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/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 7-11 in the reply filed on 9/1/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-6 and 12-15 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected apparatus and method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claims 7-11 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim 7 recites “a plurality of injectors (202) protruding inside the gasification reactor (102), wherein the plurality of injectors (102)” in lines 5-6. The second instance of injectors should be labeled (202) like the first. Appropriate correction is required.
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 8-10 is 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.
A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p) II. The usage limitation of claim 8 is not considered a functional recitation because it does not associate the intended usage with structure. No control device is positively recited.
The term “depends” in claims 9 and 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “depends” 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. The claims stated that number and depth of the injectors depend on their position but there is no way to ascertain from the specification the correlation between number and depth of the injectors and their position. In other words, what does an injector being at one position actually result in as opposed to another position?
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 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Diebold (US 2007/0006528 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Diebold discloses an apparatus comprising: a gasification reactor 50 comprising an inlet 100, an outlet 112 and side walls 101 capable of gasifying a biomass feedstock into a hydrogen rich syngas gas (paragraph 48); a plurality of injectors 203,204 protruding inside the gasification reactor (paragraph 52), wherein the plurality of injectors 203,204 are inclined at an angle with respect to the side walls (paragraph 53), wherein the plurality of injectors 203,204 are positioned circumferentially around the gasification reactor 50 and along the lengthwise extension of the side walls of the gasification reactor 50 (see Figure 2); a plurality of thermocouples coupled to the injectors to monitor the temperature of the gasification reactor 50 (paragraph 59); and an ignition nozzle 554 located at a bottom end of the gasification reactor 50 (see Figure 5) for igniting the biomass feedstock (paragraph 58).
Regarding claim 8, see USC 112 rejection above. Diebold is capable of controlling the system based on temperature inputs (paragraph 29).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, see USC 112 rejection above. Diebold discloses that its invention can provide secondary air-injection systems having multi-level locations, and optimally arranged and easily adjustable air-injection nozzles. The length and air-injection points in each air-injection tube, as well as the number of air-injection nozzles, can be easily changed, for example by exchanging an air-injection tube for a different air-injection tube. The number of axial locations of secondary air injection can be varied, and the amount of secondary air at each level can be precisely adjusted. Uniform or non-uniform distribution of air is achieved through placement of air-injection nozzles (paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 11, Diebold discloses a pressure transducer 522 and filter 523 at the outlet of the gasifier capable of filtration, analysis, and measurement (paragraph 87).
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
Prosecution Insights