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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 2/8/26. These drawings are acceptable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments in combination with applicant’s amendment to the claims, see pages 7-9, filed 2/28/26, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-10 has been withdrawn.
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 1-8 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 states “wherein the gas monitor is configured to measure composition and content of gas generated by the gasifier after passing through the outlet and recycling system;”. It is unclear whether the gas monitor is measuring a composition after the gas has been combusted since the gas has already moved through the outlet and recycling system, which includes the ventilator and combustion chamber. As best understood, the gas monitor 22 is at a position upstream of the ventilator and combustion chamber (Fig. 2).
Claim 3 states “wherein composition and content of the gases are measured after passing through the outlet and recycling system, and incompletely combusted coal passes through the recycling system into the combustion chamber for full combustion.” It is unclear whether the gas monitor is measuring a composition after the gas has been combusted since the gas has already moved through the outlet and recycling system, which includes the ventilator and combustion chamber. As best understood, the gas monitor 22 is at a position upstream of the ventilator and combustion chamber (Fig. 2).
Claim 8 states “wherein a thermocouple is provided on a surface of the gasification pipeline for measuring temperature to obtain data on reaction zone distribution or gasification front propagation and heat loss, the thermocouple being connected to the PLC controller via a compensation line.” However, the figures show the thermocouple 17 attached to the gasifier lid and the specification discusses that thermocouple is mounted to the hole of the gasifier lid [0028]. As best understood, the thermocouple mounted in the hole(s) of the lid 23 would facilitate measurement of propagation and/or heat loss, rather than a position on an external pipeline 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over previously cited Xin et al. (CN112647923, translation previously provided).
Claim 9: Xin teaches a test method for underground coal gasification, comprising: placing the obtained coal in the gasifier (gasifier 3, S2 a simulation coal bed), injecting the gasification agent into the gasifier through the gasification agent supply system (S3 gas injection channel page 11; A1-A4; 6- injection port, 11- a compressor, 19-a filling device; 20-an oxygen tank; 21-a carbon dioxide tank; 22-steam generator), performing ignition using an ignition head and a small burner (A1simulation of air gasification process: the simulated coal is heated and ignited by an ignition device in the gasification channel; An ignition device is arranged in the gasification channel, and the ignition device ignites inflammable substances arranged around in a mode of heating the resistance wire by electrifying so as to ignite a nearby gasification coal bed; top page 12), monitoring temperature using a thermocouple (S8 monitoring parameters of each temperature thermocouple, page 12); measuring composition and content of gasification products after passing through the outlet and recycling system using a monitoring system (S8 monitoring parameters of a gas chromatograph connected on the gas exhaust pipeline, page 12); and recording gasification process data including temperature and test time (the monitoring unit monitors and transmits monitoring parameters to the data processing unit; A1-A4 the components and flow of the coal gas in the exhaust pipeline are monitored in real time, page 5, 8, 12; A2, continuously monitoring the composition and the flow 3 of the coal gas in the exhaust pipeline in real time for 5-9 h. page 12).
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin in view of Herring (US20230085819) further in view of Su et al. (CN111236920, translation provided) further in view of Cooper et al (US5355739).
Claim 1, as best understood: Xin teaches a test system (Fig. 2) for measuring an underground coal gasification process, comprising a gasifier (The gasifier includes base 5, backing plate 4, first curb plate 2, second curb plate 3 and top cap 1) to which a gasification agent supply system (6- injection port, 11- a compressor, 19-a filling device; 20-an oxygen tank; 21-a carbon dioxide tank; 22-steam generator), an outlet and recycling system (13-gas pressure gauge; 14-a gas flow meter; 15-washing tank; 16-a devulcanizer; 17-a decoking tank; 18-a blow-off column;) and a monitoring system (12-gas chromatography) are connected, the gasification agent supply system comprising a compressor (compressor 11) connected to a pipeline (see Fig. 2); a pressure gauge (the gas pressure gauge 13 monitors the gas pressure and flow on the gas injection pipeline; end page 9) being provided on the pipeline; the outlet and recycling system being composed of the pipeline, and a combustion chamber (diffusion tower 18; the gas generated from the exhaust port passes through the washing tank 15, the desulfurizing tank 16 and the decoking tank 17 in sequence, and finally is combusted or discharged through the diffusing tower; middle page 10); the monitoring system comprising a PLC (computer; middle page 9) and a gas monitor (chromatograph 12), wherein the gas monitor is configured to measure composition and content of gas generated by the gasifier (the gas chromatograph monitors the components of the gas in the gas exhaust pipeline; end page 9) after passing through the outlet and recycling system; and the monitoring system is used for monitoring the operation state of the gasifier, the injection of the gasification agent and the gas generation condition, the temperature change in the gasification channel, and the data of the pressure gauge (The gasifier simulates the coal gasification mining process in a long channel, the gasifying agent provides gas required by simulating coal bed gasification for the gasification mining, the monitoring unit monitors gasification parameters in the gasification process, records rock stratum temperature change and acoustic emission signals in the gasification process, tests the influence of the gasifying agents with different proportions on the gasification process, and analyzes gas components and pollutants generated by gasification, so that the forms of a combustion space area and overlying strata of the gasifier are observed and researched more intuitively;. End page 4.
the monitoring unit can monitor a plurality of parameter processes of simulated gasification. The gas generated by the simulated gasification of the gasification furnace can be treated by the washing tank, the desulfurization tank and the decoking tank and then treated by the diffusion tower, so that the test safety is ensured, and the green environmental protection is realized; the test device can directly carry out filling simulation after simulating the gasification mining process, directly observe the expansion form of the combustion space area through the dissecting gasification furnace, determine the combustion and damage characteristics of the coal bed surrounding rock, and analyze the form and distribution of solid residues. Middle Page 10)
Xin fails to teach a pressure vessel ; the compressor being connected to the pressure vessel for compressing air into the pressure vessel; the pressure vessel being provided with a pipeline.
However, Herring teaches an air compressor 70 which can be directly connected to a valve 90 or to a compressed air tank 80 and then to the valve 90, Fig. 2, [0045]. Therefore, it is known in the art to use an air compressor with or without a compressed air tank.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a tank with the compressor, as taught by Herring, in order to be able to maintain a desired pressure within the tank and maintain a desired pressure therein (Herring [0051]).
Xin in view of Herring fails to teach a servo valve; and an exhaust ventilator.
However, Su teaches a servo mixing system for gasification including flow regulating valves 16-19.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a servo valve when mixing gases in order to ensure the gasification reaction state is regulated and controlled, and the gasification reaction is ensured to be orderly and normally carried out (Su, top page 8).
Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su fails to teach an exhaust ventilator.
However, Cooper teaches the use of an air pump 48 connected to an exhaust port of a detector 46 in order to move air and gas through the conduit 40, Fig. 2. Therefore it is known to use a pump/ventilator connected to an exhaust in order to move air.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a pump at the exhaust in order to effectively move the gas through a housing and the associated fluidically connected system.
Claim 2: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper teaches an underground coal gasification process according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the compressor is connected to a pressure vessel via a pressure rubber hose.
However, Herring teaches that an air conduit 14, of a system 5 (Figs. 1-3), may include either rigid or flexible piping or hose that is largely air-tight or sufficiently air-impermeable to minimize air transfer through the walls of the air conduit 14. Rubber is well known to those of ordinary skill in the art to be a flexible material for a tube or hose.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a rubber hose to connect the compressor to the pressure vessel in order to provide for ease of installation due to a flexible hose’s ability to more readily be routed through and/or around various obstacle (Herring [0036]).
Claim 5: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper teaches an underground coal gasification process according to claim 1. Xin teaches an oxygen pressure bottle (oxygen tank 20). Xin in view of Herring fail to teach wherein the gasification agent supply system further comprises a mixing station.
However, Su teaches a mixing station (gas mixing box) which is supplied by an intelligent oxygen generator 1.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a mixing station, taught by Su, with the device of Xi in order to promote fully mixing the air/gas sources (Su, page 6, item (2)).
Claim 6: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper teaches an underground coal gasification process according to claim 5, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the mixing station is a rectangular steel vessel for placing a single gas or a mixture of gases.
However, Xin teaches that the gasification furnace is made of stainless steel materials (middle page 7) and the gases provided through the gas injection port 6 inherently mix therein. Therefore, steel is a suitable material choice for a gas mixing vessel.
Su teaches a mixing box 2 which is not in a rectangular shape. However, the shape of the mixing box/container does not appear to have an significance over the gas mixing. Therefore, the shape of the container would have been an obvious design choice.
Claim 8, as best understood: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper teaches the system of claim 1. Xin teaches wherein a thermocouple is provided on a surface of the gasification pipeline for measuring temperature to obtain data on reaction zone distribution or gasification front propagation and heat loss (The temperature monitoring in the gasifier is realized by temperature thermocouples arranged on a top cover and a side plate of the gasifier, so that the temperature monitoring of a gasified coal bed and coal bed overburden is completed. Page 12, S8), the thermocouple being connected to the PLC controller via a compensation line (monitoring parameters are transmitted to the data processing unit by monitoring of the monitoring unit. Pg. 4, last full paragraph).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper further in view of Komeno et al. (US4986199).
Claim 3, as best understood: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper teaches an underground coal gasification process according to claim 1. Xin teaches wherein composition and content of the gases are measured after passing through the outlet (the gas chromatograph 12 is connected to the exhaust line, and performs component analysis on the generated gas; top page 10) and recycling system, but fails to teach wherein incompletely combusted coal passes through the recycling system into the combustion chamber for full combustion.
However, Komeno teaches that ash an incompletely combusted products (coal) are passed through a recycle passage and supplied to the combustion chamber for re-burning (Col. 6, lines 25-44).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to completely combust any incompletely combusted coal in order to pass the byproducts to a boiler or recycled (col. 1, lines 43-45).
Claims 4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper further in view of Liang et al. (CN104122289, translation provided).
Claim 4: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper teaches an underground coal gasification process according to claim 1. Xin teaches wherein the gasifier has a rectangular shape (see Fig. 2) and consists of a front portion (front portion includes the gas injection port 6, Fig. 2), a cover plate (top cover 1) is provided above, and holes (injection port 6, exhaust port 7, and screw holes; the temperature thermocouple 8 adopts a k type temperature thermocouple, is inserted into the gasification furnace through screw holes on the top cover and the side plate; top page 10) are provided at both sides (see Fig. 2).
Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper and a vessel jacket, and an inner surface of the gasifier is provided as an insulating layer.
However, Liang teaches a jacket (withstand voltage layer 4) an insulating layer used with the gasifier (flame retardant coating 1 and insulating layer 2, Fig. 1). The insulating layer 2 is not the interior surface because Liang teaches a flame-retardant layer 1 therebetween. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use an insulating layer, as taught by Liang, as long as it will not catch fire.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teaching of Liang with the device of claim 1 in order to protect the gasifier from degradation or damage due to high heat and provide reinforcement to the structure (Liang, bottom pg 4).
Claim 7: Xin in view of Herring further in view of Su further in view of Cooper further in view of Liang teaches the system of claim 4.
Xin teaches wherein regarding the holes provided on both sides, one is configured for input of gasification agent and the other is configured for removal of gas during the test (injection port 6 and exhaust port 7, Fig. 2).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin in view of Yang et al. (CN112816361, translation provided).
Claim 11: Xin teaches the test method for underground coal gasification according to claim 9, further comprising: determining gasification efficiency through calculation based on monitored test results, the monitored test results including gas composition (determined from the chromatograph 12 and A1-A4 discuss different simulation strategies which include air gasification, oxygen-enriched gasification, oxygen enrichment and steam gasification, and oxygen enrichment and carbon dioxide gasification, page 12), pressure, flow and temperature data, and recorded duration of the test (S8, page 12, monitoring parameters of a gas flowmeter and a gas pressure meter on the gas injection pipeline, monitoring parameters of the gas flowmeter and the gas pressure meter on the gas exhaust pipeline, monitoring parameters of a gas chromatograph connected on the gas exhaust pipeline, and monitoring parameters of each temperature thermocouple, each acoustic emission sensor and each pressure sensor; A1-A4 are monitored in real time and include a duration of 5-9 hours).
Xin fails to teach with sufficient specificity monitoring the weight of coal gasified. However, Xin teaches “The cutting section is cut along the length direction of the gasification furnace to cut similar materials and the gasification coal bed to the required degree, the longitudinal sections of the gasification coal bed and the top and bottom plates disclosed after the cutting can be observed, and the expansion rule of the underground coal gasification combustion space area, the morphological analysis of gasification residues, the rock stratum thermal damage and collapse characteristics and the like can be more intuitively researched”. To determine a morphology and residue characteristics, the initial parameters of the coal (mass, volume, etc.) would need to be known in order for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make an appropriate and useful analysis regarding a change to the raw coal.
This is discussed by Yang, wherein a weighing unit 3 is used to determine a thermal conversion evaluation of solids containing organic matter. Yang uses a weighing rod 25 and sample basket 35, whereby the weighing unit can track and record the change of sample quality (ie, weight loss) during the thermal conversion process in real time (bottom page 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teachings of Yang, including detecting a change in sample weight due to thermal conversion, with the device of Xin in order to realize combustion, pyrolysis and gasification evaluation of the solid containing organic substances (Yang, bottom page 17).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xin in view of Yang further in view of Kwong et al. (US20180230390).
Claim 12: Xin in view of Yang teaches the test method for underground coal gasification according to claim 11. Xin teaches monitoring the gasification agents (air, oxygen, steam, CO2), pressure, and flow rate (S8, page 12, The monitoring data includes: monitoring parameters of a gas flowmeter and a gas pressure meter on the gas injection pipeline, monitoring parameters of the gas flowmeter and the gas pressure meter on the gas exhaust pipeline, monitoring parameters of a gas chromatograph connected on the gas exhaust pipeline, and monitoring parameters of each temperature thermocouple, each acoustic emission sensor and each pressure sensor.) in order to determine the influence of different factors on gas production efficiency (end page 6). Therefore, the parameters are known to be result-effective variables which can be varied to have a predictable effect on the final product and are controlled and monitored during gasification.
Xin in view of Yang fails to teach changing the temperature while keeping gasification agents, pressure and flow constant and monitoring content and composition of gasification products.
However, Kwong teaches determining the optical temperature for coal gasification and keeping the temperature withing an optical range [0019, 0074-0076]. Therefore, temperature is known to be a result-effective variable which can be varied to have a predictable effect on the final product.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teaching of Kwong with the method of Xin in view of Yang in order to determine the influence of gasification temperature on the gas production efficiency while observing the effect of other monitored parameters.
Claim 13: Xin in view of Yang teaches the test method for underground coal gasification according to claim 11. Xin teaches monitoring the gasification agents (air, oxygen, steam, CO2), pressure, and flow rate (S8, page 12, The monitoring data includes: monitoring parameters of a gas flowmeter and a gas pressure meter on the gas injection pipeline, monitoring parameters of the gas flowmeter and the gas pressure meter on the gas exhaust pipeline, monitoring parameters of a gas chromatograph connected on the gas exhaust pipeline, and monitoring parameters of each temperature thermocouple, each acoustic emission sensor and each pressure sensor.) in order to determine the influence of different factors on gas production efficiency (end page 6). Therefore, the parameters are known to be result-effective variables which can be varied to have a predictable effect on the final product and are controlled and monitored during gasification.
Xin in view of Yang fails to teach changing the injected gasification agent while keeping gasification temperature, pressure and flow constant and monitoring corresponding test results.
However, Kwong teaches determining the optical temperature for coal gasification and keeping the temperature withing an optical range [0019, 0074-0076]. Therefore, temperature is known to be a result-effective variable which can be varied to have a predictable effect on the final product.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teaching of Kwong with the method of Xin in view of Yang in order to remove the influence of temperature on the gas production efficiency while observing the effect of the other monitored parameters.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN MORELLO whose telephone number is (313)446-6583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/JEAN F MORELLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855 5/7/26
/KRISTINA M DEHERRERA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights