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 Amendment
This is the response to amendment filed 06/01/2026 for application 18645427.
Claims 1-5 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
The 35 USC 112 rejections of claims 1-5 have been withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments.
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.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SAKURAI (JP 2000304196) in view of the machine translation of SAKURAI and LI (USPGPUB 2020/0339900).
SAKURAI teaches a natural gas hydrate transportation method and container thereof.
The process is taught in paragraphs 9 and 11 to comprise storing water in a transport container and adding water to the transport container, (introducing a mixed hydrate reaction liquid into a hydrate reaction tank) with natural gas hydrate being generated by blowing gas into the transport container (introducing natural gas into the hydrate reaction tank to obtain a mixture and enabling the mixture to undergo a hydrate generation reaction).
The transportation container 1 is taught in paragraph 31 to be loadable with the hydrate onto a transport truck 9.
A heating device 11 is provided below the transportation container 1.
SAKURAI recognizes in paragraph 28 the relationship between temperature and pressure in the formation of the natural gas hydrate.
273.65 K to 283.15 K is 0.5°C to 10°C.
283.15 K to 298.15 K is 10°C to 25°C.
LI is relied on to teach producing at the natural gas hydrate at different temperatures and the motivation to maintain the temperature within a specific range.
LI teaches a hydrate formation promoter and its use in methane storage.
The process is taught in paragraph 12 of LI, wherein the hydrate formation promoter is added to a reaction vessel and methane is introduced into the reaction vessel at a temperature of from 1 to 25°C.
LI teaches an example in paragraph 41 in which in the hydrate formation is performed at a temperature of 10°C. 10°C is 283.15 K.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
LI further teaches in paragraph 12 that the hydrate formed is stable at higher temperatures. The heating to form the hydrate are also at temperatures that overlap the temperatures in which the hydrates are stable. LI further teaches in paragraph 5 that the process overcomes the difficulties of efficiently producing hydrates.
SAKURAI teaches that in paragraphs 31, and 33 the transportation container 1 is loaded onto a transport truck 9 and the transport truck 9 comprises heating device 11. The transport container 1 and the transport truck 9 may be exposed to outside air and heated.
SAKURAI teaches in paragraph 41 placing the transport container 1 in a container 16 to reduce heating due to influence of outside air. SAKURAI teaches that the natural gas may be slightly gasified by a rise in temperature.
SAKURAI accounts for a slight increase in temperatures due to outside air.
After the transport container 1 is loaded on to the transport truck, the transport container 1 would be expected to raise in temperature due to outside air given that ambient temperature is around 20°C (293.15 K) and the transport container was at 10°C (283.15 K). (upon the hydrate generation reaction reaching equilibrium, heating the hydrate to a storage temperature greater than 283.15 K)
The heat would be maintained to under 298.15 K given that LI teaches that hydrates are formed in the temperature range of from 1 to 25°C. (heating the hydrate to a storage temperature less than 298.15 K)
LI further teaches in paragraph 53 that any other changes, modifications, substitutions, combinations, and simplifications without departing from the spirit and principle of the present invention shall be regarded as equivalent replacements and included in the scope of the present invention.
Regarding claim 2, LI teaches an example in paragraph 41 in which in the hydrate formation is performed at a temperature of 10°C. 10°C is 283.15 K.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 3, LI teaches in reference claim 1 the hydrate formation promoter comprises cyclopentane in water.
Regarding claim 4, LI teaches in reference claim 1 the hydrate formation promoter comprises cyclopentane.
Regarding claim 5, LI teaches in reference claim 1 cyclopentane is present in water in an amount of 5 to 23.4%.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments filed 06/01/2026 have necessitated new grounds of rejection.
Applicant argues that LI does not teach generating the hydrate at a temperature between 273.65 K – 283.15 K.
This is not persuasive as LI teaches an example in between hydrate formation takes place at 10°C which is 283.15 K.
SAKURAI teaches how hydrate formation and transport can be performed with the same transportation container. SAKURAI explicitly teaches that the transportation container is heated by outside air. Once formation of hydrate is performed, the transportation container would be heated by the outside air naturally.
Applicant’s argument of identifying a problem that is unrecognized by the prior art is not persuasive given the face that LI teaches hydrate formation promoter is at a temperature of 1 ° C. to 25 ° C. and a pressure of 0 to 30 MPa. LI further recognizes and teaches in paragraphs 12-13 hydrate formation rate is much faster and the methane storage capacity is 72 to 157 cubic meters.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
GUDMUNDSSON (US 5536893) teach production of gas hydrates for storage and transportation. GUDMUNDSSON teaches in Fig 1 shows a pressure/temperature diagram that demonstrates at what temperature pressure thresholds for hydrate formation.
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 MING CHEUNG PO whose telephone number is (571)270-5552. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, PREM SINGH can be reached at 5712726381. 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.
/MING CHEUNG PO/ Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/ELLEN M MCAVOY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights