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 .
This action is in response to the application filed 12/11/2023 and the IDS’s filed 01/29/2024 and 03/13/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending and being examined.
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 1-20 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.
Considering claim 1, the terms “a method with no direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere” and “a method with direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere” are not clear because the boundaries/scope of these methods are not set. For the purpose of examination, the claims will be interpreted as providing two hydrogen gas sources, wherein the first hydrogen gas source is produced by a method different from the second hydrogen gas source.
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 1-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhan et al. (US 2023/0140581 A1) in view of Foody et al. (US 2022/0298432 A1).
Considering claims 1, 5-6, 15, and 17-19, Zhan teaches a method of transporting hydrogen comprising hydrogenating a liquid hydrocarbon fuel to obtain a hydrogen-rich fuel and transporting the hydrogen-rich fuel to a dehydrogenation facility that may be at or near a hydrogen station, the hydrogen-rich fuel is used to obtain hydrogen and a second liquid hydrocarbon fuel (Zhan, abstract).
It would be expected that the hydrogen-rich fuel produced by hydrogenating a liquid hydrocarbon fuel would have a greater ratio of hydrogen to carbon than the hydrocarbon feed (i.e., liquid hydrocarbon fuel).
Zhan teaches the dehydrogenated hydrogen-rich fuel yields hydrogen and a second liquid hydrocarbon fuel which may be separated to form a hydrogen gas product and a separated-dehydrogenated effluent (Zhan, [0046]).
Zhan teaches transporting to a dehydrogenation facility in any convenient manner such as via tanker, container ship, truck, railroad tank car, pipeline, and/or any combination thereof (Zhan, [0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the first (hydrogenation facility) and second (dehydrogenation facility) hydrocarbon processing facilities to be separated by any distance included at least 100 km. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so because of the teaching that any convenient manner of transportation (tanker, container ship, truck, railroad tank car, pipeline, and/or any combination thereof) can be used and are capable of transporting the hydrogenation effluent (hydrogen-rich fuel) any distance desired with a reasonable expectation of success.
Zhan teaches hydrogenation by reaction of the liquid hydrocarbon fuel with hydrogen gas (Zhan, [0032]) and that hydrogen can be produced from a variety of processes and readily available resources such as natural gas, biomass, and nuclear power (Zhan, [0002]); he does not explicitly teach the hydrogen gas provided to the hydrogenator in the hydrogenation facility is comprised of a first hydrogen gas portion and a second hydrogen gas portion wherein the first hydrogen gas portion is hydrogen produced by a method with no direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere and the second hydrogen gas portion is hydrogen produced by a method with direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere wherein a mass flow rate of the first hydrogen gas portion is at least 90% of a mass flow rate of the hydrogen gas product.
However, Foody teaches various methods of hydrogen production such as electrolysis, stream methane reforming (SMR), hydrogen produced from biomass and/or renewable methane; Foody additionally teaches SMR is a source of carbon dioxide emissions (i.e., greenhouse gas emissions), the greenhouse gas emissions may be reduced by using hydrogen produced using electrolysis; (Foody, [0042]-[0043]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a hydrogen gas comprising a first hydrogen gas portion and a second hydrogen gas portion wherein the first hydrogen gas portion is hydrogen produced by a method with no direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere and the second hydrogen gas portion is hydrogen produced by a method with direct carbon emissions to the atmosphere wherein a mass flow rate of the first hydrogen gas portion is at least 90% , at least 101%, 90-115%, or 100-115% of a mass flow rate of the hydrogen gas product. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do so in order to produce/transport hydrogen with reduced carbon emissions to the atmosphere with a reasonable expectation of success.
Considering claims 2-3, Zhan does not explicitly teach separating the hydrogenated effluent into two or more hydrogenated hydrocarbon cuts and feeding one of the cuts to the second hydrocarbon processing facility and feeding the other cut to a third hydrocarbon processing facility and at the third hydrocarbon processing facility dehydrogenating to form a second hydrogen gas product wherein a mass flow rate of the first hydrogen gas portion is at least 90% of a combined mass flow rate of the hydrogen gas product at the second hydrocarbon processing facility and the second hydrogen gas product.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to split the hydrogenated effluent into two or more hydrogenated hydrocarbon cuts. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so in order to be able to feed the hydrogenated effluent to two separate/different hydrogen production facility with reduced carbon emissions to the atmosphere with a reasonable expectation of success.
Considering claims 4 and 12, Zhan teaches feedstocks from various sources some of which comprise cyclic C9+ hydrocarbons (i.e., naphthene, coker diesel) (Zhan, [0023]). Zhan teaches the hydrogenation generally does not change ring-structure but converts aromatic compounds to naphthenic compounds (Zhan, [0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the hydrogenated hydrocarbon cuts that is transported to the second hydrocarbon processing facility to comprise saturated cyclic C9+ hydrocarbons. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so because the feedstock contains cyclic C9+ hydrocarbons and the hydrogenation converts the aromatic compounds to naphthenic compounds (i.e., saturated cyclic hydrocarbons).
Considering claim 7, Zhan teaches the hydrocarbon fuel prior to hydrogenation is a liquid (Zhan, [0031]). Thus, it would be expected that the hydrogenated liquid hydrocarbon fuel would also be a liquid under normal conditions of 20°C and a pressure of 1 atmosphere.
Moreover, Zhan and Foody obviate the claimed process. Thus, it would be expected that the hydrogenated effluent of Zhan/Foody that is transported from the first hydrocarbon processing facility to the second hydrocarbon processing facility would also be a liquid under normal conditions of 20°C and a pressure of 1 atmosphere.
Considering claims 8 and 10, Zhan teaches that for either hydrotreating or hydrocracking, the reaction temperature may be between 250°C and 500°C, pressure of 3.5-24.2 MPa, and a feed of hydrogen (Zhan, [0025]). Zhan teaches hydrogenation temperatures form 25°C to 350°C and pressure of 100 kPa to 30 MPa (Zhan, [0037]. Zhan teaches similar catalysts are used for hydrotreating, hydrocracking, and hydrogenation (Zhan, [0028]-[0029], [0033]). The process conditions for hydrotreating, hydrocracking, and hydrogenation overlap.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for the hydrogenator to be a hydrotreater/hydrocracker depending on the process conditions of the hydrogenation.
Considering claim 9, Zhan teaches hydrogenation temperatures form 50°C to 300°C and pressure of 109 psi to 725 psi (Zhan, [0037]. A prima facie case of obviousness exists because the claimed ranges of 200°C to 260°C and pressure of 20 bar (290 psi) to 50 bar (725 psi) (see MPEP §2144.05(I)).
Considering claim 11, Zhan teaches that for hydrocracking, the reaction temperature may be between 250°C and 500°C and pressure of 3.5-24.2 MPa (Zhan, [0025]). A prima facie case of obviousness exists because the claimed ranges of 350°C to 450°C and pressure of at least 30 bar (3 MPa) (see MPEP §2144.05(I)).
Considering claim 14, Zhan teaches transporting the separated-dehydrogenated effluent from the second hydrocarbon processing facility to the first hydrocarbon processing facility and introducing the separated-dehydrogenated effluent to the hydrogenator as part of the hydrocarbon feed (Zhan, [0046]).
Considering claim 16, Zhan teaches the amount of hydrogen in the hydrogen-rich fuel may be greater than about 13.5 wt.% (Zhan, [0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to vary the ratio of the number of hydrogen atoms in the first hydrogen gas portion to the number of hydrogen atoms in the second hydrogen gas portion including to within the claimed value of 9:1 to 1:9. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do so in order to achieve desired amount of hydrogen in the hydrogen rich fuel with a reasonable expectation of success.
Considering claim 20, Zhan teaches the amount of hydrogen in the hydrogen-rich fuel may be greater than about 13.5 wt.% (Zhan, [0031]). Zhan teaches feedstocks from various sources some of which comprise cyclic C9+ hydrocarbons (i.e., naphthene, coker diesel) (Zhan, [0023]). Zhan teaches the hydrogenation generally does not change ring-structure but converts aromatic compounds to naphthenic compounds (Zhan, [0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to vary the mass flow rate of the first hydrogen gas portion to the mass flow rate of the C9+ aromatic hydrocarbons in the hydrocarbon feed including to within the claimed range of 1:14 to 1:10. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do so in order to achieve desired amount of hydrogen in the hydrogen rich fuel with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhan et al. (US 2023/0140581 A1) in view of Foody et al. (US 2022/0298432 A1) and Allinson et al. (US 2022/0298436 A1).
Considering claim 13, all of the limitations are met by the prior art referenced in meeting claim 12 limitations except for producing the hydrocarbon feed by combining heavy naphtha and C9+ aromatic hydrocarbons.
Zhan teaches using a refinery aromatic-rich stream such as a light cycle oil and diesel products among others (Zhan, [0023]). Although Zhan teaches feedstocks from various sources some of which comprise cyclic C9+ hydrocarbons (i.e., naphthene, coker diesel) (Zhan, [0023]), he does not explicitly teach producing the hydrocarbon feed by combining heavy naphtha and C9+ aromatic hydrocarbons.
However, Allinson teaches the use of a Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier (LOHC) for hydrogen transportation and storage; creating a reduced cost LOHC by using aromatics rich refinery stream and catalytically hydrogenating theses materials to produce a stream rich in cyclic hydrocarbons useable as an LOHC (Allinson, [0002]). Allinson teaches suitable refinery feedstocks include crude oil, straight-run crude oil, naphtha, FCC effluent, fraction of jet fuels, coker product, coal liquefied oil, among others and mixtures thereof (Allinson, [0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to produce the hydrocarbon feed by combining heavy naphtha and C9+ aromatic hydrocarbons. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so because both naphtha and C9+ aromatic hydrocarbons are known to be suitable feedstocks for use as LOHC’s that can be used for hydrogen transportation and storage with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allinson teaches desired boiling range of 80-370°C for the LOHC materials (Allinson, [0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the have naphtha to have an initial boiling point from 80°C to 100°C and a final boiling point from 180°C to 200°C. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so because such boiling point ranges are suitable boiling points for LOHC materials that can be used or hydrogen transportation and storage with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANITA NASSIRI-MOTLAGH whose telephone number is (571)270-7588. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:00.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/ANITA NASSIRI-MOTLAGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights