DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II (claims 7-19) in the reply filed on 4/30/26 is acknowledged.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the term “the invention” is stated in line 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 7-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB’307 (GB 672307 cited by applicant) in view of WO’293 (WO9709293 cited by applicant).
With respect to claim 7, GB’307 discloses a method, comprising: i) providing an alkali carbonate catalyst on a porous support. Particularly, a process which comprises contacting steam at gasification temperatures with a dense fluidized mass of finely divided carbonaceous solids of initially relatively low surface area in a water gas reaction zone, forming a char of high surface area within said zone, impregnating said highly active char with a catalyst promoting the gasification of carbonaceous material, and subjecting said impregnated material to a gasification reaction with steam. The catalyst is an alkali or alkaline earth metal carbonate, preferably sodium or potassium carbonate. See GB’307 p. 1-5 and claims.
However, GB’307 fails to explicitly teach ii) supplying the catalyst with a flow of CO2 and H2 gas; and iii) heating the catalyst to >350 °C, resulting in an output containing CO as claimed.
WO’293 teaches a method under a specific catalyst, the process occurring in the first reactor is the non-catalytic, high temperature Reverse Water Gas Shift reaction, i.e. H2 + CO2 - > CO + H2O. The reverse water gas shift reaction is in equilibrium with the water gas shift reaction. Above 800°C the reverse reaction is thermodynamically favored and proceeds without the need for a catalyst (see p. 12-13). It further discloses (see page 27 of the description) that the catalyst is an iron-copper catalyst, alkalized with potassium carbonate and containing 100 parts of iron, 0.1 part of copper and 0.25 parts of potassium carbonate. Therefore, under the teachings WO’293, persons skilled in the art would be lead to the specific reaction gas stream and temperature conditions.
With respect to claims 8-19, see further teachings of GB’307 where the metals are sodium and potassium; the selections of other metals are conventional replacements. GB’307 does not use other group metals, and there is no evidence that it is poisoned by sulfur-containing impurities. Selections of other common inorganic porous supports are conventional replacements. The phase structure of the catalyst is a conventional selection. Adjustment to the selection of alkali metal, the specific porous material and a phase structure thereof, the composition and space velocity of the feedstock gas stream, the source of gas, and the separation operation are conventional means.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2018/0015444 teaches a class of catalysts for CO.sub.2 hydrogenation via the reverse water-gas shift (RWGS) reaction to selectively produce CO for down-stream hydrocarbon synthesis. Alkali metal-doped molybdenum carbide, supported on gamma alumina (A-Mo.sub.2C/γ-Al.sub.2O.sub.3, A=K, Na, Li), is synthesized by co-impregnation of molybdenum and alkali metal precursors onto a γ-Al.sub.2O.sub.3 support. The A-Mo/γ-Al.sub.2O.sub.3 catalyst is then carburized to form the A-Mo.sub.2C/γ-Al.sub.2O.sub.3. Also disclosed is the related method for CO.sub.2 hydrogenation via the RWGS reaction using the A-Mo.sub.2C/γ-Al.sub.2O.sub.3 catalyst.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKIYA W BATES whose telephone number is (571)272-7039. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am - 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, Doug Hutton can be reached at 5712724137. 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.
/ZAKIYA W BATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3674 6/30/2026
Prosecution Insights