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 1-20 are pending in the instant application.
Priority
This application was filed on May 14, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statements
Applicants’ Information Disclosure Statement, filed on 08/06/2025, has been considered. Please refer to Applicant’s copy of the PTO-1449 submitted herewith.
Response to Restriction Requirement
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (i.e. claims 1-15) in the reply filed by Applicant’s representative Iona N. Kaiser on 09/22/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant states claims 16-20 have been cancelled in response to this requirement (see the 1st paragraph of page 6 of REMARKS/ARGUMENTS). However, claims 16-20 are not cancelled, but withdrawn.
Status of the Claims
Claims 16-20 were withdrawn from further consideration by Applicant as being drawn to non-elected inventions. Claims 1-15 are under examination on the merits.
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, 6, 12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 10,934,612 B2 (“the `612 patent”) to Han et al.
Applicant’s claim 1 is drawn to a method comprising: providing a multi-metal composition comprising an alloy comprising at least five elements selected from the group consisting of Co, Cr, Fe, Mn, Ni, Al, Mg, Cu, Zn, Zr, Ru, Rh, Pd, Ag, W, Re, Ir, Pt, Pd, Au, Ce, Yb, Sn, Ca, Be, Mo, V, W, and Sr; and interacting a gas stream comprising hydrogen sulfide with the multi-metal composition.
Example 1 of the `612 patent (col. 7, ln.15 to col. 8, ln. 23) discloses a method comprising: providing a multi-metal composition comprising a high-entrapy alloy comprising five elements of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, and Mo, coating the high-entrapy alloy on the surface of the base material at 250 °C to a cathode, then hydrogen sulfide was introduced to sulfurize the high-entrapy alloy coating of the cathode at 250 °C. Example 2 of the `612 patent (col. 9, ln.31 to col. 10, ln. 15) discloses a method comprising: providing a multi-metal composition comprising a high-entrapy alloy comprising six elements of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, Mo, and W, coating the high-entrapy alloy on the surface of the base material at 250 °C to a cathode, then hydrogen sulfide was introduced to sulfurize the high-entrapy alloy coating of the cathode at 250 °C. Therefore, the `612 patent anticipates claims 1, 6, 12, and 14-15.
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 2-5, 7-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the `612 patent in view of US2021/0245095 A1 (“the `095 publication”) to Fan et al.
Example 1 of the `612 patent (col. 7, ln.15 to col. 8, ln. 23) discloses a method comprising: providing a multi-metal composition comprising a high-entrapy alloy comprising five elements of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, and Mo, coating the high-entrapy alloy on the surface of the base material at 250 °C to a cathode, then hydrogen sulfide was introduced to sulfurize the high-entrapy alloy coating of the cathode at 250 °C. Example 2 of the `612 patent (col. 9, ln.31 to col. 10, ln. 15) discloses a method comprising: providing a multi-metal composition comprising a high-entrapy alloy comprising six elements of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, Mo, and W, coating the high-entrapy alloy on the surface of the base material at 250 °C to a cathode, then hydrogen sulfide was introduced to sulfurize the high-entrapy alloy coating of the cathode at 250 °C.
In terms of claim 2, the `612 patent does not specifically teach the gas stream consists essentially of hydrogen sulfide. However, the `095 publication ([0087] and claim 9) disclose a method for hydrogen sulfide conversion comprising injection of H2S/N2 gas, N2 being an inert gas, which reads on “wherein the gas stream consists essentially of hydrogen sulfide”.
In terms of claim 3, the `095 publication ([0059 and 0062] and claim 1) disclose the chemical products of the interacting step comprise hydrogen and sulfur.
In terms of claim 4, the `095 publication [0062] discloses the sulfur gas can be condensed and removed as solid or liquid sulfur based on its downstream application.
In terms of claim 5, the `095 publication (FIG. 1 and [0071]) discloses the sulfidation reactor 102 includes metal alloy composite particles, and an H2S containing gas stream is provided into the sulfidation reactor 102, resulting in the formation of hydrogen gas (H2) and one or more sulfide minerals. The hydrogen gas (H2) is collected, and the one or more sulfide minerals are provided to the regeneration reactor 104. Therefore, the `095 publication teaches a method further comprising separating the hydrogen.
In terms of claim 7, the `612 patent (claim 1) teaches Ar is used as protective gas. It would be obvious to use nitrogen as an alternative protective gas. In addition, the `095 publication (claim 2, [0053, 86, 88], tables 1-2 and 4) discloses that the gas stream further comprises nitrogen, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, and may comprise trace amounts of oxygen.
In terms of claim 8, the `095 publication (claim 1) discloses that the reaction products after the first gaseous input stream comprise hydrogen and sulfide minerals formed from the reaction of the alloy with H2S.
In terms of claim 9, the `095 publication is silent about CO2 being separated from the hydrocarbons and hydrogen. No technical effect is derivable from such a separation. It thus appears to be merely one of several straightforward possibilities which the skilled person would select, depending on the circumstances, without exercising inventive skills, in order to solve the problem posed.
In terms of claims 10-11, Examples 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8 of the `095 publication (claim 1, [0059 and 0062]) discloses a fixed bed reactor, which implies that the multi-metal composition (alloy) is disposed on column(s); the interacting step comprises the alloy undergoing sulfidation, and the method further comprises heating the column to remove at least some sulfur from the alloy.
In terms of claim 13, Example 1 of the `612 patent (col. 7, ln.15 to col. 8, ln. 23) teaches a multi-metal composition comprising a high-entrapy alloy comprising five elements of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, and Mo; and Example 2 of the `612 patent (col. 9, ln.31 to col. 10, ln. 15) teaches a multi-metal composition comprising a high-entrapy alloy comprising six elements of Co, Cr, Fe, Ni, Mo, and W. Examples 1-2 do not teach a high-entrapy alloy comprising Cu. However, the `095 publication [0031] teaches each of the first metal and second metal is selected from: iron (Fe), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), Zinc (Zn), cobalt (Co), manganese (Mn) and copper (Cu). Therefore, the `612 patent in view of the `095 publication would have rendered claim 13 obvious.
Conclusions
Claims 1-15 are rejected.
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn.
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
