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
Claims 1-10 and 22-23 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups I, II, IV, and V, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election of Group III (claims 11-21) was made without traverse in the 6/10/2026 reply.
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 –
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11, 13-14, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20170096348 A1 Takahashi et al. Claim 11 requires “A method for recycling ammonia from an ammonia- containing liquid, the method comprising, bringing an ammonia-containing liquid containing ammonia into contact with a porous coordination polymer in which a metal ion and an organic ligand coordinately bonded to adsorb the ammonia to the porous coordination polymer”. Takahashi et al. discloses “use of a metal cyanocomplex as an ammonia adsorbent.” [0020]. Regarding the coordination Takahashi et al. discloses “While there are generally six cyano groups coordinated at M', it is to be understood that a part thereof may be replaced by a nitro group and coordination of 4 to 8 cyano groups does not give rise to any problem.” [0036]. Regarding the ammonia containing liquid Takahashi et al. discloses “An ammonia adsorbent as recited in 1, characterized in that by contact of said absorbent with a liquid containing ammonia and/or ammonium ions, ammonia and/or ammonium ions are adsorbed thereto.” [0021]. The metal cyanocomplex of Takahashi et al. is understood a polymer consisting of many monomer units linked together because the cyano (CN-) group can act as a bridging ligand.
Claim 11 further requires “and subsequently desorbing the ammonia from an ammonia-adsorbed porous coordination polymer to recover the ammonia, the ammonia-adsorbed porous coordination polymer being formed by adsorbing the ammonia to the porous coordination polymer.”. Takahashi et al. discloses “An ammonia adsorbent as recited in any one of 1, 2 and 3), characterized in that by immersion of said adsorbent in water, an aqueous acid solution or an aqueous salt Solution
or irradiation of said absorbent with ultraviolet rays, ammonia and/or ammonium ions are desorbed therefrom.” [0021].
Claim 13 requires “the porous coordination polymer has an active site.”. It is understood from the specification that “an active site” refers to a site that is capable of coordinating ammonia (Specification at [0018]). Takahashi et al. discloses ammonia coordination “NH3 is coordinated and adsorbed to an exposed metal site of the metal cyanocomplex” [0037].
Claim 14 requires “the metal ion constituting the porous coordination polymer comprises a metal selected from a group consisting of Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Sc, Y, Ti, Zr, Hf, V, Nb, Ta, Cr, Mo, W, Mn, Re, Fe, Ru, Os, Co, Rh, Ir, Ni, Pd, Pt, Cu, Ag, Au, Zn, Cd, Hg, Al, Ga, In, Tl, Si, Ge, Sn, Pb, As, Sb, and Bi.”. Takahashi et al. discloses “The metal atom M used herein is preferably one or two or more metal atoms selected from the group consisting of Vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, ruthenium, cobalt, rhodium, nickel, palladium, platinum, copper, silver, Zinc, lanthanum, europium, gadolinium,
lutetium, barium, strontium, and calcium … The metal atom M' is preferably one or two or more metal atoms selected from the group consisting of Vanadium, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten, manganese, iron, ruthenium, cobalt, nickel, platinum, and copper” [0034], which overlaps significantly with the metals claimed.
Claim 16 requires “the ammonia-containing liquid is adjusted to be alkaline.”. Takahashi et al. discloses in example 1 “Then, there was solution L1 provided as an adsorption testing solution in which 0.1 mol/L of ammonium chloride and 0.1 mol/L of ammonia water were mixed together.” [0073]. It is understood that the addition of ammonia to water to form ammonia water adjusts the pH of the solution to alkaline.
Claim 20 requires “the ammonia-containing liquid is a liquid subjected to ammonia stripping.”. It is understood that the ammonia adsorbent of Takahashi et al. strips ammonia from solution during use.
Claims 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 110787780 A Wei et al. Claim 11 requires “A method for recycling ammonia from an ammonia- containing liquid, characterized by the method comprising, bringing an ammonia-containing liquid containing ammonia into contact with a porous coordination polymer in which a metal ion and an organic ligand coordinately bonded to adsorb the ammonia to the porous coordination polymer”. Regarding adsorbing ammonia from a liquid Wei et al. discloses “An aqueous solution containing 30 mg/L of NH4+ was prepared. The wastewater was treated with an adsorbent of 0.3% by weight (the adsorbent obtained in Example 5). The solution was magnetically stirred for 240 min, and then centrifuged and filtered. The concentration of NH4+ in the filtrate was tested. The remaining concentration of NH4+ in the solution was 11.0 mg/L, and the removal rate reached 63.3%.” [0121]. Regarding a porous coordination polymer the adsorbent of Example 5 is “The composite adsorbent material contains conductive polymer polypyrrole, zinc oxide metal oxide, and coupling agent butyric acid.” [0059]. Regarding pores Wei et al. discloses “In order to maintain electroneutrality, the negatively charged hydroxyl groups will bind to substances in the aqueous solution, and then selectively adsorb them through chelation, electrostatic adsorption, or pore adsorption.” [0049].
Claim 11 further requires “and desorbing the ammonia from an ammonia-adsorbed porous coordination polymer to recover the ammonia, the ammonia-adsorbed porous coordination polymer being formed by adsorbing the ammonia to the porous coordination polymer.”. Wei et al. discloses “After adsorbing pollutants, the adsorbent can be soaked in acid and alkali solutions for 1–120 min in sequence or in alkali and acid solutions for 1–120 min in sequence to achieve pollutant desorption and adsorbent regeneration.” [0091].
Claim 15 requires “the organic ligand constituting the porous coordination polymer is derived from carboxylic acids or azoles.” The polymer of Example 5 uses butyric acid which is a carboxylic acid.
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.
Claims 12, 17, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170096348 A1 Takahashi et al. Claim 12 requires “a water-soluble organic solvent is adhered to the porous coordination polymer.” Takahashi et al. discloses “It is also noted that the metal cyanocomplex may further contain a solvent other than water, and a material that does not positively appear in its composition Such as other ions serving as impurities.” [0035]. Although Takashi et al. does not specify that the solvent other than water is a water soluble organic solvent, it nevertheless would have been i) implicit (MPEP 2144.01) and/or ii) obvious (MPEP 2143 I.(G)) to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention i) that the non-water solvent would be water soluble, and/or ii) to employ a water soluble non-water solvent, for at least the reason that such a water-soluble non-water solvent would be compatible with Takahashi et al.’s further processing steps involving washing with an aqueous acid or aqueous salt solution to desorb ammonia (see Claim 11).
Claim 17 requires “the ammonia contained in the alkaline ammonia-containing liquid is adsorbed to the porous coordination polymer, an acid is added to a mixed liquid of the alkaline ammonia-containing liquid and the porous coordination polymer to form an acidic liquid, the ammonia-adsorbed porous coordination polymer is recovered, and then the ammonia is desorbed from the ammonia-adsorbed porous coordination polymer.”. Takahashi et al. discloses “PB thin film FFe2-2 obtained in Preparation Example 6 was left to stand in a flask having a volume of 1.5 L and an ammonia concentration of 200 ppm for 5 minutes for adsorption of ammonia, followed by measurement by a Fourier transform infrared spectrophotometer (FTIR). As a result, there was a peak increase at 1400 cm that would appear to be ascribable to ammonia, as indicated by a dotted line (. . . ) in FIG. 7. Then, this thin film having ammonia adsorbed onto it was immersed in 0.5 mmol/L of sulfuric acid with the result that there was a decrease in the 1400 cm’ peak as indicated by a dashed line (--) in FIG. 7, from which desorption of ammonia by the acid was confirmed. From this it has been found that the immersion in acid of PB having ammonia adsorbed to it, too, makes it possible to recycle PB as an ammonia adsorbent.” [0088-0090]. It is understood that the net effect of immersing the polymer in 0.5 M sulfuric acid is an acidic liquid. Although Takahashi et al. does not actually perform the step of recovering the polymer this would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to realize the goal of recycling the polymer (and thereby desirably avoid or at least reduce the cost of making/providing additional polymer). MPEP 2143 I.(G). One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to use any known liquid-solid separation method, such as simple filtration, in order to achieve this outcome. MPEP 2143 I.(E).
Claim 19 requires “the ammonia-containing liquid is derived from a liquid generated at a semiconductor manufacturing plant, an ammonia manufacturing plant, a chemical material manufacturing plant using ammonia, or a chemical material manufacturing plant in which ammonia is by-produced, or a liquid containing ammonia discharged from a living organism.”. Although Takahashi et al. discloses using lab prepared ammonia solutions in the examples, they list at least semiconductors and biomass as potential sources of waste streams to adsorb from “In the field of biomass power generation, on the other hand, livestock's feces and urine or the like are fermented to turn methane into fuel, but most of the ensuing nitrogen content remains as ammonia in the digestive fluid, and how to make use of or process that ammonia is now under study” [0002] and “In other fields than the environmental and energy fields, a problem with ammonia is that it may remain as impurities in semiconductor productions and within fuel cells; there is a need for its removal.” [0004]. Using a material for its intended purpose is prima facie obvious.
Claim 21 requires “the porous coordination polymer is reused after the ammonia is desorbed from the ammonia- adsorbed porous coordination polymer.”. In examples 6-8 Takahashi et al. discloses at least three processes wherein the polymer is returned to its initial state ready for reuse [0086-0092], however Takahashi et al. falls short of explicitly reusing the polymer. The actual reuse of the polymer, ready to be used again, is obvious as it would save costs compared to synthesizing a new absorbent. MPEP 2143 I.(G).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 110787780 A Wei et al. Claim 18 requires “the ammonia-containing liquid comprises a water-soluble organic solvent.” Although Wei et al. does not explicitly disclose an example wherein ammonia was absorbed from wastewater containing a water soluble organic solvent they do disclose “Although some of these wastewaters have been treated, they still contain certain levels of organic pollutants and inorganic substances, manifesting as high COD and BOD concentrations, high color, and high levels of nutrients (total phosphorus and total nitrogen, etc.) and heavy metal ions (such as lead ions, copper ions, antimony ions, zinc ions, etc.). Moreover, wastewater usually contains multiple pollutants or multiple heavy metal ions at the same time. Wastewater containing only one pollutant is very rare.” [0004] and “The composite adsorbent material provided in this application is applicable to the adsorption and removal of different pollutants in wastewater and has broad adsorption spectrum.” [0028] It is therefore understood that Wei et al. contemplates using their adsorbent on a wastewater stream containing organic pollutants (water soluble organic solvents) and inorganic substances (such as NH3/NH4OH) and that they expect their adsorbent material to be suitable for the removal of both. MPEP 2144.01.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA MAXWELL SPEER whose telephone number is (703)756-5471. The examiner can normally be reached M-T and Th-F 8am-6pm PST. 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.
/JOSHUA MAXWELL SPEER/
Examiner
Art Unit 1736
/DANIEL BERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights