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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 6/29/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, line 1 “rpyoil” should be spelled out using the official name.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 7 is 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.
To Claim 7, line 1 “the purified hydrogen” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujimura (US Pat.: 5980858).
Fujimura describes a method of treating wastes by gasification and then recycling that waste, to including generating hydrogen for the synthesis of ammonia (abstract). The waste used can include plastic wastes (col. 3, lines 64-66). The exhaust from the gasified waste is then processed using a variety of systems, to include a catalytic step (col. 2, lines 50-55), which isolates the hydrogen (col. 13, lines 50-65) for reacting with nitrogen to generate ammonia (col. 14, lines 54-60). The heat and treatment steps can be considered reforming steps.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hallett (WO 2020/257946).
Fujimura does not disclose steam reforming of methane.
Hallett describes a process for reducing various material to produce methane (para. 135, 136). The wastes described can include plastics (para. 83, 141, 180). This process heats the wastes and penetrates the wastes with gases to reduce the molecules directly (para. 105). The methane-rich stream is then further processed by catalytic steam reforming (para. 160) to produce hydrogen (para. 160).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture methane from the plastic waste and then further process the methane by steam reforming, as taught by Hallet for use with the ammonia manufacturing process of Fujimura because Hallet explains that this is an effective method of making hydrogen from the same plastic wastes.
Regarding claims 3, 4 and 6, the claims further limit the feedstock to be a pyrolysis product, which is an optional embodiment of claim 1 (a feedstock comprising mixed plastic waste or a pyrolysis product) and therefore not required. As such, claims 3 and 4 are rejected based on identical/substantially identical reasons as claim 1.
As to Claim 5, Hallet teaches that the CO is converted using a water gas shift reaction to produce more hydrogen (para. 160).
Claim(s) 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Whitman (US Pub.: 2017/0011364).
Fujimura teaches that the hydrogen is from wastes, such as plastics (see above). This is considered recycling. The reference does not describe use of recycle credits.
Whitman describes a process for waste handling and recycling (title). The system uses technology systems and devices for collecting, managing, measuring and tracking recyclables and waste materials (para. 3). The system can accommodate for a large number of waste types, to include plastics (para. 164). Furthermore, the system can include credit information (para. 9) and can factor-in credit owed or obligated owed (para. 19, 21). The system can also award credit for recyclable materials (para. 105, 252, 253).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a recycle credit, as taught by Whitman for use with the process of recycling waste plastics, as taught by Fujimura because this method of waste handling is known to manage waste systems and account for recycled materials, while giving credit for use of those recycled materials.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hallett (WO 2020/257946) and in view of Whitman (US Pub.: 2017/0011364).
Fujimura describes gasifying wastes that can include plastic wastes (abstract and col. 3, lines 64-66) to produce hydrogen (col. 13, lines 50-65) for reacting with nitrogen to generate ammonia (col. 14, lines 54-60). This meets steps a) and d) of Claim 9.
As to the other features of Claim 9, specifically, as to making syngas from steam reforming, as required by step c), Hallett describes a process for reducing various material to produce methane (para. 135, 136). The wastes described can include plastics (para. 83, 141, 180). This process heats the wastes and penetrates the wastes with gases to reduce the molecules directly (para. 105). The methane-rich stream is then further processed by catalytic steam reforming (para. 160) to produce hydrogen and CO (para. 160). A mixture of H2 and CO are the compositions for syngas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture methane from the plastic waste and then further process the methane by steam reforming, as taught by Hallet for use with the ammonia manufacturing process of Fujimura because Hallet explains that this is an effective method of making hydrogen from the same plastic wastes.
As to steps b) and e), Whitman describes a process for waste handling and recycling (title). The system uses technology systems and devices for collecting, managing, measuring and tracking recyclables and waste materials (para. 3). The system can accommodate for a large number of waste types, to include plastics (para. 164). Furthermore, the system can include credit information (para. 9) and can factor-in credit owed or obligated owed (para. 19, 21). The system can also award credit for recyclable materials (para. 105, 252, 253).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a recycle credit, as taught by Whitman for use with the process of recycling waste plastics, as taught by Fujimura because this method of waste handling is known to manage waste systems and account for recycled materials, while giving credit for use of those recycled materials.
Claim(s) 10, 11, 12, 13, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura (US Pat.: 5980858).
Fujimura explains that the waste is heated under pyrolysis and gasifying partial oxidation conditions (col. 15, lines 30, 35-46). The product made includes a mixture of CO and H2 (col. 15, lines 38-44). Fujimura teaches that the product made includes a synthesis gas (col. 8, line 43). The hydrogen produced is then reacted with with nitrogen to generate ammonia (col. 14, lines 54-60).
As to Claims 11 and 12, Fujimura teaches that the wastes used in the hydrogen-generation process can include plastic wastes (col. 3, lines 64-65 as well as other fuels, such as low-grade coal (col. 3, lines 66-67 and col. 4, lines 60-64).
As to Claim 16, Fujimura teaches that the nitrogen gas is obtained from air separation (col. 5, lines 33-35).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Hallett (WO 2020/257946).
Fujimura teaches that the partial oxidation of the wastes produced a mixture of acid gases, such as CO, H2 and CO2 (col. 15, lines 43-45, 51-55). The stream is then processed to separate the hydrogen (col. 15, line 67 to col. 16, line 1).
As to the feature of steam shifting the syngas, Hallett teaches producing hydrogen from the combustion of wastes (such as plastics) (see above). The product stream is then processed by a water gas shift reaction (para. 160). The water in the water-gas shift reaction is steam (para. 115).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to separate hydrogen using water gas shift reactions and steam, as taught by Hallett for use with the process of Fujimura because this is a known and effective method for separate hydrogen from the waste stream.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Hallett (WO 2020/257946) and in view of Whitman (US Pub.: 2017/0011364).
Fujimura describes gasifying wastes that can include plastic wastes (abstract and col. 3, lines 64-66) to produce hydrogen (col. 13, lines 50-65) for reacting with nitrogen to generate ammonia (col. 14, lines 54-60). This meets steps a) and d) of Claim 9.
As to the other features of Claim 9, specifically, as to making syngas from steam reforming, as required by step c), Hallett describes a process for reducing various material to produce methane (para. 135, 136). The wastes described can include plastics (para. 83, 141, 180). This process heats the wastes and penetrates the wastes with gases to reduce the molecules directly (para. 105). The methane-rich stream is then further processed by catalytic steam reforming (para. 160) to produce hydrogen and CO (para. 160). A mixture of H2 and CO are the compositions for syngas.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to separate hydrogen using water gas shift reactions and steam, as taught by Hallett for use with the process of Fujimura because this is a known and effective method for separate hydrogen from the waste stream.
As to steps b) and e), Whitman describes a process for waste handling and recycling (title). The system uses technology systems and devices for collecting, managing, measuring and tracking recyclables and waste materials (para. 3). The system can accommodate for a large number of waste types, to include plastics (para. 164). Furthermore, the system can include credit information (para. 9) and can factor-in credit owed or obligated owed (para. 19, 21). The system can also award credit for recyclable materials (para. 105, 252, 253).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a recycle credit, as taught by Whitman for use with the process of recycling waste plastics, as taught by Fujimura because this method of waste handling is known to manage waste systems and account for recycled materials, while giving credit for use of those recycled materials.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHENG HAN DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5823. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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, Fung Coris can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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.
/SHENG H DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732 August 5, 2026
Prosecution Insights