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 .
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.
Status of Application
Claims 13-24 are pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant's request for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(a)-(d). Certified copies of the priority document EP21204454 have been received, but not for EP21204782.
Claim Objections
Claims 13-24 are objected to because of the following informalities: Chemical subscripts were not utilized, Applicants are requested to ensure all chemical compounds utilize subscripts. 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 13-24 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.
Claim 13 recites “gas output (for instance O2 and N2)” which is indefinite as to if it is limiting the gsa output to those. For the purposes of compact prosecution it is being treated as “gas output of O2 and N2 from the at least one adsopriton column . . .”. All claims dependent from claim 13 are rejected for that same reason. Claim 16 similarly recites “pumping (for instance by a compressor)” which is indefinite on if the pumping is meant t be via a compressor, which is how it is being construed for the purposes of compact prosecution.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-24 would be allowable absent the above rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
As to claim 13, none of the cited prior art, either alone or in combination, discloses or reasonably suggests a process for the production of ammonium nitrate from N2 and O2 via subjecting N2 and O2 to plasma and then the output from which is subjected to an absorption column with water and the aqueous output therefrom is electrolyzed and the oxygen produced therefrom is utilized as the O2 in the plasma reactor along with that gas of O2 and N2 from the absorption column. “Towards Green Ammonia Synthesis through Plasma-Driven Nitrogen Oxidation and Catalytic Reduction” to Hollevoet et al., (cited and provided by Applicants) is the closest piece of prior art and it discloses (23828 R col) a plasma reaction between nitrogen and oxygen to for nitrous oxide which is hten subjected to an absorption column with water and subjecting such to a step of hydrogen production via an electrolyzer and forming ammonium nitrate but recycling of oxygen is only done after condensation to form ammonia, not ammonium nitrate nor is the nitrogen recycled and recycling from the absorption column is not something present therein.
Conclusion
Claims 13-24 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD M RUMP whose telephone number is (571)270-5848. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 06:45 AM to 04:45 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
RICHARD M. RUMP
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/RICHARD M RUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights