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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-9, 11-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kani et al (US 20230340677 A1).
Claim 1: Kani discloses an apparatus for converting air to ammonia (see e.g. abstract), the apparatus comprising:
an anode gas compartment for receiving air (see e.g. #32 on Fig 8 and 9);
an anode electrocatalyst coupled to the anode gas compartment (see e.g. “anode” on Fig 7; [0120]);
a cathode gas compartment (see e.g. #24 on Fig 8 and 9; [0089]; [0106]);
a cathode electrocatalyst coupled to the cathode gas compartment (see e.g. #22 on Fig 8 and 9; [0106]); and
an electrolyte compartment (see e.g. #36 on Fig 8 and 9) comprising a liquid electrolyte (see e.g. [0121]),
wherein the electrolyte compartment is positioned between the anode electrocatalyst and the cathode electrocatalyst (see e.g. #36 on Fig 8 and 9),
wherein the anode electrocatalyst is operably configured to convert nitrogen from the air to nitrate at the anode electrocatalyst by a nitrogen oxidation reaction (see e.g. [0199]),
wherein the cathode electrocatalyst is operably configured to convert the nitrate to the ammonia at the cathode electrocatalyst by a nitrate reduction reaction (see e.g. [0105]).
Claim 2: Kani discloses that the anode electrocatalyst is selected from the group of electrocatalysts consisting of: platinum (Pt), titanium (Ti), nickel (Ni), iron (Fe), and palladium (Pd) (see e.g. [0095]).
Claim 3: Kani discloses that the anode electrocatalyst includes an oxide and/or an alloy of one or more elements selected from the group consisting of: platinum (Pt), titanium (Ti), nickel (Ni), iron (Fe), and palladium (Pd) (see e.g. [0095]).
Claim 4: Kani discloses that the cathode electrocatalyst is selected from the group of electrocatalysts consisting of: silver (Ag), gold (Au), copper (Cu), nickel (Ni), and iron (Fe) (see e.g. [0109]).
Claim 5: Kani discloses that the cathode electrocatalyst includes an oxide and /or alloy of one or more elements selected from the group consisting of: silver (Ag), gold (Au), copper (Cu), nickel (Ni), and iron (Fe) (see e.g. [0109]).
Claim 7: Kani discloses that the anode gas compartment is open to the air (see e.g. [0046]; [0124]).
Claim 8: The instant specification states the following in [0060]:
A conduit 406 may be connected to the cathode gas compartment 302 for flowing a sweep gas. The conduit 406 provides an inlet to connect the sweep gas (e.g., Ar, CO2, etc.) to the cathode gas compartment 302 and the cathode electrocatalyst 312. The flowing gas may be any inert gas compatible to remove formed gas from the cathode. For example, a flowing gas stream may include, but is not limited to, Ar, air, CO2, He, N2, N2O, and combinations thereof.
Kani discloses a conduit connected to the cathode gas compartment (see e.g. [0103]) for flowing air (see e.g. [0013]), which reads on a sweep gas per the instant specification.
Claim 9: Kani discloses that the anode gas compartment is configured to flow air into the apparatus wherein a N2 component of the air is configured to react at the anode electrocatalyst (see e.g. [0120]; [0124]).
Claim 11: Kani discloses that the apparatus converts nitrogen and oxygen to the nitrate and the ammonia (see e.g. [0127]).
Claim 12: Kani discloses a system for converting the ammonia and the nitrate to fertilizers (see e.g. [0022]).
Claim 13: Kani discloses a method of converting a feed gas to a reduced nitrogen-based product (see e.g. abstract), comprising:
providing an electrochemical reactor (see e.g. Fig 8 and Fig 9), wherein the electrochemical reactor comprises:
an anode gas compartment (see e.g. #32 on Fig 8 and 9);
an anode electrocatalyst coupled to the anode gas compartment (see e.g. #22 on Fig 8 and 9; [0092]);
a cathode gas compartment (see e.g. #24 on Fig 8 and 9; [0089]; [0091]);
a cathode electrocatalyst coupled to the cathode gas compartment (see e.g. #22 on Fig 8 and 9; [0092]); and
an electrolyte compartment (see e.g. #36 on Fig 8 and 9) comprising a liquid electrolyte (see e.g. [0121]),
wherein the electrolyte compartment is positioned between the anode electrocatalyst and the cathode electrocatalyst (see e.g. #36 on Fig 8 and 9);
directing the feed gas through the anode gas compartment to the anode electrocatalyst to convert one or more components of the feed gas to an intermediate in the liquid electrolyte (see e.g. [0097]); and
directing a gas (air) through the cathode gas compartment (see e.g. [0089], [0106]) to convert the intermediate in the liquid electrolyte to the reduced nitrogen-based product (see e.g. [0106]).
With regard to the limitation claiming a sweeping gas is directed to the cathode gas compartment, the instant specification states the following in [0060]:
A conduit 406 may be connected to the cathode gas compartment 302 for flowing a sweep gas. The conduit 406 provides an inlet to connect the sweep gas (e.g., Ar, CO2, etc.) to the cathode gas compartment 302 and the cathode electrocatalyst 312. The flowing gas may be any inert gas compatible to remove formed gas from the cathode. For example, a flowing gas stream may include, but is not limited to, Ar, air, CO2, He, N2, N2O, and combinations thereof.
Therefore, the air disclosed in Kani reads on a sweep gas per the instant specification.
directing a sweep gas.
Claim 14: Kani discloses that the anode electrocatalyst is selected from the group of electrocatalysts consisting of: platinum (Pt), titanium (Ti), nickel (Ni), iron (Fe), and palladium (Pd) (see e.g. [0095]) is in the liquid electrolyte (see e.g. Fig 7).
Claim 15: Kani discloses that the reactor operates on the gases at a temperature of about room temperature (“ambient temperatures”, see e.g. [0020]).
Claim 16: Kani discloses that the reactor operates on the gases at about ambient pressure (“ambient pressure”, see e.g. [0036]).
Claim 17: Kani discloses that the feed gas is air (see e.g. [0088]), and the reduced nitrogen-based product is ammonia (see e.g. [0089]).
Claim 18: Kani discloses that one or more components of the feed gas are selected from the group consisting of: N2, Air, H2O, O2, and combinations thereof (see e.g. [0088]).
Claim 20: With regard to the limitation claiming “the sweep gas is an inert gas”, the instant specification states the following in [0060]:
A conduit 406 may be connected to the cathode gas compartment 302 for flowing a sweep gas. The conduit 406 provides an inlet to connect the sweep gas (e.g., Ar, CO2, etc.) to the cathode gas compartment 302 and the cathode electrocatalyst 312. The flowing gas may be any inert gas compatible to remove formed gas from the cathode. For example, a flowing gas stream may include, but is not limited to, Ar, air, CO2, He, N2, N2O, and combinations thereof.
Therefore, the air disclosed in Kani reads on an inert sweep gas per the instant specification.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kani in view of Murphy et al (US 20060049063 A1).
Claim 6: Kani does not explicitly teach a silicon gasket positioned between at least two adjacent components of the apparatus. Murphy teaches a device for electrolytically converting nitrogen into ammonia (see e.g. abstract), making it analogous art (see MPEP § 2141.01(a) I). The device of Murphy includes silicon gaskets (plural, which means there is more than one) to prevent leaks (see e.g. [0040]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the apparatus of Kai by including silicon gaskets as taught in Murphy to prevent leaks.
Claim(s) 10 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kani in view of Denvir et al (US 20030164305 A1).
Claim 10: Kani does not explicitly teach that the liquid electrolyte comprises a carbonate. Kani teaches that electrolyte just needs to be “suitable” and “typically…aqueous” (see e.g. [0121]). Denvir teaches a device for electrolytically converting nitrogen into ammonia (see e.g. abstract), making it analogous art (see MPEP § 2141.01(a) I). Denvir teaches the following regarding the electrolyte (see e.g. [0032]):
The electrolyte must be capable of forming, stabilizing and permitting migration of the negatively charged nitrogen-containing species between the cathode and anode. Also, the electrolyte must be chemically and electrochemically stable and inert under the conditions required for the electrochemical synthesis of ammonia. The anion of the molten salt must not undergo an electrochemical oxidation process at the anode and the cation of the molten salt must not undergo an electrochemical reduction process at the cathode. The preferred electrolyte comprises one or more molten salts selected from metal chlorides, iodides, bromides, carbonates, sulfides, phosphates, and mixtures thereof.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the apparatus of Kai by selecting a carbonate as taught in the list of Denvir because KSR rationale E states that it is obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” and MPEP § 2144.07 states that “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”.
Claim 19: Kani does not explicitly teach that the liquid electrolyte comprises a carbonate. Kani teaches that electrolyte just needs to be “suitable” and “typically…aqueous” (see e.g. [0121]). Denvir teaches a device for electrolytically converting nitrogen into ammonia (see e.g. abstract), making it analogous art (see MPEP § 2141.01(a) I). Denvir teaches the following regarding the electrolyte (see e.g. [0032]):
The electrolyte must be capable of forming, stabilizing and permitting migration of the negatively charged nitrogen-containing species between the cathode and anode. Also, the electrolyte must be chemically and electrochemically stable and inert under the conditions required for the electrochemical synthesis of ammonia. The anion of the molten salt must not undergo an electrochemical oxidation process at the anode and the cation of the molten salt must not undergo an electrochemical reduction process at the cathode. The preferred electrolyte comprises one or more molten salts selected from metal chlorides, iodides, bromides, carbonates, sulfides, phosphates, and mixtures thereof.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method of Kai by selecting a carbonate as taught in the list of Denvir because KSR rationale E states that it is obvious to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” and MPEP § 2144.07 states that “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”.
Relevant Prior Art
Hatzell et al (US 20210140055 A1) – A method of electrolytically converting air into ammonia and fertilizer (see e.g. abstract).
Ballantine et al (US 20210155491 A1) – A method and apparatus for converting nitrogen from air into ammonia (see e.g. abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER W KEELING whose telephone number is (571)272-9961. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM. 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, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. 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.
/ALEXANDER W KEELING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights