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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2021-143359, filed on 09/02/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
Applicant's Claim submission filed on November 11, 2024, has not been entered as the claim construction is improper as it appears Applicant submitted modification of original multiple dependent claims instead of the corrected claims of 02/26/2024. The Claim Amendments of 02/26/2024 are entered, accordingly Claims 1-5 are pending.
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 1-5 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.
In re claim 1,
the phrase "an argon column" in line 2 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether this is the same argon column in line 1 or a separate (or additional) argon column. For purposes of examination: in order to expedite prosecution, this phrase/term is interpreted as the argon column.
the phrase " wherein the upper section and the lower section both have a bed having the same bed length within the same section" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how an upper and lower section can simultaneously be different sections and same sections and have the same length while being different sections and the same section. For purposes of examination: in order to expedite prosecution, this phrase/term is interpreted as the upper section and lower section having a length.
In re claim 5, the phrase "an air separation unit" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether this is the same argon column in line 1 or a separate (or additional) argon column. For purposes of examination: in order to expedite prosecution, this phrase/term is interpreted as the argon column.
Claims 2-4 are rejected at least by virtue of its dependency.
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, 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.
Claims 1, 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dean et al. (US 6128922 A) in view of Nojima et al (US5784899A).
In re Claim 1, Dean discloses an argon column (1) for an air separation unit (Col 2:39-41) comprising a high-pressure column (Col 3:1-5: necessarily high pressure column of double column air separation unit), a low-pressure column (Col 4:9-10), and an argon column (1), that is a structured packed column using structured packing materials (Col 3:27-32), and
• that produces an argon product (22) using a fluid supplied from the low-pressure column as a raw material (Col 4:9-12);
• wherein the argon column (1) comprises an upper section (14, N, N+1) and a lower section (12);
• wherein the upper section (14) and the lower section (12) both have a bed having the same bed length within the same section (Col 4:19-24);
• wherein the upper section length is 72% or less of the total bed length (Col 4:19-25); and
• wherein the upper bed length is 1.25 times or more than the lower bed length (Col 4:19-25; 1/0.8 is 1.25 times the more than the lower bed length).
However, Dean does not explicitly teach, that produces an argon product using a fluid supplied from a middle portion of the low-pressure column as a raw material.
On the other hand, Nojima teaches that produces an argon product (22) using a fluid (22) supplied from a middle portion of the low-pressure column (9) as a raw material (Col 1:45-50: Argon material gas is withdrawn from the middle portion of 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have taken the teachings of Dean and to have modified them by producing an argon product using a fluid of Dean supplied from a middle portion of the low-pressure column of Dean as taught by Nojima as a raw material , in order to minimize oxygen carryover into the argon recovery column (See Nojima 1:45-55), without yielding unpredictable results.
In re Claim 3, Modified Dean teaches wherein an oxygen concentration in the argon product is 10 ppm or less (Nojima Col 2:55-65).
In re Claim 4, Modified Dean teaches wherein the argon column (1) is vertically divided into two or more parts (Nojima Col 2:50-60).
In re Claim 5, Modified Dean teaches An air separation unit comprising the argon column for an air separation unit (Dean 1; See Col 4:9-10) according to Claims 1.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dean et al. (US 6128922 A) as modified by Nojima et al (US5784899A) further in view of Kechagia et al (US 20140245781 A1).
In re Claim 2, Modified Dean discloses wherein the number of the beds in the upper section (14) is one or more (Col 4:4-10).
However, Modified Dean does not explicitly teach, wherein the number of the beds in the lower section is two or more.
On the other hand, teaches wherein the number of the beds in the lower section is two or more (See [0050-0053]; Fig. 1: Stage B-H).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have taken the teachings of Modified Dean and to have modified them by having wherein the number of the beds in the lower section of Dean is two or more as taught by Kechagia, in order to have efficient and decrease the concentration of oxygen (See Kechagia [0011]), without yielding unpredictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIM M ADENIJI whose telephone number is (571)272-5939. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/IBRAHIM A. MICHAEL ADENIJI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights