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
Applicant’s claim of priority as a 35 U.S.C. §371 national stage entry of PCT/FR2022/051946 filed Oct. 14, 2022, which claims foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. §119 to France application FR 2111198 filed Oct. 21, 2021, is hereby acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 112 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 1, and claims 3-10 that depend therefrom, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without undue experimentation, which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976).
Independent claim 1 is drawn to a method for extracting uranium and plutonium from “an acidic aqueous solution with a pH of less than 0” (i.e., a negative fluid pH). The examiner notes that Chemical Dictionaries define pH as between zero and 14. The present specification does not disclose as to how a person skilled in the chemical extraction arts can prepare, or determine, an aqueous acidic solution having a pH of less than zero.
Examiner notes that, in a subsequent reply to this action, Applicant’s submission of a scientific article, or a declaration, showing that preparing/ascertaining a fluid having a negative pH is known in the chemical arts, would suffice to overcome this rejection.
Correction in a subsequent reply to this action by Applicant is respectfully requested.
Allowable Subject Matter
Independent claim 11, and claims 12-22 that depend therefrom, have been examined in the instant action and have been found allowable
Independent claims 1 and 5, and claims 2-4 and 6-10 that depend therefrom, would also be allowable if the 35 U.S.C. 112, rejection presented, supra, is overcome in a subsequent reply to this action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a method for treating, in one cycle, an aqueous solution from the dissolution of a spent nuclear fuel in nitric acid, wherein the aqueous solution comprises uranium(VI) and/or plutonium(IV) with technetium/ruthenium activation products, wherein the cycle includes, inter alia, a co-extraction of uranium(VI) and plutonium(IV) from the aqueous solution, the co- extraction comprises contacting the aqueous solution with an organic solution comprising a monoamide, or a mixture thereof, in an organic diluent, followed by a separation of the aqueous and organic solutions from each other, wherein the monoamide has the chemical structure formula (I), as recited in present independent claim 11.
Nor does the prior art of record tach or suggest a method for extracting uranium(VI) and/or plutonium(IV) from an acidic aqueous solution with a pH of less than 0, wherein the acidic aqueous solution is mixed with an organic solution having one or more monoamides in an organic diluent, followed by separating the aqueous and organic solutions from each other, wherein the monoamide has the chemical structure formula (I), as recited in present independent claims 1 and 5.
The closest prior art of record is Miguirditchian (US 2007/0219160 A1 to Miguirditchian et al., published Sept. 20, 2007).
Miguirditchian discloses a method for treating an aqueous solution resulting from the dissolution of a spent nuclear fuel in nitric acid, and allowing the uranium and plutonium contained in the solution to be extracted, separated and decontaminated in a single cycle (abstract; [0001]; [0002]; [0020] of Miguirditchian). The cycle comprises: a co-extraction of uranium and plutonium from an aqueous solution with an organic solution/diluent followed by a separation of the aqueous and organic solutions; a decontamination of the organic solution with respect to americium, curium and fission products with an organic solution in an nitric acid aqueous solution, followed by a separation of the organic and aqueous solutions; a partitioning of the uranium and plutonium contained in the organic solution into an aqueous solution and an organic solution, wherein the aqueous solution comprising plutonium/uranium and the organic solution comprising uranium without plutonium by a specified partitioning process; specified decontamination of the organic solution with respect to technetium; stripping of uranium from the organic solution; and a regeneration of the organic phase, whereby a first and second aqueous solution are obtained that is decontaminated, the first aqueous solution comprising plutonium without uranium or a mixture of plutonium and uranium, and the second aqueous solution comprising uranium without plutonium ([0020] to [0030] of Miguirditchian). The monoamide is an N,N-dialkylamide, or a mixture of two particular N,N-dialkylamides, having specific chemical formulas recited in paragraphs [0031 to [0033] of Miguirditchian).
However, Miguirditchian does not teach/suggest its organic solution used for extraction including the cyclic amide/monoamide compound in accordance with the chemical formula (I), as recited in present independent claims 1, 5 and 11. Nor does Miguirditchian teach or suggest its acidic aqueous solution having a pH of less than zero as recited in present claims 1 and 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-8916. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am -6:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSEPH DEL SOLE can be reached on 571-272-1130. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN J FIGUEROA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
September 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights