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 12/4/23 drawings are provisionally accepted. Due to their complexity and/or numerosity, applicant’s assistance is requested to ensure that all component labels therein are correctly identified in the specification and vice versa. 37 CFR 1.3 (courtesy required).
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s 6/24/26 election of Group I (claims 1-12) is acknowledged. As applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the/any supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 13-16 are withdrawn from further consideration per 37 CFR 1.142(b) as drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par. as indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter that 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 recitation “the bed of solids” lacks sufficient antecedent bases, rendering claim 1 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Applicant is hereby advised that, as independent claim 1 and various dependent claims are rejected for deficiencies under 35 USC 112(b)/2nd par., all claims depending therefrom also contain such deficiencies and are likewise rejected (unless the deficiencies are resolved by the dependent claim’s own limitations) - cure thereof is required for any and all claims affected even if any such claim were otherwise found allowable. See, e.g., In re Jolly, 172 F.2d 566, 567 (CCPA 1949) (holding that dependent claims of indefinite claims are thusly indefinite), and Ex parte Kristensen, 10 USPQ2d 1701, 1702-04 (BPAI 1989) (same); 35 USC 112(d)/4th par.
Regarding claims 5 and 10, the phrase "such as" renders the claims rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par. because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase (“Ni or Cu” in claim 5, “Fe, Ni or Cu” in claim 10) are i) merely exemplary yet not required, or ii) a required part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). While interpretation i) has been applied via the broadest reasonable interpretation standard (MPEP 2111.03), this rejection nevertheless needs addressing.
Regarding claim 5, the recitation “the metal fuel in the second solid” lacks sufficient antecedent bases, rendering claim 5 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Regarding claim 7, the recitations “the packed bed of solids containing CaO and Ni” and “the steam reforming” lack sufficient antecedent bases, rendering claim 7 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Regarding claim 8, the recitations “the sorption enhanced process”, “the packed bed of carbonated solids”, and “sub-step jj)” lack sufficient antecedent bases, rendering claim 8 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Regarding claim 9, the recitations “an additional carbonation step iii)” (no first/primary “carbonation step” is previously recited in claim 9 or claim 1) and “the packed bed of solids containing CaO and Cu” lack sufficient antecedent bases, rendering claim 9 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Regarding claim 11, the recitation “the packed bed of solids” lacks sufficient antecedent bases, rendering claim 11 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 are not rejectable over the prior art and do not suffer from any deficiencies under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Nevertheless, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par. rejections detailed above must be overcome before any claims can be deemed allowable. The most pertinent prior art of record appears to be EP2006252A2 (2008) (“’252”). Regarding claim 1, ‘252 teaches a method comprising preheating CaCO3 to >600oC, combusting a fuel to heat up the CaCO3 to 900-950oC in a calciner, and applying a vacuum to the calciner to enhance/accelerate the calcination in the calciner. See ‘252 at, e.g., par. 9 and 15; Fig. 2. Claim 1 is not rejectable over ‘252, however, at least because ‘252 does not conduct its combustion “within the bed of solids [located within the calciner]” as claimed, but rather conducts its combustion in a separate combustion chamber and employs CaO (i.e. calcined CaCO3) to transmit heat from the combustion chamber to the calciner. See id. As changing ‘252’s overall methodology by conducting its combustion within the calciner rather than within a separate combustion chamber would appear to materially alter ‘252’s principle of operation, such an alteration is considered non-obvious. MPEP 2143.01 VI.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL BERNS whose telephone number is (469)295-9161. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 (Central). 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at (571) 270-3591. 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.
/DANIEL BERNS/ July 29, 2026
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights