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 December 12, 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
page 1, [0001], line 2, please amend Serial No. “147/284,589” to Serial No. -- 17/284,589 --.
page 1, [0001], line 2, please insert the phrase -- now US Patent No. 11,885,031, -- after the year “2021,”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
I. Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2003272696 (‘696) in view of Minh et al. (“Reversible Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Technology for Green Fuel and Power Production,” The Electrochemical Society Interface (2013 Jan 1), Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 55-62).
Regarding claim 1, JP ‘696 teaches an apparatus (= the cell stack 5, which is a solid oxide fuel cell stack, contains a mixture of POSOFC cells 1 (a first type of solid oxide fuel cell) and SOFC cells 2 (a second type of solid oxide fuel cell) in a ratio of 1:2) [ρ [0018]] for converting carbon dioxide and natural gas liquids into other chemicals and/or fuels,1 comprising:
• at least one electrochemical cell (= heat-generating SOFC cell 2) [ρ [0020]];
wherein the electrochemical cell reduces the endothermic load (= as a result, heat is transferred from the heat-generating SOFC cell 2 to the heat-absorbing POSOFC cell 1) [ρ
[0020]].
JP ‘696 does not explicitly teach wherein the endothermic load is associated with electrochemical CO2 reduction.
The subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the manner in which an apparatus operates is not germane to the issue of patentability of the apparatus itself. Ex parte Wildahl 10 USPQ 2d 1546, 1548 (BPAI 1989); Ex parte McCullough 7 USPQ 2d 1889, 1891 (BPAI 1988); In re Finsterwalder 168 USPQ 530 (CCPA 1971); In re Casey 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967).
However, Minh teaches that:
A reversible solid oxide fuel cell (RSOFC) is a device that can operate efficiently in both fuel cell and electrolysis operating modes. Thus, in the fuel cell mode, an RSOFC functions as an SOFC, generating electricity by electrochemical combination of a fuel (hydrogen, hydrocarbons, alcohols, etc.) with air (oxygen in the air). In the electrolysis mode, an RSOFC functions as an electrolyzer (in this case, referred to as a solid oxide electrolysis cell or SOEC), producing hydrogen (from water) or chemicals such as syngas (from mixtures of water and carbon dioxide) when coupled with an energy source (fossil, nuclear, renewable) [page 55, left column, lines 1-16].
An SOFC (Solid Oxide Fuel Cell) stack and an SOEC (Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell) stack are fundamentally the same core hardware operating in reverse2 where in the electrolysis mode, an RSOFC functions as an electrolyzer (in this case, referred to as a solid oxide electrolysis cell or SOEC), producing chemicals such as syngas from mixtures of water and carbon dioxide.
Regarding claim 2, JP ‘696 teaches wherein the at least one electrochemical cell comprises a first electrochemical cell (= heat-generating SOFC cell 2) [ρ [0020]] and a second
electrochemical cell (= heat-absorbing POSOFC cell 1) [ρ [0020]].
Regarding claim 3, JP ‘696 does not explicitly teaches wherein each of the first electrochemical cell and second electrochemical cell includes a cathode, a membrane, and an anode.
JP ‘696 teaches a solid oxide fuel cell stack (ρ [0018]; and Fig. 1).
Minh teaches that an SOFC comprises an oxygen electrode (= a cathode), an electrolyte (= a membrane), and a hydrogen electrode (= an anode) [page 55, Fig. 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
263
883
media_image1.png
Greyscale
].
The subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because JP ‘696 teaches a solid oxide fuel cell in [0018]; and Fig. 1, where a cell comprising an oxygen electrode, an electrolyte and a hydrogen electrode would have been the configuration of a solid oxide fuel cell as taught by Minh on page 55, Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 4, JP ‘696 teaches wherein the first electrochemical cell is adapted to
convert CO2 into CO and convert C2H₆ into C2H4,3 and the second electrochemical cell is adapted to offset voltage and heat requirements of the first electrochemical cell4 (= when attempting to realize a POSOFC-SOFC system that combines endothermic and exothermic reactions, it is thermally advantageous to supply the Joule heat generated during power generation by the SOFC to the POSOFC) [ρ [0003]].
Regarding claim 6, JP ‘696 teaches wherein the second electrochemical cell is adapted to convert C2H₆ into C₂H₄5 (= which use the electrochemical partial oxidation reaction of hydrocarbons) [ρ [0003]].
Regarding claim 7, JP ‘626 does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one electrochemical cell is at least one component of an intermediate temperature solid oxide electrolyzer cell.
JP ‘696 teaches that:
Figure 1 shows an example of the first embodiment of the present invention.
In Figure 1, the cell stack 5, which is a solid oxide fuel cell stack, contains a mixture of POSOFC cells 1 (a first type of solid oxide fuel cell) and SOFC cells 2 (a second type of solid oxide fuel cell) in a ratio of 1:2. The cells are connected and stacked to maximize the heat transfer area between the POSOFC cells 1 and SOFC cells 2.
In other words, each POSOFC cell 1 is sandwiched between two SOFC cells 2 (ρ [0018]).
The subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because JP ‘696 teaches that each POSOFC cell 1 is sandwiched between two SOFC cells 2 in [0018]. When the structure recited in the reference is similar to that of the claims, claimed properties and/or functions may be presumed in the prior art.
Regarding claim 8, JP ‘626 does not explicitly teach wherein the temperature for operation of the intermediate temperature solid oxide electrolyzer cell is in the range of 650 °C-750°.
The subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the manner in which an apparatus operates is not germane to the issue of patentability of the apparatus itself. Ex parte Wildahl 10 USPQ 2d 1546, 1548 (BPAI 1989); Ex parte McCullough 7 USPQ 2d 1889, 1891 (BPAI 1988); In re Finsterwalder 168 USPQ 530 (CCPA 1971); In re Casey 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967).
II. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2003272696 (‘696) in view of Minh et al. (“Reversible Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Technology for Green Fuel and Power Production,” The Electrochemical Society Interface (2013 Jan 1), Vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 55-62) as applied to claims 1-4 and 6-8 above, and further in view of Botte (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0148846 A1).
Regarding claim 5, JP ‘696 does not explicitly teach wherein the conversion of CO2 into
CO and conversion C2H₆ into C2H4 in the first electrochemical cell occurs simultaneously.6
The subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the manner in which an apparatus operates is not germane to the issue of patentability of the apparatus itself. Ex parte Wildahl 10 USPQ 2d 1546, 1548 (BPAI 1989); Ex parte McCullough 7 USPQ 2d 1889, 1891 (BPAI 1988); In re Finsterwalder 168 USPQ 530 (CCPA 1971); In re Casey 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA
1967).
However, Botte teaches that with respect to electrochemical conversion, it has been demonstrated that the electrochemical reduction of CO2 can produce CO, methane, formic acid, etc. using solid oxide electrolyte-type electrolyzers at 800o C. to 100o C. (page 1, [0003]).
Citations
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
WO 2017/144403 is cited to teach a process for producing carbon monoxide (CO) from carbon dioxide (CO2) in a solid oxide electrolysis cell (SOEC) or SOEC stack (page 1, lines 17-19).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDNA WONG whose telephone number is (571) 272-1349. The
examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM- 3:30 PM.
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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/EDNA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
1 A preamble is not necessarily accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See MPEP § 2111.02(II)..
2 See also Minh in Fig. 1.
3 The inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP § 2115.
4 The manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP § 2114.
5 The manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP § 2114.
6 This is where Applicant claims an apparatus in terms of function and the apparatus of the prior art is the same as that of the claim but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference.
Prosecution Insights