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 .
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s amendments to claim 1 overcome the 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) rejection presented over Brizitskiy et. al (US 2025/00524151 A1), however, a new grounds of rejection is presented over Brizitskiy in view of Werner (US 4,761,077). See rejection below.
The applicant’s amendments to claims 8, 10, and 14 overcome the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection presented in the Non-Final rejection dated 05/27/2026, therefore the rejections are maintained.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brizitskiy et. al (US 2025/0052415 A1) in view of Werner (US 4,761,077).
With respect to claim 1 Brizitskiy discloses a method of burning gaseous ammonia, comprising: receiving an oxidizer gas [primary air via reference character 11 and secondary air via reference character 10] into a chamber body [reference character 15] such that the oxidizer gas flows along a central axis of the chamber body; introducing gaseous ammonia into a fuel manifold [see annotated Fig. below] that surrounds the chamber body [via reference character 11, see paragraph 0018], mixing the oxidizer gas and the gaseous ammonia to form a combustion mixture [see Fig. 1]; igniting the combustion mixture [via a spark plug, see reference character 2 and paragraph 0018]; and combusting the combustion mixture for a duration such that the gaseous ammonia is converted to combustion products [see paragraphs 0018-0020].
Brizintskiy does not disclose that chamber body including a plurality of inlets extending through a sidewall of the chamber body configured to receive the gaseous ammonia at an angle relative to the central axis of the chamber body, such that when oxidizer gas passes through the chamber body swirl is induced in the gaseous ammonia.
Werner discloses a chamber body [reference character 4]; an intake conduit [reference character 11] having a first end for a first fluid and a second end coupled to one open end of the chamber body; and a plurality of inlets [reference character 5] extending through a sidewall of the chamber body, configured to receive a second fluid at an angle relative to a central axis of the chamber body such that when first fluid passes through the chamber body, swirl is induced in the second fluid. Finally, Werner discloses a manifold [reference character 6] configured to receive pressurized fluid and deliver the pressurized fluid to the plurality of inlets.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the method taught by Brizitskiy by including a plurality of inlets in the chamber body at an angle relative to the central axis of the chamber body, as taught by Werner, in order to increase the mixing rate and enhance flame stability.
With respect to claims 2-3 Brizitskiy implicitly disclose that at least 98% of the gaseous ammonia is converted to combustion products (claim 2) and that at least 99.9% of the gaseous ammonia is converted to combustion products (claim 3) by disclosing a means (flame stabilizing washer and afterburning catalyst, see paragraphs 0019-0020) for “ensuring complete combustion of ammonia-air mixtures”1 [see paragraph 0020].
With respect to claims 4-5 Brizitskiy implicitly discloses that combusting the combustion mixture for the duration produces a resultant level of NOx that is below a threshold value of 10 ppm. (claim 4) and that the threshold value is 2.5 ppm. (claim 5) by disclosing a means (flame stabilizing washer and afterburning catalyst, see paragraphs 0019-0020) for “completely eliminat[ing] the combustion products”2 [see paragraph 0020].
With respect to claim7 Brizitskiy discloses introducing, during introducing gaseous ammonia, a flow of gaseous hydrogen into the chamber body at less than 25% v/v to the gaseous ammonia [see paragraph 0013].
With respect to claim 8 Brizitskiy discloses that the gaseous ammonia is introduced into the chamber body in a direction normal to the longitudinal axis [see Fig. 1, the ammonia is introduced through inlet 11 which is normal to the longitudinal axis extending through thermocouple 4].
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brizitskiy et. al (US 2025/0052415 A1) in view in view of Werner (US 4,761,077) and further in view of Ojelade et. al (Ojelade, O.A., Zaman, S.F. Ammonia decomposition for hydrogen production: a thermodynamic study. Chem. Pap. 75, 57–65 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11696-020-01278-z).
With respect to claim 6 Brizitskiy does not disclose that igniting the combustion mixture comprises igniting the combustion mixture at a gas pressure in a range from 10 PSI to 20 PSI.
Ojelade discloses that the conversion percentage of NH3 is pressure dependent at constant temperature [see Fig. 3]; on this basis a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to optimize the pressure within the reactor to maximize the conversion of NH3 based on the prevailing reactor temperature. Therefore, the pressure is interpreted to be a result effective variable that would be optimized in order to achieve a recognized result.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to ignite the combustion mixture at a gas pressure in a range from 10 PSI to 20 PSI in view of the teachings of Ojelade since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIVEK K SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)272-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:20AM.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at 571-272-9059. 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.
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
1 Complete combustion is understood to be 100% conversion of the fuel to combustion products.
2 Brizitskiy discloses that the combustion products are NOx and NH3.
Prosecution Insights