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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/20/2026.
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.
Claim 2 and 4 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 2 recites the limitation "the pre-heater" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 depends on claim 1 where there are two prior mentions of pre-heating elements in lines 14-17 and lines 18-22. For purposes of prior art search, “the pre-heater” is interpreted to wherein the apparatus comprises the “oxidant pre-heater positioned between the mixing device and the combustion chamber of the combustion device” and where “the pre-heater” is instead “the oxidant pre-heater positioned between the mixing device and the combustion chamber of the combustion device”.
Claim 4 is 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 4 contains limitation to “wherein the hydrogen production system also has a carbon capture unit positioned upstream of the hydrogen recovery unit”. However, Claim 4 also depends on claim 1 which also contains limitation to “a carbon capture unit”. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of infringement because it is unclear whether the language refers to different two carbon capture units or to the same unit.
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, 3, 6, 8, 12, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Genkin et al (US 8,496,908 submitted in the IDS filed 4/22/2024)
Genkin teaches an apparatus for steam reforming comprising:
A plurality of catalyst-containing reformer tubes (104) located in the radiant section of a reformer furnace (100) (i.e., “combustion device”);
Said reformer furnace (100) configured to combust one or more fuel gases (74) with an oxidant (54) in the radiant section of the reformer furnace to form a flue gas and to heat the at least one reactant stream (10) passed through the tubes of the reformer furnace to form at least one reformate stream (12) for production of hydrogen;
A mixing device positioned to receive and blend a first portion (50) of the flue gas form the reformer furnace to blend it with oxygen (52) from a source of oxygen to form the oxidant (54) such that the oxidant comprises between 20 and 35 vol% (i.e., approximately between 20 and 35 mol%) O2 on a wet basis, between 15 and 50 vol% (about mol%) CO2 on a wet basis and less than 5 vol% nitrogen; the oxidant stream also comprises steam in an amount of 15 to 40 vol%;
A carbon capture system (heat exchanger 85 and deoxidizer 90) positioned to receive another portion (110) of the flue gas from the combustion device to recover CO2 and form at least one CO2 product stream (112);
A booster (120) positioned downstream of the reformer furnace to drive the flow of flue gas to the mixing device (portion 50) and to the carbon capture system (portion 110).
Regarding claim 3, Genkin further teaches a water-gas shift reactor 40 (i.e., hydrogen production unit) positioned to receive the at least one reformate stream to form a least one hydrogen-rich product stream (72); pressure swing absorption beds (70) absorption selective for the secondary gas component forming H2 product; a water removing means and knock-out drum (45) for removing H2O from the shifted reformate (i.e., a water removal unit);
heat exchangers positioned upstream from the hydrogen recovery unit and upstream of the water removal unit and downstream of a cooling train, the heat exchangers preheating feed, boiler feed water, deaerator feed water by heat exchange with air or cooling water, the reformate is cooled to a temperature where water condenses (i.e., a reformate stream cooling device positioned to receive a cooling medium to cool the at least one reformate stream to a temperature within a pre-selected water removal unit feed temperature range (see Col 10, Ln 49-55).
Regarding claim 6, as applied above, Genkin teaches the deoxidation unit receiving a carbon capture portion of the flue gas to recover CO2 from the carbon capture portion of the flue gas.
Regarding claim 8, Genkin teaches an apparatus wherein 40 to 60% of the combustion product gas withdrawn from the convention section of the reformer furnace is recycled as the first portion of the combustion product gas (i.e., the mixing device portion of the flue gas is 40 to 60% of the flue gas (see Col 8, Ln 17-23).
Regarding claim 12, Genkin teaches the apparatus comprising a carbon capture system (i.e., the deoxidizer) receiving a carbon capture portion of the flue gas to recover CO2 from the carbon capture of the flue gas. As applied above, Genkin also teaches a booster (120) positioned downstream of the reformer furnace to drive the flow of flue gas to the mixing device (portion 50) and to the carbon capture system (portion 110).
Regarding claim 25, Genkin teaches an apparatus comprising passing combustion product gases passed to the convection section and compressed by a blower fan (i.e., an oxidant pre-heater heat exchanger conduit receiving the oxidant from the mixing device and pre-heat the oxidant via the flue gas within the combustion chamber before the oxidant is fed to the combustion chamber) (see Col 8, Ln 11-16).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genkin and in further view of Licht et al (US 8,137,422).
As applied above, Genkin teaches an apparatus for steam reforming according to claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Genkin does not teach a carbon capture unit positioned upstream of the hydrogen recovery unit, the carbon capture unit of the hydrogen production system configured to recover CO2 form the at least one reformate stream received by the hydrogen production system and output at least one CO2 stream.
Licht teaches an apparatus for steam-hydrocarbon reforming and hydrogen production comprising a reformer and a shift reactor for shifting the reformate to produce hydrogen, the system further comprising a carbon dioxide scrubber to form a carbon dioxide depleted stream, the carbon-dioxide depleted stream sent to a separator to form the hydrogen-containing product has and by-product gas (see Col 3, Ln 14 to Col 4, Ln 45). Licht teaches that the process is particularly useful for producing a hydrogen-containing product gas with reduced carbon dioxide emissions (see Col 4, LN 20-24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to prepare the apparatus as taught by Genkin where the apparatus further comprises a CO2 scrubber (i.e., carbon capture unit) upstream of the hydrogen recovery unit as taught by Licht to product a hydrogen product with reduced carbon dioxide emissions.
Regarding claim 22, Genkin teaches a process where CO2 product gas is sequestered, used for enhanced oil recovery, introduced into a CO2 pipeline, or otherwise used (see Col 9, Ln 5-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to prepare the apparatus as taught by Genkin and Licht where the recovered CO2 from the hydrogen production system is also feedable to a compression system to form a CO2 product stream to produce a CO2 product gas useful for other process as suggested by Genkin.
Claim(s) 5 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genkin and Licht as applied to claim 4 in further view of Anderson et al (US 2014/0124705).
As applied above, Genkin and Licht teach an apparatus according to claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Genkin and Licht do not teach wherein the carbon capture unit output is positioned and configured to output the at least one CO2 recovery steam to the mixing device to form the oxidant.
Anderson teaches a process for the production of synthesis gas with reduced carbon dioxide footprint via recycling of the carbon dioxide produced in the process to the burners of the steam reformer by mixing with oxygen or an enriched oxygen stream to form the oxidant gas for the burner in the steam reformer (see Abstract and [0008]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to prepare an apparatus comprising CO2 recovered from shifted reformate in a carbon capture unit, as taught by Genkin and Licht where CO2 is output to the mixer for forming the oxidant gas, as taught by Anderson to reduce the carbon footprint of the process.
Regarding claim 23, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to prepare an apparatus comprising CO2 recovered from shifted reformate in a carbon capture unit, as taught by Genkin and Licht where CO2 is output to the mixer for forming the oxidant gas, as taught by Anderson to reduce the carbon footprint of the process.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Genkin as applied to claim 6 in further view of Anderson.
As applied above, Genkin and Licht teach an apparatus according to claim 6.
Regarding claim 5, Genkin does not teach wherein the carbon capture unit output is configured to output the an oxidant forming feed stream to feed to the mixing device to form the oxidant.
Anderson teaches a process for the production of synthesis gas with reduced carbon dioxide footprint via recycling of the carbon dioxide produced in the process to the burners of the steam reformer by mixing with oxygen or an enriched oxygen stream to form the oxidant gas for the burner in the steam reformer (see Abstract and [0008]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to prepare an apparatus comprising CO2 recovered from the flue gas in a carbon capture unit, as taught by Genki where CO2 is output to the mixer for forming the oxidant gas, as taught by Anderson to reduce the carbon footprint of the process.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11, 13, 21 and 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art of record, namely Genkin, does not teach the apparatus comprising all of the additional limitations of claim 9-11, 13, 21 and 24.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL FORREST whose telephone number is (571)270-5833. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (10AM-6PM).
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, Sally A Merkling can be reached at (571)272-6297. 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.
/MICHAEL FORREST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738
