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 .
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-11 and 13-28, drawn to a method for converting carbon-containing raw materials and in particular biomass into hydrogen, classified in C10J 3/723.
II. Claims 12 and 29, drawn to an apparatus for converting carbon-containing raw materials and in particular biomass into hydrogen, classified in C10K 1/002.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as process and apparatus for its practice. The inventions are distinct if it can be shown that either: (1) the process as claimed can be practiced by another and materially different apparatus or by hand, or (2) the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process. (MPEP § 806.05(e)). In this case the method Group I need not include a recovery device and instead can reuse energy through control optimization.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
The inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Norman Soloway on 9/23/26 a provisional election was made with traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-11 and 13-28. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 12 and 29 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-11 and 13-28 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.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 2, 3, 5, 7-11, 13, 15, and 18 all further recite the term “preferably” as well. Claims 2-11 and 13-19 depend on claim 1. It should be noted that limitations associated with the term “preferably” are not given patentable weight as the Office construes them as optional.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 2, 5, and 7 all recite multiple, overlapping ranges. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the first cooling step" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, the phrase "in particular" renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). It should be noted that limitations associated with the term “in particular” are not given patentable weight as the Office construes them as optional.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the purified and cooled hydrogen" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the recorded measure values and/or data" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term “longer” in claim 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “higher” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what the recording takes place over a longer period of time than.
Regarding claim 20, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 22, 23, and 28 all further recite the term “preferably” as well. Claims 21-28 depend on claim 20. It should be noted that limitations associated with the term “preferably” are not given patentable weight as the Office construes them as optional.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “cleaning of the hydrogen-containing synthesis gas” in line 6 and then “in a cleaning operation of the apparatus” in line 10. Further, claim 28 also refers to “a cleaning operation.” It is unclear whether or not these are the same cleaning steps.
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 (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 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 1-8, 11, and 13-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schuetzle (US 2010/0175320 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Schuetzle discloses a process comprising: gasifying carbonaceous material with steam to produce syngas (paragraph 44); cleaning the syngas (paragraph 84); utilizing the energy of the syngas for system processes (paragraph 23); and controlling the process with a control device connected to sensors (paragraph 81).
Regarding claim 2, Schuetzle discloses that the feedstocks are agricultural, forest and municipal waste as well as natural gas, coal, oil shale and oil sands (paragraph 19) and heated to 1000-1500 °C (paragraph 44) which is at least 20% higher in energy that its original source.
Regarding claim 3, Schuetzle discloses tar separation (paragraph 47).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Schuetzle discloses transferring heat of product to boil (paragraph 57).
Regarding claim 6, Schuetzle discloses traps (paragraph 47).
Regarding claim 7, Schuetzle discloses compressing product gases (paragraph 75).
Regarding claim 8, Schuetzle discloses separating hydrogen gas in the product (paragraph 73).
Regarding claims 11 and 13-15, Schuetzle discloses temperature and pressure sensors (paragraph 81).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, Schuetzle discloses that the controller utilizes pressure, temperature, and flow rates (paragraph 83).
Regarding claim 18, Schuetzle discloses feedstock handling equipment (paragraph 49).
Regarding claim 19, Schuetzle discloses controlling feed conveyance based on analyzed parameters (paragraph 91).
Regarding claims 20 and 28, Schuetzle discloses a method comprising: gasifying carbonaceous material with steam to produce syngas (paragraph 44); and cleaning the syngas (paragraph 84).
Regarding claim 21 Schuetzle discloses transferring heat of product to boil (paragraph 57). The predetermined temperature is not defined and therefore could be anything (i.e. boiling temperature).
Regarding claim 22, Schuetzle discloses that the controller utilizes pressure, temperature, and flow rates (paragraph 83).
Regarding claims 23 and 26, Schuetzle discloses treatment devices placed in the gas lines in parallel with the reactors or in series upstream or downstream from the reactors (paragraph 72).
Regarding claims 24 and 27, Schuetzle discloses operating valves for system purges and measuring their flow rates (paragraph 75).
Regarding claim 25, the limitation of “a cleaning medium” is not given patentable weight as per the USC 112 rejections above.
Claims 1, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jack (US 2018/0291279 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jack discloses a process comprising: gasifying carbonaceous material with steam to produce syngas (paragraph 71); cleaning the syngas (paragraph 115); utilizing the energy of the syngas for system processes (paragraph 26); and controlling the process with a control device connected to sensors (paragraph 29).
Regarding claim 9, Jack discloses drying the biomass (paragraph 37).
Regarding claim 10, Jack discloses cracking the tars (paragraph 58).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
