DETAILED ACTION
STATUS OF THE APPLICATION
Receipt is acknowledged of Applicants’ Amendments and Remarks, filed 4 January 2024, in the matter of Application No. 18/576,502. Said documents have been entered on the record. The Examiner further acknowledges the following:
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-5 are pending.
Claims 1-5 have been amended.
No claims have been cancelled.
Thus, claims 1-5 represent all claims currently under consideration.
Priority
Domestic Priority data as claimed by Applicant:
This application is a 371 of PCT/JP2022/027232 (07/11/2022)
Foreign Applications:
JAPAN 2021-115084 (07/12/2021)
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
The information disclosure statements submitted on 4 January 2024, 30 January 2024, 9 April 2025, and 23 March 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). See p. 1-2, paragraph [0003] of the Specification as filed.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koskinen et al. (US 2013/0072583 A1; IDS of 03-23-2026; hereinafter “Koskinen”), in view of Peschel et al. (US 2020/0165732 A1; IDS of 03-23-2026; hereinafter “Peschel”).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Koskinen teaches a method for producing a hydrocarbon composition, the method comprising gasifying the raw material in the presence of oxygen to produce a gas containing carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen and hydrocarbons; feeding the gas to a Fischer-Tropsch reactor; and recovering the hydrocarbon composition which is further treated to produce a fuel or lubricant for a combustion engine (Koskinen; Title; Abstract; claims 1 and 23).
The biomass feedstock can be selected from various waste materials and can be gasified in a fluidized bed reactor or circulating fluidized bed reactor (CFB) gasifier in the presence of oxygen at a temperature of about 700 to 1200 ºC (Koskinen; paragraphs [0022]-[0023]). This temperature range is consistent with the written description, provides an exemplary gasification reaction temperature of usually 700 ºC or more and preferably 800 ºC to 1200 ºC (Specification; [0025]). Koskinen further teaches that gasification can be promoted by feeding steam, air or oxygen into the reactor, exemplary results being obtained with oxygen and oxygen in combination with steam (Koskinen; paragraph [0025]).
The method of Koskinen further comprises wherein a part of or substantially all of the carbon dioxide contained in the gas produced from gasification is removed before it is fed into the Fischer-Tropsch reactor and used for forming carbon monoxide by a reversed water gas shift reaction by use of external hydrogen (Koskinen; claims 1, 11, and 14-15; paragraph [0017]). Carbon dioxide can be withdrawn from the gas at any point from or downstream any gas treatment process arranged before the Fischer-Tropsch reactor, and carbon dioxide can be recovered even from a high-temperature outlet stream of the gasifier or any reformer by, for example, a metal membrane (a hydrogen cell) (Koskinen; paragraph [0059]).
Fig. 2 of Koskinen depicts an exemplary embodiment of the process, wherein the feed for gas from a gasifier is introduced into reformer 2 (Koskinen; paragraph [0082]; Fig. 2). The effluent from the reformer 2 is fed into a reversed water gas shift reactor 3 along with a stream of hydrogen gas from hydrogen unit 1 along with some recycled gases separated from the gas mixture conducted to Fischer-Tropsch reactor 8 (Koskinen; paragraph [0085]). In the reversed water gas shift reactor 3, carbon dioxide and hydrogen are converted into carbon monoxide and water in an equilibrium reaction to increase the production of carbon monoxide (Koskinen; paragraphs [0086]-[0087]). The gaseous effluent of the reversed water gas shift reactor can be withdrawn and conducted through a series of optional washing units 4 and units for specific removal of carbon dioxide membrane 5 and removal unit 9, such as a methanol washing unit, a membrane unit, or a PSA unit (Koskinen; paragraphs [0089]-[0090]). After unit 5 there can be an optional washer unit 7, and finally the syngas is fed into a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 8 wherein hydrocarbons are synthesized by reacting carbon monoxide and hydrogen.
Overall, Koskinen teaches a method and production facility for the production of synthetic fuels comprising a gasification apparatus for gasifying waste biomass by reacting the waste, oxygen and steam at a high temperature to produce a gasified gas containing carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and hydrogen; a carbon dioxide separation apparatus (5) for separating carbon dioxide at least from the gasified gas produced in the gasification apparatus; and an FT synthesis apparatus (8) for producing a synthetic fuel by Fischer-Tropsch synthesis from a synthetic gas from which carbon dioxide has been separated in the carbon dioxide separation apparatus, in a manner consistent with instant claims 1 and 4.
Koskinen fails to explicitly teach wherein the method for producing the synthetic fuel further comprises a carbon dioxide electrolysis step/apparatus for electrolyzing the carbon dioxide separated in the carbon dioxide separation step/apparatus to produce an electrolyzed gas containing carbon mo. noxide and carbon dioxide; and the electrolyzed gas produced in the carbon dioxide electrolysis step/apparatus being supplied to the carbon dioxide separation step/apparatus such that carbon dioxide is separated from the gasified gas and the electrolyzed gas, as recited in instant claims 1 and 4.
Further regarding claim 2 depending from claim 1 and claim 5 depending from claim 4, Koskinen teaches that any external hydrogen source which comprises hydrogen produced by electricity, for example, without emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases can be employed (Koskinen; paragraph [0040]). Koskinen also teaches that during electrolytic production of hydrogen, considerable volumes of oxygen gas of high purity are obtained, and this oxygen can be used in the gasification of the biomass (Koskinen; paragraph [0041]).
Koskinen also fails to explicitly teach water electrolysis step/apparatus for electrolyzing water to produce water and hydrogen, the produced hydrogen being supplied to the FT synthesis step/apparatus and the produced oxygen being supplied to the gasification apparatus, as recited in instant claims 2 and 5.
However, Peschel teaches a method and system for producing a gas product containing carbon monoxide, wherein in solid oxide electrolysis cells water as well as carbon dioxide can also be subjected to the electrolysis process so that a synthesis gas containing hydrogen and carbon monoxide can be formed (Peschel; Title; paragraph [0006]; claims 1 and 13).
Peschel teaches that within the scope of the present invention, a simple, cost-effective, and technically uncomplicated, on-site production of carbon monoxide or synthesis gas by carbon dioxide electrolysis according to one of the explained techniques is possible. In this way, carbon monoxide or synthesis gas can be provided to a consumer, without having to resort to the known methods (Peschel; paragraph [0026]). Peschel further teaches that within the scope of the present invention, the flexible purification of an electrolysis raw product, or of a raw gas provided by means of electrolysis, which is predominantly composed of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide and, optionally, hydrogen and water, to yield carbon monoxide products of different purity levels, or to yield synthesis gas, is possible (Peschel; paragraph [0026]).
Peschel further teaches that the carbon dioxide as well as water, either in separate electrolysis cells, via co-electrolysis, or carried out in one or more electrolyzers each having one or more electrolysis cells, can be used to generate synthesis gas (Peschel; paragraphs [0003], [0008], [0024], [0026], and [0051]; claim 12). If synthesis gas is to be formed as the gas product, water and carbon dioxide are typically supplied to the electrolysis process in a ratio that corresponds to the later or desired ratio of hydrogen and carbon monoxide in said gas product (Peschel; paragraph [0034]).
Fig. 1 of Peschel describes an exemplary embodiment 100 of the method and system of Peschel, wherein an electrolysis process 10 comprising electrolysis cell(s) are provided as an essential method step and supplied by flow K comprising carbon dioxide which is partially converted to carbon monoxide to produce a raw gas A whose composition depends on the feeds supplied to 10 and the electrolysis conditions (Peschel; paragraph [0051]; Fig. 1; claims 1 and 13). Within the scope of the embodiment, a water or vapor flow of H2O is also fed to the electrolysis process 10, wherein the water thus provided is also reacted in the electrolysis process to produce an oxygen-rich material flow O2 that can be removed from the anode side, and a raw gas A that contains hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide (Peschel; paragraphs [0052]-[0053]; Fig. 1). The raw gas A comprising synthesis gas and carbon dioxide is then introduced to a pressure swing adsorption process 20 along with retentate mixture B (comprising mainly CO and CO2) of a membrane method 30, from which the raw gas is combined beforehand to form a collection flow C (Peschel; paragraphs [0054]-[0055]; Fig. 1). The adsorption process 20 produces the gas product D, which is enriched in carbon monoxide and depleted of carbon dioxide in comparison with the raw gas A, and a residual mixture E, which is depleted of carbon monoxide and enriched in carbon dioxide in comparison with the raw gas A (Peschel; claims 1 and 13; Fig. 1). The residual mixture E is at least partially subjected to a membrane separation process 30 in order to obtain a first gas mixture B as a retentate and a second gas mixture H as a permeate, the first gas mixture B being at least partially fed back to the adsorption process 20 together with the raw gas A or with the fraction thereof subjected to the adsorption process 20, and the second gas mixture H being at least partially fed back to the electrolysis process 10 (Peschel; claims 1 and 13; Fig. 1). Finally, a portion of the residual mixture E may be discharged in the form of material flow F (purge), while the remainder is compressed in the form of material flow G and recirculated either to the adsorption process 20 or the electrolysis process 10 (Peschel; paragraph [0058]). Overall, the present invention makes it possible to increase the fraction of carbon monoxide at the inlet of the adsorption process in a targeted manner to correspondingly reduce the fraction of carbon dioxide and thus results in better operating conditions for the CO2 removal step, wherein pressure swing adsorption (PSA) is a preferred method of CO2 removal (Peschel; paragraphs [0016] and [0020]).
Thus, Peschel teaches a method and system for producing a synthesis gas stream comprising carbon dioxide and optionally a water electrolysis step/apparatus 10, the electrolyzed carbon dioxide is separated in adsorption step/apparatus 20, in a manner consistent with instant claims 1-2 and 4-5.
The prior art as taught by Koskinen and Peschel reside in the overlapping technical field of synthesis gas production and is in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. Furthermore, both Koskinen and Peschel teach methods for synthesis gas production aimed at improving efficiency by maximizing CO2 utilization and are therefore reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor. Thus, the cited prior art is deemed analogous art, as described in MPEP § 2141.01(a). Of particular note,
Furthermore, the CO2 separation unit 5 of Koskinen may also comprise a PSA unit (Koskinen; paragraphs [0089]-[0090]; Fig. 2) which is also a preferred method of Peschel for CO2 separation following electrolysis, as detailed above (Peschel; paragraphs [0016] and [0020]). In addition, Fig. 2 of Koskinen shows that part of the CO2 separated from unit 5 can be emitted to the ambient after a purification step in unit 9 (Koskinen; paragraph [0091]). In addition, Peschel teaches that at least one fresh feed predominantly or exclusively containing carbon dioxide can be fed to the electrolysis process, and water can be additionally supplied to the electrolysis process if synthesis gas is to be formed as the gas product (Peschel; paragraph [0034]). Therefore, the skilled artisan would be sufficiently motivated to incorporate Peschel’s electrolysis unit 10 into the process of Koskinen to receive the purified CO2 exhaust 9 and supply the electrolyzed gas back to CO2 separation unit 5 to arrive at an improved process that decreases CO2 emissions and increases the yield of the synthetic fuel by providing another valuable use for the CO2 produced in the method of Koskinen with a reasonable expectation of success. Finally, it would have been prima facie obvious to feed the hydrogen stream and oxygen stream obtained from the electrolyzers of Peschel to the FT synthesis step and gasifier of Koskinen, respectively, because Peschel explicitly teaches that the hydrogen is used for synthesis gas (i.e., the same reactant in the FT synthesis step of Koskinen) and because Peschel does not provide a use for the emitted oxygen and Koskinen teaches that oxygen obtained from water electrolysis can be fed to the gasifier (Koskinen; paragraph [0041]). Lastly, Koskinen’s process teaches that fresh hydrogen is introduced at a point immediately before the FT reactor in order to raise the H2:CO ratio of the gas to about 2 (Koskinen; paragraph [0035]), and Peschel teaches that the water and CO2 can be supplied to the electrolysis process in a ratio that corresponds to the desired ratio of hydrogen and CO in the synthesis gas product, including in particular a molar ratio of H2 to CO of approximately 2 if desired or in the range of from 1:10 to 10:1 (Peschel; paragraphs [0034] and [0042]). Thus, the addition of Peschel’s hydrogen to the process of Koskinen would advantageously enable the skilled artisan to reduce the requirement of the externally sourced hydrogen of Koskinen and further improve efficiency and reduce costs.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Koskinen to incorporate the teachings of Peschel to arrive at the claimed invention. Such an endeavor would result in combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, as described in MPEP § 2143(I)(A). The motivation to do so would permit the skilled artisan to pursue, with a reasonable expectation of success, a method and facility for producing synthetic fuels with improved cost-efficiency and decreased CO2 emissions, as described above.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koskinen et al. (US 2013/0072583 A1; IDS of 03-23-2026; hereinafter “Koskinen”), in view of Peschel et al. (US 2020/0165732 A1; IDS of 03-23-2026; hereinafter “Peschel”) as applied to claims 1-2 and 4-5 above, and further in view of Berninghausen et al. (WO 2015/180752 A1; hereinafter “Berninghausen”).
Regarding claim 3, claim 1 is rendered obvious over Koskinen and Peschel, as detailed above.
Koskinen and Peschel fail to teach a method further comprising an oxygen separation step of separating oxygen from the air, the separated oxygen being supplied to the gasification step, as recited in instant claim 3.
However, Berninghausen teaches a hydrocarbon production apparatus and method for the production of gaseous and/or liquid hydrocarbons (44, 60, 61) from solid, liquid or gaseous carbonaceous carrier (1) comprising a gasifier (5) for the production of carbon monoxide sustainable gasification gas, a shift-process (22) to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide from carbon monoxide and water vapor, and a synthesis process (43) for the production of gaseous and/or liquid hydrocarbons (44) from carbon monoxide and hydrogen (Berninghausen; Abstract; claim 1; Fig. 1; pages 19-20). The process and system of Berninghausen is analogous to the method and system of Koskinen for the transformation of a biomass waste source to synthetic fuel through gasification, CO2 separation (5), and a FT synthesis step (8). Of particular note, Berninghausen teaches that oxygen for use as a gasification agent can be obtained from electrolysis of water (33) and/or an air separation plant (via line 55, but not shown) (Berninghausen; page 8, lines 1-4; page 12, lines 13-22.
It would have been prima facie obvious to combine the teachings of Koskinen, Peschel, and Berninghausen to arrive at the instantly claimed method with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. A person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include an air separation unit in the combined process of Koskinen and Peschel because Berninghausen teaches that air separation units can provide make-up oxygen for gasification units. Therefore, the combination of Koskinen, Peschel, and Berninghausen will predictably result in a process for obtaining all of the oxygen required for gasification using known sources. Also see MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Based on the combined teachings of the references, the Examiner submits that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the instantly claimed method. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and absent a clear showing of evidence to the contrary.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to DEREK RHOADES whose telephone number is (703)-756-5321. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday–Thursday, 7:30 am–5:00 pm EST; Friday, 7:30 am–4:00 pm EST.
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, Robert Havlin can be reached on 571-272-9066. 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.
/D.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1692
/AMY C BONAPARTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692
Prosecution Insights