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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/12/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objection
Claims 1-2 and 7-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: please amend “a corrosion rate” in line 9 to – [[a]] the corrosion rate--; “a line upstream or downstream said piece of equipment” to -- a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment--.
Claim 2: please amend “to sweep” to – [[to]] sweeping--; “to measure” to –measuring --.
Claim 7: please amend “the range 3.0 to 6.0 mV” to – [[the]] a range of 3.0 to 6.0 mV--; “where the parameters ba is the anodic Tafel slope and be is the cathodic Tafel slope” to – where the parameter[[s]] ba is the anodic Tafel slope and the parameter bc is the cathodic Tafel slope-- .
Claim 8: please amend “a super duplex stainless steel” to – [[a]] the super duplex stainless steel--; “the range 3.5 to 5.0 mV” to – [[the]] a range of 3.5 to 5.0 mV--.
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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, claim 1 recites “the corrosion rate” in line 1; “the provision of electrode” in line 4; “the electrochemical potential” in lines 7-8, which lack antecedent basis, thus the scope of claim 1 is indefinite. Claims 2-14 are further rejected by virtue of their dependence upon and because they fail to cure the deficiencies of indefinite claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites “the current”, which lacks antecedent basis, thus the scope of claim 2 is indefinite. Claims 3-5 and 13 are further rejected by virtue of their dependence upon and because they fail to cure the deficiencies of indefinite claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites “the open circuit potential” and “the potential difference”, which lack antecedent basis, thus the scope of claim 3 is indefinite. Claims 4-5 and 13 are further rejected by virtue of their dependence upon and because they fail to cure the deficiencies of indefinite claim 3.
Regarding claim 6, claim 6 recites “the imposed potential difference”, “the open circuit potential”, and “the current”, which lack antecedent basis, thus the scope of claim 6 is indefinite. Claims 7-8 and 14 are further rejected by virtue of their dependence upon and because they fail to cure the deficiencies of indefinite claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 recites “a super duplex stainless steel (austenitic-ferritic)” , wherein the term “super” is a relative term which also renders the claim indefinite. The term “super” 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. In this instant claim, it is unclear what is the requirement of the duplex stainless steel be considered as a “super” duplex stainless steel. Furthermore, 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, claim 7 recites the broad recitation of “austenitic-ferritic”, and the claim also recites “a super duplex stainless steel” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by “(austenitic-ferritic)” is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Claim 7 further recites “when it is immersed into an aqueous solution of ammonium carbamate”, and claim 1 recites electrodes immersed in the process fluid, which is an aqueous solution containing ammonium carbamate. It is unclear if “an aqueous solution of ammonium carbamate” recited in claim 7 is the same or different than the aqueous solution containing ammonium carbamate recited in claim 1. Note that “containing” is considered synonymous with “comprising” and it is an open-ended transitional phrase. If the above two aqueous solutions are different, then it is unclear which solution does “the solution” in line 14 of claim 7 refer to. Furthermore, “the anodic Tafel slope” and “the cathodic Tafel slope” also lack antecedent basis. Note that the anodic/cathodic Tafel slope is not a single definite value since it depends on the experimental conditions. Thus the scope of claim 7 is indefinite. Claims 8 and 14 are further rejected by virtue of their dependence upon and because they fail to cure the deficiencies of indefinite claim 7.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites “a high-pressure urea synthesis section” , wherein the term “high-pressure” is a relative term which also renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-pressure” 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. In this instant claim, it is unclear what is the pressure requirement be considered as a “high-pressure”.
Furthermore, 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, claim 10 recites the broad recitation of “a high-pressure urea synthesis section or urea synthesis loop”, and the claim also recites “particularly a urea synthesis reactor, a urea stripper, a urea condenser or a piece thereof” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by “particularly a urea synthesis reactor, a urea stripper, a urea condenser or a piece thereof” is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Thus the scope of claim 10 is indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 would be allowable if they are rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The closest prior art to the present application is Takahashi et al. (US20160075642A1) in view of Zhu et al. (Corrosion behaviour of 15CrMo steel for water-wall tubes in thermal power plants in the presence of urea and its byproducts, Corros Rev, 2021, 39, 43-53), Rokosz et al. (Corrosion studies of austenitic and duplex stainless steels in the environment of ferment of biogas plants, WSN, 2017, 74, 194-208), Valeh-e-Sheyda et al. (Inhibition of corrosion in amine air cooled heat exchanger: experimental and numerical study, Applied thermal engineering, 2016, 98, 1241-1250), and Erfani et al. (Investigation of carbon steel and stainless steel corrosion in a mea based CO2 removal plant, Petroleum & Coal, 2015, 57, 48-55).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches a method for determining the corrosion rate of a piece of equipment of a urea synthesis plant (Fig.3 shows a measurement apparatus for measuring the corrosion behavior of a material of the working electrode 31 immersed in a urea synthesis liquid synthesized in the autoclave [para. 0106-0107]; and the corrosion rate is measured by the polarization resistance method [para. 0128]; Fig.5 shows corrosion rate of the material S32808, S31260, and S31603; the stripper of the urea synthesis plant, austenite-ferrite duplex stainless steel S32808 is preferably used [para. 0079-0087]; S31603 series general-purpose stainless steel can be used such as piping and valves [para. 0088]; general-purpose S31803 or S31260, is used as a urea synthesis apparatus material in at least a part of the synthesis tower A, the stripper B, the condenser C [para. 0136]; the material of the working electrode is deemed as the piece of equipment), said piece of equipment being in contact with a process fluid of said urea synthesis plant (a material of the working electrode 31 immersed in a urea synthesis liquid synthesized in the autoclave [para. 0106-0107]), which is an aqueous solution containing ammonium carbamate (ammonia including ammonium carbamate and ammonia converted to urea [para. 0089]; Water, ammonium carbonate, and urea are placed in the autoclave 34 [para. 0118]), wherein the method comprises the provision of electrodes immersed in said process fluid (working electrode 31, reference electrode 32 and counter electrode 33 are immersed in the process fluid as shown in Fig.3 [para. 0125]), said electrodes including at least a working electrode (working electrode 31 [para. 0125]) which is made of the same material as said piece of equipment (measuring the corrosion behavior of a material of the working electrode 31 immersed in a urea synthesis liquid synthesized in the autoclave [para. 0106-0107]; Fig.5 shows corrosion rate of the material S32808, S31260, and S31603; the stripper of the urea synthesis plant, austenite-ferrite duplex stainless steel S32808 is preferably used [para. 0079-0087]; S31603 series general-purpose stainless steel can be used such as piping and valves [para. 0088]; general-purpose S31803 or S31260, is used as a urea synthesis apparatus material in at least a part of the synthesis tower A, the stripper B, the condenser C [para. 0136]; thus, the working electrode is made of the same material as said piece of equipment), a reference electrode (reference electrode 32 [para.0125]) and a counter electrode (counter electrode 33 [para. 0125]), the method comprising the steps of:
a) determining polarization data of the working electrode, by varying the electrochemical potential of said working electrode relative to the reference electrode (After the potential difference between the working electrode 31 and the reference electrode 32 was low, showing the active region, the current flowing between the working electrode 31 and the counter electrode 33 was measured by the polarization resistance method. The corrosion rate during active dissolution was obtained from this current value [para. 0107, 0125; Fig.4]), and
b) determining a corrosion rate of said piece of equipment based on said polarization data (the current flowing between the working electrode 31 and the counter electrode 33 was measured by the polarization resistance method. The corrosion rate during active dissolution was obtained from this current value [para. 0125]);
wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid by installing said electrodes in a pressure vessel (the corrosion behavior of the working electrode 31 can be grasped by the potential difference occurring between the working electrode 31 and the reference electrode 32 immersed in a urea synthesis liquid synthesized in the autoclave 34 [para.0107]; the current flowing between the working electrode 31 and the counter electrode 33 was measured by the polarization resistance method. The corrosion rate during active dissolution was obtained from this current value [para. 0125]; At this time, the pressure was about 160 bar [para. 0122]. The autoclave 34 is deemed as the pressure vessel).
Takahashi teaches wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid by installing said electrodes in a pressure vessel (autoclave 34 in Fig.3 [para. 0107]). Takahashi is silent to wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid by installing said electrodes in a pressure vessel of said piece of equipment or by withdrawing a portion of said process fluid from a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment and sending said portion of said process fluid to a probe including the electrodes.
Zhu teaches electrochemical measurement of corrosion rate of 15CrMo steel exposed to urea solution by the polarization method. The measurement device comprises 15CrMo steel working electrode, a Pt counter electrode, and a reference electrode (the last paragraph in section 1 and section 2.4). Zhu does not teach and/or suggest wherein the electrodes are put in contact with the process fluid by installing the electrodes in a pressure vessel of said piece of equipment or by withdrawing a portion of the process fluid from a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment and sending said portion of said process fluid to a probe including the electrodes.
Rokosz teaches electrochemical measurement of corrosion rates of austenitic and duplex stainless steels placed in the same corrosive environment of the biogas plant ferment based on the polarization method (title, abstract and section 2). A sample of ferment was acquired from an agricultural plant in the region of Slupsk, Poland. The experimental set up comprising a working electrode which is a studied sample of austenitic or duplex stainless steel, a Pt counter electrode and a reference electrode, wherein the electrodes are immersed a ferment solution acquired from the plant (section 2). Rokosz further teaches the cold-rolled diplex stainless steel 2205 placed in the same corrosive environment revealed the highest resistance to the types of corrosion. Thus, Rokosz teaches determining the corrosion rate of a piece of equipment ( austenitic or duplex stainless steel) based on polarization data, wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid (ferment solution) by withdrawing a portion of said process fluid from the same corrosive environment of the biogas plant and sending said portion of said process fluid to a probe including the electrodes. Rokosz does not teach and/or suggest wherein the process fluid is withdrawn from a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment since Rokosz teaches corrosion studies placed in the same corrosive environment of the piece of equipment.
Valeh-e-Sheyda teaches electrochemical measurement of corrosion rate of A-179 carbon steel sample obtained from an amine plant based on the polarization method, wherein A-179 carbon steel as the working electrode, a graphite as auxiliary electrode, and Ag/AgCl reference electrode are immersed in a bulk electrolyte medium (sections 2.1, 3.1, and 3.3). Valeh-e-Sheyda does not teach and/or suggest wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid by installing said electrodes in a pressure vessel of said piece of equipment or by withdrawing a portion of said process fluid from a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment and sending said portion of said process fluid to a probe including the electrodes.
Erfani teaches electrochemical measurement of corrosion rates of carbon steel or stainless steel used in CO2 removal plant based on the linear polarization resistance method, wherein the carbon steel or stainless steel is used as the working electrode. The working electrode, counter electrode and reference electrode are immersed in an amine solution obtained from under study industrial plant (section 2.1 and abstract). Thus, Erfani teaches determining the corrosion rate of a piece of equipment (carbon steel or stainless steel) based on polarization data, wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid (amine solution) by withdrawing a portion of said process fluid from the under study industrial plant and sending said portion of said process fluid to a probe including the electrodes. Erfani does not teach and/or suggest wherein the process fluid is withdrawn from a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment since Erfani teaches the amine solution obtained from under study industrial plant.
The combined prior arts of Takahashi, Zhu, Rokosz, Valeh-e-Sheyda, Erfani, and the prior arts pertinent to applicant's disclosure listed in conclusions do not teach and/or suggest the last limitations of claim 1: wherein said electrodes are put in contact with said process fluid by installing said electrodes in a pressure vessel of said piece of equipment or by withdrawing a portion of said process fluid from a line upstream or downstream of said piece of equipment and sending said portion of said process fluid to a probe including the electrodes. Thus, claim 1 is patentably distinguished from the prior art of record. Claims 2-14 are dependent from or otherwise include the limitations of claim 1 and are allowable for the same reasons above.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Gullberg et al. (WO2017013181A1) teaches a duplex stainless steel as a construction material for a component in ammonium carbamate environment. Hiraide et al. (JP2018168415A) teaches a ferritic stainless steel which is excellent in corrosion resistance in a high temperature urea environment and also excellent in corrosion resistance even under the formation of an oxide film. Hiraide et al. (US20160002760A1) teaches a ferritic stainless steel sheet for fuel supply system members and a fuel supply system part having both good corrosion resistance and good braze ability and also having excellent strength. Mennen (US20040116743A1) teaches a process for urea synthesis. Sutherlin et al. (US20100285327A1) teaches a part for an article of equipment includes a fluid conducting first region including a corrosion resistant first material, and a fluid conducting second region including a second material. Hirasawa et al. (US20180195157A1) teaches a ferritic stainless steel sheet for a urea SCR casing which is excellent in terms of corrosion resistance in a urea SCR environment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIZHI QIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3487. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am-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, Luan V. Van can be reached on (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.
/SHIZHI QIAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1795