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 .
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 24,26,27,32 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 24 recites “the fourth retenate stream conduit”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for “the fourth retenate stream conduit” in previous claim limitations.
Claim 26 recites “the ratio of the membrane capacity of the feed stream separation stage to the first permeate stream separation stage”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for “the ratio of the membrane capacity of the feed stream separation stage to the first permeate stream separation stage” in previous claim limitations.
Claim 27 recites “the ratio of the membrane capacity of the feed stream separation stage to the second permeate stream separation stage”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for “the ratio of the membrane capacity of the feed stream separation stage to the second permeate stream separation stage” in previous claim limitations.
Claim 32 recites “the crude gas stream”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for “the crude gas stream” in previous claim limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 17-19, 23-28,30-33,35,36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Malsam et al(7604681).
Malsam et al in figure 1 teaches a multistage membrane apparatus comprising: a feed stream separation stage (102); a first permeate separation stage (109); a second permeate separation stage (113); a compression unit (compressor 107); and gas conduits; wherein: a feed stream conduit (101) is connected to a raw gas stream conduit (100), which is connected to and a gas inlet of the feed stream separation stage ; a first permeate stream conduit is connected to a permeate gas outlet of the feed stream separation stage, which is connected to and a gas inlet of the compression unit ; a compressed permeate gas conduit (105) is connected to a gas outlet of the compression unit and to the gas inlet of the first permeate separation stage ; a first retentate stream conduit (104) is connected to a retentate gas outlet of the feed stream separation stage ; a second permeate stream conduit (112) is connected to a permeate gas outlet of the first permeate separation stage and to a gas inlet of the second permeate separation stage ; a second retentate stream conduit (111) is connected to a retentate gas outlet of the first permeate separation stage ; a third permeate stream conduit (116) is connected to a permeate gas outlet of the second permeate separation stage ; a third retentate stream conduit (115) is connected to a retentate gas outlet of the second permeate separation stage and to the first permeate stream conduit (noting recycle in figure 1 to first permeate stream 105), up-stream of compression unit , or directly to compression unit ; and wherein: each separation stage is a membrane separation stage with gas separation membranes(103,110,114); the feed stream separation stage is configured to separate a feed stream comprising a gas to be separated, a main remaining gas and optionally one or more further gas components into a first permeate stream and a first retentate stream; the first permeate separation stage is configured to separate the compressed gas stream obtained from compression unit (107), into a second permeate stream and a second retentate stream; the second permeate separation stage is configured to separate the second permeate stream into a third permeate stream(116) and a third retentate stream(115); and wherein said multistage membrane apparatus does not comprise a compressor in the second permeate stream conduit between the first permeate separation stage and the second permeate separation stage .
With regards to claim 18, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the second retentate stream conduit is connected to the retentate gas outlet of the first permeate separation stage and to the feed stream conduit .
With regards to claim 19, Malsam et al further teaches wherein feed stream conduit comprises a compressor (column 7 lines 19-20 stating “raw gas stream 100 is typically at above atmospheric pressure) and the second retentate stream conduit is fed to a connection point up-stream of compressor, to the raw gas stream conduit or to a gas removal device.
With regards to claim 23, Malsam et al further teaches wherein a second compressor is located between the raw gas stream and the feed stream(column 7 lines 19-20 stating “raw gas stream 100 is typically at above atmospheric pressure”.
With regards to claim 24, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the feed stream conduit the fourth retentate stream conduit is fed to a connection point up-stream of compressor , or to the raw gas stream conduit .
With regards to claim 25, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the membrane capacity of first separation stage is the highest membrane capacity of all membranes used in the apparatus and/or the membrane with the highest permeance for the gas to be separated compared to all membranes in the apparatus is in the first separation stage(column 9 lines 57-58 stating “residue stream 104 is usually the most carbon-dioxide-lean and methane-rich stream produced by the process”.
With regards to claim 26, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the ratio of the membrane capacity of the feed stream separation stage to the membrane capacity of the first permeate stream separation stage is equal to or greater than 2 and/or the ratio of the membrane capacity of the feed stream separation stage to the membrane capacity of the second permeate stream separation stage is equal to or greater than 2.
With regards to claim 27, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the gas separation membranes are hollow fiber membranes or spiral wound membranes(column 9 lines 18-21 stating “the membranes may be manufactured as flat sheets or as fibers and housed in any convenient module form, including spiral wound modules, plate-and-frame modules and potted hollow-fiber modules”) and wherein the gas separation membranes comprise a separation-active layer of a material selected from the group consisting of: polyamides, polyetherimides, polyaramides, polybenzoxazoles, polybenzothiazoles, polybenzimidazoles, polysulfones, cellulose acetate, cellulose acetate derivatives, polyphenylene oxides, polysiloxanes, polymers with intrinsic microporosity, mixed matrix membranes, facilitated transport membranes, polyethylene oxides, polypropylene oxides and polyimides(noting column 7 lines 61-62 stating “other preferred materials for membrane 103 are modern polyimides”).
With regards to claim 28, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the gas separation membranes comprise a separation active layer of a polyimide of the structure I in claim 28 (noting column 7 lines 61-62 stating “other preferred materials for membrane 103 are modern polyimides ; column 8 lines 11-14 stating “the most preferred membranes 103 for use in step 102 are made from glassy polymers characterized by having repeating units of a fluoroinated, non-aromatic cyclic structure, the ring having at least five members”).
With regards to claim 30, Malsam et al further teaches a method for separating a gas and a main remaining gas from a raw gas stream comprising the gas to be separated, the main remaining gas and optionally one or more further gas components, wherein the method is carried out in the multistage membrane apparatus of claim 17, and said method comprises the following steps: a) a raw gas stream is fed to a feed stream that is fed to the feed stream separation stage where the raw gas stream is separated into a first permeate stream and a first retentate stream, wherein the first retentate stream is removed from the multistage membrane apparatus as a second product, further processed or discarded; b) the first permeate stream is compressed with compression unit such that after compression, said compressed first permeate stream is fed into the first permeate.
With regards to claim 31, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the second retentate stream(111) is recycled to the feed stream, recycled to the raw gas stream, further processed in the multistage membrane apparatus, or removed from the multistage membrane apparatus as a third product, discarded, or combined with the first retentate stream.
With regards to claim 32, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the gas to be separated is enriched in the third permeate stream compared to the raw gas stream and/or the second retentate stream is fed to the crude gas stream.
With regards to claim 33, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the membrane capacities of the separation stages are selected such that the membrane with the highest membrane capacity of all membranes is used the first separation stage, and/or the membrane with the highest permeance for the gas to be separated compared to all membranes is used in the first separation stage.
With regards to claim 35, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the first permeate stream, a gas stream obtained by combining the third retentate stream and the first permeate stream or a gas stream obtained by combining the third retentate stream, the first permeate stream and the fourth permeate stream is compressed in the compression unit(107) to a pressure in the range of 5 to 200 bara.
With regards to claim 36, Malsam et al further teaches wherein the gas to be separated is selected from the group consisting of helium, hydrogen and carbon dioxide, and/or wherein the main remaining gas is a hydrocarbon gas(column 3 lines 57-58 stating “the membranes used in the three stages are selective in favor of carbon dioxide over methane”.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malsam et al(7604681).
Malsam et al teaches all of the limitations of claim 29 but is silent as to further comprising one or more identical or different control valves which are used to adjust the pressures of the gas streams within the apparatus. Examiner respectfully submits valve control in fluid stream conduits is well known, therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide one or more identical or different control valves so that the fluid conduits in Malsam are capable of being controlled according to user specifications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-22,34 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.
Claim 20 recites “wherein the apparatus further comprises: - a retentate separation stage (3) that is connected to the retentate gas outlet of the first permeate separation stage (2) via the second retentate stream conduit (16), wherein the retentate separation stage (3) is configured to separate the second retentate stream into a fourth permeate stream in a fourth permeate stream conduit (21) connected to a permeate gas outlet of the retentate separation stage (3); and - a fourth retentate stream in a fourth retentate stream conduit (20), wherein the fourth retentate stream conduit (20) is connected to a retentate gas outlet of the retentate separation stage (3).”. Malsam et al teaches a feed stream separation stage, a first permeate separation stage, and a second permeate separation stage, however Malsam et al does not teach or suggest wherein the apparatus further comprises: - a retentate separation stage that is connected to the retentate gas outlet of the first permeate separation stage via the second retentate stream conduit , wherein the retentate separation stage is configured to separate the second retentate stream into a fourth permeate stream in a fourth permeate stream conduit connected to a permeate gas outlet of the retentate separation stage; and - a fourth retentate stream in a fourth retentate stream conduit , wherein the fourth retentate stream conduit is connected to a retentate gas outlet of the retentate separation stage. Claims 21 and 22 depend on claim 20 and hence would also be allowable upon incorporation of claim 20 into claim 17.
Claim 34 recites “wherein the multistage membrane apparatus further comprises a retentate separation stage (3), wherein: i) the second retentate stream is separated into a fourth permeate stream and a fourth retentate stream in the retentate separation stage (3); ii) the fourth permeate stream is combined with the first permeate stream and/or the third retentate stream to obtain a combined gas stream that is fed to compression unit (6); and iii) the fourth retentate stream is recycled to the feed stream or the raw gas stream, further processed in the multistage membrane apparatus, removed from the multistage membrane apparatus, combined with the first retentate stream or discarded.”. Malsam et al teaches a feed stream separation stage, a first permeate separation stage, and a second permeate separation stage, however Malsam et al does not teach or suggest wherein the multistage membrane apparatus further comprises a retentate separation stage (3), wherein:i) the second retentate stream is separated into a fourth permeate stream and a fourth retentate stream in the retentate separation stage (3); ii) the fourth permeate stream is combined with the first permeate stream and/or the third retentate stream to obtain a combined gas stream that is fed to compression unit (6); and iii) the fourth retentate stream is recycled to the feed stream or the raw gas stream, further processed in the multistage membrane apparatus, removed from the multistage membrane apparatus, combined with the first retentate stream or discarded.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT A HOPKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-1159. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6am-4pm.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 5712707872. 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.
/ROBERT A HOPKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
September 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights