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 .
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 1-9 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In this case, claim 1 recites “the reformer operated at least with a first hydrocarbon mixture and a second hydrocarbon mixture”, and also recites “supplying the primary reformer with a first gas stream”, one of ordinary skill in the art is uncertain what the relationship between the recited “a first hydrocarbon mixture and a second hydrocarbon mixture” and the later-on recited “a first gas stream”, such as a first gas stream being or some other gas composition? Secondly, claim 1 also recites “a semifinished product gas stream”, wherein the term “a semifinished product gas stream” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “a semifinished product gas stream” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, such as what type of product gas stream can be considered as “semifinished product gas stream, e.g. at least 50% of raw material being consumed/converted or more than 50% of product being produced, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thirdly, claim 1 further recites “the factor H is defined depending on the chemical composition of the gas stream”, since claim 1 already recites “a first hydrocarbon mixture”, “a second hydrocarbon mixture” (both hydrocarbon mixture can be gas stream), “a first gas stream” and “a semifinished product gas stream”, one of ordinary skill in the art is uncertain which chemical composition of the gas stream referring back, “a first hydrocarbon mixture”, “a second hydrocarbon mixture” or “a first gas stream” or “a semifinished product gas stream”? Next, one of ordinary skill in the art is uncertain in which way factor H being defined depending on the chemical composition of the gas stream, such as factor H being defined depending on the chemical substance(s) of the gas stream, or chemical substance(s) atom arrangement or chemical substance’s relative ratio in the gas stream. Therefore, the metes and bounds of such claimed “the factor H is defined depending on the chemical composition of the gas stream” cannot be ascertained. All these render claim 1 indefiniteness and all claim 1’s depending claims are rejected for similar reasons.
Claims 3-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In this case, claim 3 recites “H is defined in accordance with the molar concentration of methane, ethane, propane, and butane”, while claim 4 recites “H is defined in accordance with the molar concentration of methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentane, and hexane” and claim 5 recites “H is defined in accordance with the molar concentration of methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentane, hexane, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and nitrogen”, claim 6 also recites a specific formula of define H being based on molar concentration of methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentane, hexane, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and nitrogen, one of ordinary skill in the art is uncertain which gas composition comprising methane, ethane, propane, and butane (or methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentane, and hexane) (or methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentane, hexane, carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and nitrogen), such as the semifinished product gas stream from the primary reformer or first gas stream as recited in their parent claim 1, or first hydrocarbon mixture, or second hydrocarbon mixture or final product gas stream from the secondary reformer etc.? Secondly, claim 6 also recites “F(0) is the F value of the gas composition for which the reformer is designed and for which the threshold value is defined”, since its grandparent claim 1 recites a primary reformer as well as a secondary reformer, one of ordinary skill in the art is uncertain such recited “the reformer” is referring back to which reformer, the primary reformer or the secondary reformer? As for the recited “the gas composition” please refer to similar rejections as stated in claim 1. Since claim 7 is depending on claim 5, thus it is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example, Li et al (US2012/0078408) teaches a method of managing an operational state of a steam hydrocarbon reformer furnace, the method comprising: determining a current operational state of the steam hydrocarbon reformer furnace; comparing the current operational state to a specified, preferred operational state; in response to determining that one or more elements of the current operational state deviates from the preferred operational state by a specified amount; matching, by a controller application executing on one or more processors, the current operational state to one or more operating scenarios stored in a database, each of the scenarios having been generated using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the steam hydrocarbon reformer furnace; and generating, based on the matched scenario, one or more adjustments to one or more operating parameters of the steam hydrocarbon reformer furnace, the one or more adjustments performed to return the steam hydrocarbon reformer furnace to the specified, preferred operational state. Leone (CN 102213148) teaches a method of operating an engine, comprising: in response to the fuel reforming device degradation, and generated by the fuel reforming apparatus for reforming fuel ratio proportionally reduce reforming fuel flow to the engine. the degradation comprises a liquid fuel composition below a first fuel composition threshold or greater than a second fuel composition threshold value; and reducing the reforming fuel flow in proportion to reduce engine component, and increasing the amount of liquid fuel is delivered to the engine to maintain engine torque and an air-fuel ratio of the engine for reducing the reforming fuel flow before.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUN LI whose telephone number is (571)270-5858. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Ching-Yiu (Coris) Fung 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.
/JUN LI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732
Prosecution Insights