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 .
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.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase “the chilled hydrogen-depleted tail gas” in line 15 lacks antecedent basis. It is assumed to refer to “a chilled dried hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream” recited in line 14.
Regarding claim 15, the phrase “the chilled hydrogen-depleted tail gas” in line 19 lacks antecedent basis. It is assumed to refer to “a chilled dried hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream” recited in line 18.
Claims 2-14 are rejected under 112 2nd paragraph by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 112 2nd paragraph by virtue of their dependency on claim 15.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 12, 13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cruz et al. US Patent 11,814,287.
Regarding claim 1, Cruz teaches an integrated process for hydrogen production and carbon dioxide recovery comprising (please refer to Figures 3 and 6):
a) Introducing a feed stream 105 of natural gas comprising hydrocarbons to a synthesis gas production zone comprising a reformer 112 to produce a synthesis gas 125 stream comprising hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and methane (column 9 lines 19-30 and lines 39-44);
b) Separating the synthesis gas stream 125 in a hydrogen pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit 140 to form a high-pressure hydrogen product stream 145 and a hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 150 continuing to line 160 (column 10 lines 57-61);
(Please refer to Figure 6 and column 12 lines 32-60 for parts c-f. As indicated in column 10 lines 62-67, the hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 150 is continued to a carbon dioxide recovery system which is detailed in Figure 6. The hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 160 from Figure 3 continues seamlessly to line 931 in Figure 6. In column 12 lines 26-30)
c) Chilling a working fluid stream 938 (Figure 6) with a chilling stream 934a (this stream is considered a chilling stream because it has been cooled and condensed as described in column 12 lines 49-59) in a first heat exchanger 916 forming a chilled working fluid stream 938a and a warmed chilling stream 934b to line 398c (here it has been warmed in column 12 lines 56-58);
d) Chilling the dried hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 931 (as noted above, the hydrogen depleted gas stream 160 from Figure 3 is seamlessly carried into stream 931 of the carbon dioxide separation in Figure 6, column 12 lines 35-48. Furthermore, this has been dried in column 8 line 59) with the chilled working fluid stream 938c in a main heat exchanger 911 in a cryogenic carbon dioxide separation unit (the system in Figure 6 is considered as the entire carbon dioxide separation unit) forming a chilled dried hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream (939a to 931c) and a warmed working fluid stream 938d (column 13 lines 15-25) and
e) Separating in fractionator 913 the chilled hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 931c into a carbon dioxide product stream 941, and an overhead stream 932 (column 14 lines 10-25); and
f) Passing the warmed working fluid stream 938d to the first heat exchanger (through 938k and 938).
Regarding claim 2, Cruz teaches the chilling stream 934a is a liquid (column 12 line 56). This stream is part of a residue stream from the carbon dioxide separator and therefore contains hydrogen or natural gas (column 12 lines 26-27).
Regarding claim 4, Cruz teaches separating the overhead stream 932 in a separation unit 915 to recover a bottom carbon dioxide stream 934 and an off-gas hydrogen stream 933 and the carbon dioxide stream 934 is sent to the separator 913 (column 12 line 49-55).
Regarding claim 5, the off-gas stream 933 is continued through 933b and is taken to a PSA separation unit (referring back to Figure 3, stream 933b becomes line 175) which recovers hydrogen 190 and off gas components 200 of leftover natural gas including carbon monoxide and methane (column 9 line 63 to column 10 line 5).
Regarding claims 6, 7, and 8, the leftover gas stream 200 is sent to reformer 112 as fuel (column 10 line 5).
Regarding claim 12, Cruz teaches a dryer and compressor may be included before the carbon dioxide recovery system (column 8 lines 56-60). Therefore, Cruz teaches drying and compressing the hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream to form a dried and compressed tail gas stream which is further exchanged with the chilled working stream downstream.
Regarding claim 13, Cruz teaches that steam is recovered through line 135 from the reformer 12, thus water is removed from the syngas stream prior to the PSA (column 9 line 42).
Regarding claim 15, Cruz teaches an integrated process for hydrogen production and carbon dioxide recovery comprising (please refer to Figures 3 and 6):
a) Introducing a feed stream 105 of natural gas comprising hydrocarbons to a synthesis gas production zone comprising a reformer 112 to produce a synthesis gas 125 stream comprising hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and methane (column 9 lines 19-30 and lines 39-44);
b) Separating the synthesis gas stream 125 in a hydrogen pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit 140 to form a high-pressure hydrogen product stream 145 and a hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 150 continuing to line 160 (column 10 lines 57-61);
c) Compressing and drying the hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream (column 8 lines 56-60);
(Please refer to Figure 6 and column 12 lines 32-60 for parts d-g. As indicated in column 10 lines 62-67, the hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 150 to line 160 is continued to a carbon dioxide recovery system which is detailed in Figure 6. The hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 160 from Figure 3 continues seamlessly to line 931 in Figure 6. In column 12 lines 26-30)
d) Chilling a working fluid stream 938 (Figure 6) with a chilling stream 934a (this stream is considered a chilling stream because it has been cooled and condensed as described in column 12 lines 49-59) in a first heat exchanger 916 forming a chilled working fluid stream 938a and a warmed chilling stream 934b to line 398c (here it has been warmed in column 12 lines 56-58), the chilling stream 934a is a liquid (column 12 line 56) and is part of a residue stream from the carbon dioxide separator and therefore contains hydrogen or natural gas (column 12 lines 26-27);
e) Chilling the dried hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 931 (as noted above, the hydrogen depleted gas stream 160 from Figure 3 is seamlessly carried into stream 931 of the carbon dioxide separation in Figure 6, column 12 lines 35-48) with the chilled working fluid stream 938c in a main heat exchanger 911 in a cryogenic carbon dioxide separation unit (the system in Figure 6 is considered as the entire carbon dioxide separation unit) forming a chilled dried hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream (939a to 931c) and a warmed working fluid stream 938d (column 13 lines 15-25) and separating in fractionator 913 the chilled hydrogen-depleted tail gas stream 931c into a carbon dioxide product stream 941, and an overhead stream 932 (column 14 lines 10-25);
f) Passing the warmed working fluid stream 938d to the first heat exchanger (through 938k and 938); and
g) separating the overhead stream 932 in a separation unit 915 to recover a bottom carbon dioxide stream 934 and an off-gas hydrogen stream 933 and the carbon dioxide stream 934 is sent to the separator 913 (column 12 line 49-55).
Regarding claim 17, the off-gas stream 933 is continued through 933b and is taken to a PSA separation unit (referring back to Figure 3, stream 933b becomes line 175) which recovers hydrogen 190 and off gas components 200 of leftover natural gas including carbon monoxide and methane (column 9 line 63 to column 10 line 5); the leftover gas stream 200 is sent to reformer 112 as fuel (column 10 line 5).
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.
Claims 3, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruz et al. US Patent 11,814,287.
Regarding claim 3, the working fluid is considered 938 and is predominantly carbon dioxide stream (column 13 line 17). However, since the feed entering the carbon separation system is from natural gas, it is reasonably expected that the feed contains traces of light hydrocarbons and hydrogen.
Regarding claims 9, 10, and 11, Cruz does not explicitly teach using the warmed chilling stream to chill a process stream, where the process stream comprises the synthesis gas stream, a dehydrogenation feed, or a compressor discharge stream. However, Cruz teaches that many of the streams in the overall process are used as carriers for heat exchange, thus providing an efficient way of conserving and using heat. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the warmed chilling stream as a carrier for heat exchanging the feed to another process.
Regarding claim 14, Cruz does not specify the type of heat exchanger used, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use known heat exchangers in the art including circuit, shell and tube, brazed aluminum, or spiral wound heat exchangers.
Regarding claim 16, the working fluid is considered 938 and is predominantly carbon dioxide stream (column 13 line 17). However, since the feed entering the carbon separation system is from natural gas, it is reasonably expected that the feed contains traces of light hydrocarbons and hydrogen.
Regarding claim 18 and 19, Cruz does not explicitly teach using the warmed chilling stream to chill a process stream, where the process stream comprises the synthesis gas stream, a dehydrogenation feed, or a compressor discharge stream. However, Cruz teaches that many of the streams in the overall process are used as carriers for heat exchange, thus providing an efficient way of conserving and using heat. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the warmed chilling stream as a carrier for heat exchanging the feed to another process.
Regarding claim 20, Cruz does not specify the type of heat exchanger used, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use known heat exchangers in the art including circuit, shell and tube, brazed aluminum, or spiral wound heat exchangers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARON PREGLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571) 272-5954. 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.
/SHARON PREGLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772