DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-14 are pending in the instant application.
Priority
This application is a U.S. national stage entry under 35 U.S.C. §371 of International Application No. PCT/EP2022/067622 filed June 27, 2022, which claims priority benefit to French Patent Application No. 2107216 filed on July 2, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statements
Applicants’ Information Disclosure Statement, filed on 12/28/2023, has been considered. Please refer to Applicant’s copy of the PTO-1449 submitted herewith.
Response to Restriction Requirement
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I (i.e. claims 1-12) in the reply filed by Applicant’s representative Csaba Henter on 09/15/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant traversed the restriction requirement on the ground that the patent office has not established that it would pose an undue burden to examine the full scope of the claimed invention. However, Applicant fails to argue why the patent office has not established that it would pose an undue burden to examine the full scope of the claimed invention. Actually, the previous Office Action states that the instant application lacks unity of invention because the groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features over the "Y" references of FR2934175A1, FR2934176A1, FR2948578A1, and FR2909010A1, as well as the prior art cited in this Office action. Therefore, claim 1 lacks a special technical feature, and pending claims lack unity of invention. Accordingly, the restriction requirement for lack unity of invention is maintained and made FINAL.
Status of the Claims
Claims 13-14 are withdrawn from further consideration by Examiner as being drawn to non-elected inventions under 37 CFR 1.142(b) due to the restriction requirement. Claims 1-12 are under examination on the merits.
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) 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Specifically, claims 1, 3 4-5, and 9 contain the terms “such as” and/or “preferably” rendering the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the terms are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 2-12 depending on claim 1 are also rejected.
In addition, claim 4 contains the phrase “wherein said radical R contains one or more heteroatoms, present by means of functions such as alcohols, ethers, thioethers, nitriles, ketones, sulfones, sulfoxides, amides or amines”. However, it is not clear what that phrase means because R is a substituent of the compound R(NH)n is an unsaturated heterocyclic organic compound or a mixture of unsaturated heterocyclic organic compounds, cannot means of functions such as alcohols, ethers, thioethers, nitriles, ketones, sulfones, sulfoxides, amides.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
Claims 1-2 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO2012/068327 (“the `327 publication”) to Blair et al.
Applicant’s claim 1 is drawn to an absorbent composition for absorbing the carbon dioxide contained in a gaseous effluent comprising the combination of a base B or a mixture of bases B with at least one compound R(NH)n in an aqueous solvent Z and/or the product obtained by reaction of said base B or of said mixture of bases B with said compound R(NH)n in said aqueous solvent Z, wherein: B is a base or a mixture of bases corresponding to one of the general formulae M(HCO3)x or M'y(CO3) or M"(OH)., where M, M', M", which are identical or different, are chosen without distinction from: a monovalent cation such as lithium, sodium, potassium, rubidium or cesium, a quaternary ammonium cation corresponding to the general formula R1R2R3R4N+ wherein R1, R2, R3 and R4 are independently chosen from a hydrogen atom, a branched or unbranched, saturated or unsaturated aliphatic, substituted or unsubstituted, saturated or unsaturated alicyclic, substituted or unsubstituted, saturated or unsaturated heterocyclic, substituted or unsubstituted monoaromatic or polyaromatic hydrocarbon- based group containing between 1 and 20 carbon atoms, it being possible for R1, R2, R3 and R4 to be bonded in pairs by covalent bonds to form a heterocycle with 5 to 8 atoms, a divalent cation such as magnesium, calcium or barium, and wherein x, y, w are equal to 1 or to 2; R(NH)n is an unsaturated heterocyclic organic compound or a mixture of unsaturated heterocyclic organic compounds, wherein the radical R is an alicyclic, monoaromatic or polyaromatic, or heterocyclic group having at least one nitrogen atom, and n is between 1 and 20, preferably between 1 and 6, very preferably n is equal to 2 or 3; Z is essentially water or a mixture of solvents comprising water.
The `327 publication (claim 9) discloses a scrubbing liquid composition for absorbing acidic contaminants from fluids in an industrial process, the composition comprising:
at least one absorbent component having a general formula
PNG
media_image1.png
304
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(i.e., R(NH)n)) including carbonates, bicarbonates, carbamates, ureas, and amides thereof and salts thereof; (b) a solvent; and (c) further comprising at least one component selected from the group consisting of: amines, activators, promoters, antifoaming agents, co-absorbents (i.e., base B), corrosion inhibitors, coloring agents, and combinations thereof. The `327 publication [0056-0057] further discloses co-absorbents include one or more components selected from calcium oxide, calcium ligtiosulfonate, calcium silicate hydrates, calcium hydroxide, calcium carbonate, calcium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, trona, sodium sesqu (carbonate, soda ash, nacholite, sodium aluminate, metal oxides, and the like; and activators and co-absorbents are preferably present in the composition of the invention from about 0.01 to about 90 wt% (wt% based on the weight of total actives), etc. The `327 publication (claim 10) discloses the solvent is selected from the group consisting of: water, alcohols, polyols, other acid gas solvents, organic solvents, and combinations thereof. Therefore, the `327 publication anticipates claims 1-2, 4, 7-10, and 12.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 3, 5-6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the `327 publication in view of US2012/148463 A1 (“the `463 publication”) to Carrette et al.
The `327 publication (claim 9) discloses a scrubbing liquid composition for absorbing acidic contaminants from fluids in an industrial process, the composition comprising: (a) at least one absorbent component having a general formula
PNG
media_image1.png
304
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(i.e., R(NH)n)) including carbonates, bicarbonates, carbamates, ureas, and amides thereof and salts thereof; (b) a solvent; and (c) further comprising at least one component selected from the group consisting of: amines, activators, promoters, antifoaming agents, co-absorbents (i.e., base B), corrosion inhibitors, coloring agents, and combinations thereof. The `327 publication [0056-0057] further discloses co-absorbents include one or more components selected from calcium oxide, calcium ligtiosulfonate, calcium silicate hydrates, calcium hydroxide, calcium carbonate, calcium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate, sodium bicarbonate, trona, sodium sesqu (carbonate, soda ash, nacholite, sodium aluminate, metal oxides, and the like; and activators and co-absorbents are preferably present in the composition of the invention from about 0.01 to about 90 wt% (wt% based on the weight of total actives), etc. The `327 publication (claim 10) discloses the solvent is selected from the group consisting of: water, alcohols, polyols, other acid gas solvents, organic solvents, and combinations thereof.
In terms of claim 3 wherein the compound R(NH)n is an unsaturated heterocyclic organic compound comprising at least 2, 3 or 4 nitrogen atoms in a ring of 5 or more atoms respectively comprising at least 3, 2 or 1 carbon atom(s), preferably an organic compound with an unsaturated heterocycle containing five atoms, having at least one nitrogen atom per four carbon atoms, the `327 publication does not teach the compound R(NH)n is an unsaturated heterocyclic organic compound. Instead, the `327 publication teaches the compound R(NH)n is a saturated heterocyclic organic compound of the formula
PNG
media_image1.png
304
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
However, the difference is further taught and/or suggested by the `463 publication. The `463 publication (claim 7) discloses an absorbent solution for absorbing the acid compounds (e.g., CO2) contained in a gaseous effluent, said solution comprising: a) at least one amine, b) water, c) at least one degradation inhibiting compound for limiting the degradation of said amine, the degradation inhibiting compound being a derivative of a triazole or of a tetrazole, at least one substituent of which comprises a sulfur atom such as 1H-1,2,4-triazole-3-thiol, a 1H-1,2,4-triazole-3-thiol salt, etc. The `463 publication (Abstract) further discloses the degradation of an absorbent solution comprising organic compounds with an amine functional group in aqueous solution is substantially reduced in the presence of a small amount of degradation inhibiting agents belonging to the family of derivatives of triazoles or of a tetrazole at least one substituent of which contains a sulfur atom, and the absorbent solution is used to deacidize a gaseous effluent. In addition, present claim 1 is drawn to an absorbent composition defined by an open-ended transition phrase “comprising”, and the claimed absorbent composition may further contain additional unspecified components. One ordinary skilled in the art would have been motivated to include a derivative of triazoles or of a tetrazole in the absorbent composition for capturing CO2 because both the prior art references are used for the same application of absorbing CO2, and triazoles and tetrazole are unsaturated heterocyclic organic compounds. Therefore, the `327 publication in view of the `463 publication would have rendered claim 3 obvious.
In terms of claims 5-6, the `463 publication (claim 7) discloses an absorbent solution comprising a derivative of a triazole or of a tetrazole, such as 1H-1,2,4-triazole-3-thiol, a 1H-1,2,4-triazole-3-thiol salt, etc., which is the product obtained by reaction of said mixture of bases B with said compound R(NH)n.
In terms of claim 11, wherein said other solvent is chosen from tetraethylene glycol dimethyl ether, sulfolane, dimethyl sulfoxide, ethanol, polyethylene glycols-200/400/600, N-methylpyrrolidone, 1,3- dioxan-2-one, dimethylformamide, dimethylacetamide, formamide, acetamide, 2- methoxy-2-methyl-3-butanone, 2-methoxy-2-methyl-4-pentanone, tetrahydropyrimidone, dimethyl thiodipropionate, bis(2-hydroxyethyl)sulfone or tributyl phosphate, the `327 publication (claim 10) discloses the solvent is selected from the group consisting of: water, alcohols, polyols, other acid gas solvents, organic solvents, and combinations thereof. One ordinary skilled in the art would have known that ethanol is one of the most common alcohols as a solvent. In addition, polyethylene glycols-200/400/600 is one of the common polyols know to one ordinary skilled in the art in light of the `327 publication (claim 10).
Claim Objection
Claims 3-12 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent of claims 1, 5, 8, and 10.
Conclusions
Claims 1-12 are rejected.
Claims 13-14 are withdrawn.
Claims 3-12 are objected to.
Telephone Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yong L. Chu, whose telephone number is (571)272-5759. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amber R. Orlando can be reached on 571-270-3149. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Status Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/YONG L CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights