DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Claim Interpretation
In the claims, “aromatic aramids” is taken to mean “aramids,” which are already aromatic by definition. These are also called aromatic polyamides.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, “about5000” should be separated. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, “and/or” should be changed to “and” to avoid being redundant with “or a combination thereof.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is indefinite because it recites a “carbon molecular sieve membrane, “said membrane comprising one or more aromatic aramids.” This is indefinite because the specification makes it clear that the aromatic aramids are precursors of the membrane that are pyrolyzed (carbonized) to form the carbon molecular sieve (see instant specification paragraphs 57, 58, 69, 76-emboidment 26, 87, 116). The pyrolyzed membrane will not contain any actual aromatic aramids unless the thermal decomposition is incomplete, which is not disclosed in this application. It appears that claim 1 should recite a “carbon molecular sieve membrane derived from an aramid precursor” to overcome this rejection. This is assumed for examination.
Claim 16 is indefinite because it recites a % concentration but does not specify whether this is by volume, mass or mole, which can be very different for a gas.
Claims 2-15 are rejected for depending from an indefinite parent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 107824056 A.
CN ‘056 teaches a carbon molecular sieve membrane that is formed by carbonization of waste aromatic polyamide (aramid) reverse osmosis film membranes at a temperature of 400-900°C (see abstract, page 3 of the machine-generated English translation). The aramid will inherently be either crosslinked or uncrosslinked and have a hydrogen gas permeability and selectivity over other gases as recited in instant claims 8-11 because the same precursors and carbonization conditions are used.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 7 and 13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN ‘056 in view of applicants’ admitted prior art.
CN ‘056 discloses all of the limitations of the claims except that the aramid is solution processable and prepared by interfacial polymerization of a preferred amine and acid halide, and that the membrane is used for separating hydrogen from carbon dioxide or other gas to produce a permeate of 50-99.99% hydrogen (no method of making the aramid or using the CMS is disclosed). Applicants’ admitted prior art discloses that CMS membranes have H2/CO2 selectivity and can recover hydrogen and capture hydrogen to produce blue hydrogen from steam methane reforming. Also disclosed is that aramids can be inexpensively and rapidly synthesized by in situ interfacial polymerization or stirred interfacial polymerization in a solution using m-phenylenediamine (1,3-phenylenediamine) and trimesoyl chloride (see instant specification paragraphs 5 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the membrane of CN ‘056 by using well-known formation methods for the aramid in order to provide rapid and inexpensive synthesis and defect-free ultra-thin films, and to use the CMS for hydrogen purification to provide sustainable production of hydrogen and outstanding selectivity to produce a high purity hydrogen product. A high purity is assumed to be greater than 50% and one skilled in the art will understand that steam methane reforming product gas will also contain some methane.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN ‘056 in view of applicants’ as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of CN 1778457 A.
CN ‘056 in view of applicants’ admitted prior art discloses all of the limitations of the claims except that a preferred acid halide mixture is used. CN ‘457 discloses an aromatic polyamide membrane that is produced from m-phenylenediamine and a mixture of isophthaloyl chloride and terephthaloyl chloride as halides (see abstract, claim 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the aramid precursors of the primary references by using those disclosed in CN ‘457 in order to provide a membrane that is formed from easily obtained raw materials and has low cost, high desalting rate, and large flux.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional references listed on the attached PTO-892 form disclose fluid separation membranes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK LAWRENCE whose telephone number is (571)272-1161. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-7pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK M LAWRENCE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
fl