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 1-13 in the reply filed on 5/11/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. CN 104162341 in view of Amte et al. US Patent 9,931,593.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches an apparatus for absorbing, capturing and desorbing CO2 using solid amine comprising (Figure, [0006]-[0015], [0032]):
a) a catcher (Figure) for capturing CO2 in flue gas ([0006]) and comprising:
a treatment reactor chamber 1 for the introduction of a flue gas containing CO2 and solid amine adsorbent particles, where the CO2 are absorbed onto the amine particles ([0010]) and
a delivery riser pipe 6 communicated with the treatment reactor chamber 1,
[AltContent: textbox (third amine outlet)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (solid amine inlet)]
PNG
media_image1.png
260
293
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a first solid amine inlet (bottom of riser 6 and driven by blower 7, see labeled Figure below);
b) a desorber D for heating and desorbing CO2 adsorbed by the solid amine adsorbent ([0011]), a second solid amine inlet of the desorber being communicated with a first solid amine outlet of the catcher; and
c) a cooler 4 ([0036]) for cooling the solid amine adsorbent treated by the desorber, a third solid amine inlet of the cooler 2b extending from the bottom right of cooler 4 being communicated with a second solid amine outlet of the desorber 2b, and a third solid amine outlet of the cooler being communicated with the first solid amine inlet of the catcher extending to the feeder 5 ([0034]).
Li teaches flue gas inlet A is at the bottom of the reaction chamber 1 and does not explicitly teach the flue gas inlet is provided at a bottom end of the delivery riser pipe 6 then into the inlet at the bottom of the riser.
However, Li does teach that the solid amines (through riser 6) and the flue gas (through inlet A) are in contact and thus it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to move the flue gas inlet to the bottom of the delivery pipe together with the solid amine to increase the contact time and increase adsorption.
Li does not explicitly teach an adsorbent inlet, and an adsorbent outlet of the treatment chamber being communicated with the adsorbent inlet.
However, Amte teaches and adsorber A comprising an outlet at C1 for the adsorber to recycle to an inlet near the bottom of the adsorber tower A. This reduces the thermal load while increasing adsorption (column 7 lines 20-40). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Li to include an adsorbent inlet, and an adsorbent outlet of the treatment chamber being communicated with the adsorbent inlet similar to Amte in order to provide an efficient adsorption apparatus.
Regarding claim 2, the limitations of “a temperature is 30 °C to 40 a pressure is 70 kPa(a) to 120 kPa(a), a solid-gas ratio is 2 to 30, a gas flow rate is 2 m/s to 20 m/s, and a contact time of the flue gas being mixed with the solid amine adsorbent is 3 s to 20 s” is considered method limitations and do not give patentable weight to a claim directed to the apparatus. See MPEP 2114.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With regards to claim 3, the prior art fails to teach or suggest recited catcher configuration in the dependent claim. Specifically, the prior art does not teach a treatment chamber having a lower collecting dense phase section equipped with a circumferential distribution loop pipe, an upper settling section, and a separate flue gas cyclone separator located within the settling section. Li uses a countercurrent downflow adsorption reactor with a separate outlet gas-solid separator while Amte uses an adsorber and cyclone. Neither teach the claimed combination of the structural elements in claims 1 and 3, particularly the combination of a delivery pipe primary separator discharging into an upper settling section, a separate cyclone within that section and a fluidized dense phase collection section having the recited distributor and solids outlet.
Janke of US Patent 4,220,623 discloses a reactor vessel 2 including a riser discharge head 3, a dense-phase catalyst bed 4, steam ring 5, and internal cyclones 17 and 21. However, Janke’s apparatus would be incompatible with Li and Amte since there is no motivation to use Janke’s vessel in the system for carbon capture with amine adsorbents as with Li and Amte. Doing so would require wholesale reconstruction of the adsorption vessel and gas-solid flow paths, effectively importing substantially the entire structural arrangement of claim 3 with an adsorbtion system without obvious connection or compatibility. Janke teaches a riser entrance 1 and an outlet 12 and would require further construction to address all the components required by claims 1 and 3.
Moreover, Li selected its downflow reactor to avoid fluidized bed problems including moisture-induced amine agglomeration and unstable solids circulation. Thus, Li teaches away from any modification with an FCC chamber. A person having ordinary skill in the art would therefore lack a clear motivation and reasonable expectation of success for modifying Li and Amte with Janke without impermissible hindsight.
Specifically, the prior art lacks the following in combination:
a delivery pipe communicated with the treatment chamber, a bottom end of the delivery pipe being provided with a flue gas inlet, a first solid amine inlet and an adsorbent inlet, and an adsorbent outlet of the treatment chamber being communicated with the adsorbent inlet; and
wherein the treatment chamber comprises the follow sections along the delivery direction of materials in the delivery pipe in sequence:
a collecting dense phase section provided with an air inlet for fluidizing air to enter and a distribution loop pipe communicated with the air inlet, the distribution loop pipe being uniformly provided with air outlets in a circumferential direction, and the first solid amine outlet and the adsorbent outlet being provided on the collecting dense phase section and below the distribution loop pipe and the air inlet;
a settling section communicated with the collecting dense phase section and used for settling the solid amine adsorbent for capturing C02;
a top end of the delivery pipe being provided with a primary separator for separating the flue gas from the solid amine adsorbent, an outlet of the primary separator being located at the settling section, and the settling section being provided with a flue gas cyclone separator for separating flue gas treated by the primary separator, and a top of the settling section being provided with an exhaust port for discharging the treated flue gas.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARON PREGLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571) 272-5954. 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.
/SHARON PREGLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772