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.
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Response to Preliminary Amendment
The Applicant’s preliminary amendment, filed June 14, 2024 has been fully considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: reference character “180” has been used to designate both “an oxidizing gas” in line 7 and “oxygen-depleted oxidizing gas” in line 8. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: grammar. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the hydrocarbon feedstock is burnt by bringing it into contact with the oxygen carrier” in line 3.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the oxygen carrier that has passed through the reduction reactor (2000) is oxidized by bringing it into contact with an oxidizing gas (100, 130, 150, 180)” in lines 5-6.
The term “it” creates grammatical uncertainty.
The Examiner suggests the following amendment to Claim 9:
9. (Currently Amended) A chemical looping combustion method for the combustion of a hydrocarbon feedstock using a solid-state oxygen carrier in the form of particles, wherein:
- the hydrocarbon feedstock is burnt by bringing [[it]] the hydrocarbon feedstock into contact with the oxygen carrier in a reduction reactor (2000) operating as a fluidized bed;
- the oxygen carrier that has passed through the reduction reactor (2000) is oxidized by bringing [[it]] the oxygen carrier into contact with an oxidizing gas (100, 130, 150, 180)…
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 1-8 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 1 recites the limitation "said reduced oxygen carrier" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said oxidized oxygen carrier" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said oxygen-depleted oxidizing gas" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 is 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 6 recites the limitation "preferably situated on a lower wall of said inlet pipe" in line 3. The phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 9-15 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 9 recites the limitation "preferably air" in line 6. The phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 9 recites the limitation "said oxidized oxygen carrier" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the oxygen-depleted oxidizing gas" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "said oxidized oxygen carrier" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 is 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 14 recites the limitation "preferably selected from the list consisting of coal, coke, petcoke, biomass, oil sands and household waste" in lines 2-3. The phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the reduced oxygen carrier (440)" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the unburnt particles" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "said unburnt particles" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "said unburnt particles (602)" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "preferably by means of an L-ported valve" in line 12. The phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 14 recites the limitation "said unburnt particles (602)" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:.
Claims 1, 9. Ajhar et al. (EP 2,644,994 A1) discloses A plant for chemical looping combustion of a hydrocarbon feedstock using a solid-state oxygen carrier (oxygen carrier 22) in the form of particles (Fig. 1; [0019] – [0022]; Claim 1), comprising at least:
- a reduction reactor (fuel reactor 12) configured to operate as a fluidized bed and perform the combustion of said hydrocarbon feedstock (fuel 10) in contact with said oxygen carrier (22) ([0020]);
- at least one … oxidation reactor (air reactor 14) configured to oxidize said reduced oxygen carrier (reduced oxygen carriers are transmitted 52 to air reactor 14) coming from said reduction reactor (12) by contacting with an oxidizing gas (air 16) ([0020]; [0022]) …;
- lines (18, 22, 26, 48, 52) for circulating said oxygen carrier between said reduction reactor (12) and said at least one … oxidation reactor (14) ([0022]).
Ajhar discloses that the air reactor (14) (i.e. oxidation reactor), may be a fluidized bed reactor, configured to oxidize reduced oxygen carriers ([0019]; [0020]; [0022]); and wherein the gas-solid stream exiting the air reactor (14) is transmitted to a solid separator (20), which may be a cyclone separator, wherein the solid separator separates oxidized oxygen carriers from flue gas stream (18) ([0022]).
Ajhar does not disclose: at least one cyclone oxidation reactor configured to … separate said oxidized oxygen carrier from said oxygen-depleted oxidizing gas.
Sozinho et al. (US 2017/0320731) teaches a plant for chemical looping oxidation-reduction combustion (CLC) of a gaseous hydrocarbon feed (10) (Fig. 2); the plant (1000) comprising: an oxidation reactor (110); and a reduction reactor (120); wherein the oxygen-depleted oxidizing gas stream is separated from the oxygen-carrying solid stream at the top of oxidation reactor (110) by a gas/solid separation system including two gas/solid separation devices (150, 151), such as cyclones ([0104]).
However, the Examiner finds that it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine prior art references to arrive at the claimed invention without the benefit of the original disclosure. Moreover, the prior art references, alone or in combination, fail to establish a sufficient teaching or motivation to combine the air / oxidation reactor(s) and cyclone separator(s) into one unitary apparatus / reactor performing both functions as claimed versus coupling a plurality of apparatuses together as disclosed by the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Morin et al. (US 2009/0072538) discloses a plant (See Figure), comprising: a reduction reactor (5) and an oxidation reactor (7) ([0029]; [0030]; [0037]); wherein the reduction reactor (5) and oxidation reactor (7) may be a fluidized bed reactor, each equipped with a cyclone (11,12) for separation of solids ([0031]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Crystal J. Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-6242. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/CRYSTAL J LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738
Prosecution Insights