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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 13-20 in the reply filed on 24 February 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Al-Hooshani et al. (US 2019/0300798).
With regards to Claim 13 Al-Hooshani teaches:
A bed of sulfur adsorbent material within a fixed-bed or fluidized-bed adsorber which reads on applicant’s claimed positioning a bed of adsorbent material within a vessel of an adsorber. (See Al-Hooshani Paragraph 93) The absorbent material comprises boron-doped activated carbon which reads on applicant's claimed adsorbent material comprising an activated carbon layer including activated carbon. The activated carbon support, onto which boric acid is doped, has a surface area of 300 to 1200 m2/g and a pore volume of 0.2 to 1.0 cm3/g giving a total pore volume to surface area ratio of 0.17 to 3.3 nm to which reads on applicant's claimed surface area of 380 to 750 m2/g and total open pore volume to surface area ratio of 0.59 nm to 0.83 nm. (See Al-Hooshani Paragraph 69-71) A feed fluid is passed through the bed of adsorbent material to purify the feed fluid, and the purified fluid from the vessel is output after the feed fluid has passed through the bed of adsorbent material. (See Al-Hooshani Paragraphs 93-96)
Al-Hooshani discloses an activated carbon adsorbent with a range of surface area of 300 to 1200 m2/g, and a pore volume of 0.2 to 1.0 cm3/g giving a total pore volume to surface area ratio of 0.17 to 3.3 nm to which renders applicant’s claimed range of an activated carbon adsorbent with a surface area of 380 to 750 m2/g and total open pore volume to surface area ratio of 0.59 nm to 0.83 nm obvious. Al-Hooshani renders the claimed range obvious as it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to optimize the range disclosed by Al-Hooshani as discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Further in cases where the claimed range overlaps or lies inside of prior art ranges a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and dependent claims 15-20 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.
Al-Hooshani teaches the claimed process, of Claim 13 as detailed above. Al-Hooshani does not teach “wherein the feed fluid has a hydrogen content of less than 79 volume percent (vol%) to output a purified fluid flow having a hydrogen content of greater than or equal to 95 vol%” it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that the process of Al-Hooshani could be modified to meet the claimed limitations as Al-Hooshani teaches removing sulfur from sour gas (See Al-Hooshani Paragraph 87) and that the sulfur containing mixture contains 0.001 wt% to about 10 wt%, preferable less than 1 wt% sulfur. (See Al-Hooshani Paragraph 88) and is reduced by up to 90% after contact with the sulfur adsorbent. The adsorbent is intended to remove sulfur. There’s no clear reason to contact it with hydrogen which may or may not contain sulfur and the process taught by Al-Hooshani does not teach the claimed 79% Hydrogen to 95% Hydrogen process. All other claims depend from Claim 14 and as such contain allowable subject matter.
Other Applicable Prior Art
All other art cited not detailed above in a rejection is considered relevant to at least some portion or feature of the current application and is cited for possible future use for reference. Applicant may find it useful to be familiar with all cited art for possible future rejections or discussion.
The closest prior art is Applicant's own art (US 2025/0145460 A1) hereinafter '460. However, while '460 does teach the claimed activated carbon with a ratio of total open pore volume to surface area of 0.73 nm in Paragraph 26, '460 is not applicable as while it was filed before the current application it was filed within the grace period and published after the current application was filed and shares the same applicant. Other prior art, such as Robinson et al. (US 5,744,421), teaches activated carbon with surface areas which exceed the claimed range, and total pore volumes, different from total open pore volumes, which cannot be determined to be related to the surface area in the same manner as claimed as they are given as percentages rather than volumes (See Robinson Col. 6 lines 5-20). Tour et al. (WO 2022/220828) teaches a sorbent with an overlapping surface area and an overlapping total pore volume, see instant specification paragraph 9s and 10 and Tour pg. 26. However, Tour teaches a “polymeric carbon sorbent” which does not read on the claimed activated carbon. (See Tour pg. 26 and 27)
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIT E ANBACHT whose telephone number is (571)272-9876. The examiner can normally be reached on M, T, R, F 11 am - 4 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-9876.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIT E. ANBACHT/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
BRIT E. ANBACHT
Examiner
Art Unit 1776