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 § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deng (US20180264399A1) as evidenced by Lecomte (Post combustion CO2 capture).
Claim 1: Deng teaches a method (abstract) comprising: providing a membrane module including a plurality of hollow fibers, the plurality of hollow fibers including a lumen side spaced apart from a shell side to define a membrane therebetween, the membrane including a plurality of pores dispersed therein (composite membrane set up as hollow fiber membrane with hollow fibres, [0128]); contacting the shell side of the plurality of hollow fibers with a gas phase (gas passes outside of hollow fiber, [0128]), wherein the gas phase includes CO2 (maximize ability to absorb CO2, [0128]); contacting the lumen side of the plurality of hollow fibers with a liquid phase (solvent pass down central channel, [0128]), wherein the liquid phase includes a physical solvent for physisorption of CO2 into the liquid phase (organic carbonate solvent, [0052]); desorbing CO2 from the liquid phase by reducing a pressure of the liquid phase or by heating the liquid phase downstream of the membrane module (increase temp to remove CO2 from solvent, [0129]); and after desorbing CO2 from the liquid phase, recirculating the liquid phase to the membrane module for the continuous physisorption of CO2 into the liquid phase (lean solvent sent back to separation unit, [0139], figure 1).
Regarding the limitations of “providing a membrane module including a plurality of hollow fibers, the plurality of hollow fibers including a lumen side spaced apart from a shell side to define a membrane therebetween, the membrane including a plurality of pores dispersed therein” these are all implicitly taught by the structure of a hollow fiber membrane. Deng teaches the hollow fibers define an essentially cylindrical core area separated from the area outside the core by the composite membrane ([0128]). Deng also teaches there is a lumen (central channel) and a shell side (outside the fibre) and a membrane with pores being defined between (porous support layer).
Regarding the limitation “wherein the liquid phase includes a physical solvent for physisorption of CO2 into the liquid phase,” Deng teaches the use of a physical solvent (organic carbonate). This would implicitly teach that a physisorption of CO2 is being performed.
If Deng does not explicitly teach a physical solvent for physisorption of CO2 into the liquid phase, Deng teaches the use of a physical solent (organic carbonate, [0052]). Lecomte teaches that physical solvents absorb compounds present in gas by dissolution in liquid without chemical reaction (3.3.1.2 physical solvent processes, page 45). It also teaches that physical solvents are insensitive to degradation and side reactions as well as being able to be easily regenerated (page 45). Therefore it would be implicitly taught that the organic carbonate of Deng is a physical solvent for physisorption.
Claims 5 and 6: Deng teaches the gas phase contacts the lumen side and the liquid phase contacts the shell side or the liquid phase contacts the lumen side and the gas phase contacts the shell side (solvent passes central channel while gas passes outside or vice versa [0128]).
Claim 7: Deng teaches the membrane includes a pore size of between 20 nm to 100 nm (MWCO can be 2000 (40nm), [0123]-[0124]).
Claim 10: Deng teaches the plurality of hollow fibers are hydrophobic fibers ([0008], [0152], [0153]).
Claim 11: Deng teaches the hydrophobic fibers include polypropylene (PP), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polysulfone (PS), or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) (PP hollow fibers, [0122]).
Claim 12: Deng teaches the gas phase includes wet flue gases containing CO2 (flue gas, [0039]). The wet flue gas is implicitly taught by Deng as flue gas is made by combustion of fossil fuels and contains water vapor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng in view of Deng2 (US20160206993A1).
Claim(s) 3, 4, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng in view of CN456 (CN113289456A, attached translation will be referenced).
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng in view of Membrane CO separation (Membrane CO separation, see attached reference).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng in view of Culp (US20230043712A1).
Claim(s) 15, 16, 18, 19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng2 in view of Deng in view of JP941 (JP5093941B2, attached translation will be referenced).
Claim(s) 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng2, Deng, JP941, and CN456.
Rejection in view of Deng and Deng2
Claim 2: Deng does not explicitly state the liquid phase is pressurized to a greater extent than the gas phase, such that a pressure differential exists therebetween. Deng teaches the invention of claim 1. Deng teaches a membrane contactor for separating CO2 from a mixed gas with a solvent (abstract). Deng2 teaches a process for separating CO2 from a mixed gas with a membrane and a liquid absorbent (abstract). Deng2 teaches that the pressure of the gas side can be lower than the liquid side ([0068]). Deng2 teaches that the exact pressure different utilized is dependent on the properties of the absorbent and membrane materials, such as surface tension and contact angle, as well as pore size and pore size distribution of membranes ([0072]). Deng2 teaches that the pressure difference has the advantage of helping avoid wetting the membrane ([0072]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Deng to have a higher liquid phase pressure than the gas phase as Deng2 teaches that the pressure appears to be a result effective variable that depends on the properties and parameters of the method in order to avoid wetting of the membrane ([0072]). This would have a reasonable expectation of success for optimizing as Deng2 teaches this is able to reduce CO2 to less than 1 vol% ([0106]).
Rejection in view of Deng and CN456
Claims 3 and 4: Deng does not explicitly teach the physical solvent is a deep eutectic solvent or that the deep eutectic solvent includes reline, ethaline, or glyceline. Deng teaches the invention of claim 1. Deng teaches a membrane contactor for separating CO2 from a mixed gas with a solvent (abstract). CN456 teaches that membrane separation is a common and known method for CO2 removal (page 1, Background technique, second paragraph).CN456 teaches the use of deep eutectic solvents, which are a new type of green solvent (page 1, Background technique, third paragraph). CN456 teaches choline chloride + urea which is reline (pages 1-2, Background technique, fourth paragraph). CN456 teaches that this has the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation (last paragraph of page 2 to first paragraph of page 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Deng to use reline as the solvent as CN456 teaches that deep eutectic solvents have the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation.
Claim 14: Deng does not explicitly teach the liquid phase includes a mixture of water and a deep eutectic solvent with a ratio (wt %) of between 1:1 and 3:1, inclusive. Deng teaches the invention of claim 1. Deng teaches a membrane contactor for separating CO2 from a mixed gas with a solvent (abstract). CN456 teaches that membrane separation is a common and known method for CO2 removal (page 1, Background technique, second paragraph). CN456 teaches the use of deep eutectic solvents, which are a new type of green solvent (page 1, Background technique, third paragraph). CN456 teaches that the deep eutectic solvent is a 3:1 mixture of water and deep eutectic solvent (water content is 75% by mass, page 2, Summary of the invention, fourth paragraph). CN456 teaches that this solvent has the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation (last paragraph of page 2 to first paragraph of page 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Deng to use the deep eutectic solvent with a water content of 75% by mass as the solvent as CN456 teaches that deep eutectic solvents have the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation.
Rejection in view of Deng and Membrane CO separation
Claims 8 and 9: Deng does not explicitly teach the plurality of hollow fibers define an inner diameter of between 0.1 mm and 1 mm or the plurality of hollow fibers define an outer diameter of between 0.1 mm and 1 mm. Deng teaches the invention of claim 1. Deng teaches a membrane contactor for separating CO2 from a mixed gas with a solvent (abstract). Deng teaches the use of a hollow fiber membrane ([0128]). Membrane CO separation teaches that hollow fiber membrane separation units for gas-liquid contactors typically have polymer fibers with inner and outer diameters of about 600-1000um (0.6-1mm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Deng to have fibers of inner to outer diameters of between 0.1-1mm as taught by Membrane CO separation because they need to be larger due to the use of gas and liquids.
Rejection in view of Deng and Culp
Claim 13: Deng does not explicitly teach the physical solvent includes diethyl sebacate. Deng teaches the invention of claim 1. Deng teaches a membrane contactor for separating CO2 from a mixed gas with a solvent (abstract). Culp teaches a method of removing CO2 from a gas stream by contacting it with a solvent (abstract). Culp teaches that diethyl sebacate is a high performing CO2 solvent ([0075]). Culp teaches that this has high CO2 uptake, low H2 uptake, and low moisture affinity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method of Deng to use diethyl sebacate as the solvent in Deng as diethyl sebacate has high CO2 uptake, low H2 uptake, and low moisture affinity (Culp, [0075]).
Rejection in view of Deng2, Deng, and JP941
Claim 15: Deng2 teaches a system for CO2 separations (abstract), the system comprising: a membrane module (membrane absorber, figure 3); wherein the gas phase includes CO2 (Feed CO2, figure 3); a pump for directing a flow rate of a liquid phase (Pump, figure 3), wherein the membrane separates the gas phase from the liquid phase ([0061]), and wherein the liquid phase includes a physical solvent (ionic liquid, [0086]) for physisorption of the CO2 into the liquid phase ([0091]); and a solvent reservoir downstream of the membrane module for desorbing the CO2 from the liquid phase (membrane desorber, figure 3), wherein the second pump provides recirculation of the solvent reservoir through the membrane module (pump, figure 3).
Deng2 does not explicitly teach including a plurality of hollow fibers, the plurality of hollow fibers including a lumen side spaced apart from a shell side to define a membrane therebetween, the membrane including a plurality of pores dispersed therein, a first pump for directing a flow rate of a gas phase along the lumen side or the shell side of the plurality of hollow fibers, and a second pump for directing a flow rate of a liquid phase along the other of the lumen side or the shell side of the plurality of hollow fibers, wherein the membrane separates the gas phase from the liquid phase. Deng2 teaches a membrane contactor for the removal of CO2 from a gas with a liquid absorbent (abstract). Deng2 teaches that the membrane feeds gas and liquid through a retentate and permeate side of the membrane ([0061]). Deng teaches a membrane contactor for removing CO2 (abstract). Deng teaches the use of hollow fiber membrane ([0128]). Deng teaches that the fan is used to pressurize the flue gas coming into the separator ( [0139]). The fan would read upon a pump as this is a device that transfers or compresses fluid. JP941 teaches that hollow fiber membranes are ideally suited as contactors for gas and liquid separation ([0004]-[0005]). JP941 teaches that the hollow fiber membrane has a lumen and shell side for each phase, with a porous wall inbetween ([0005]). JP941 also teaches that hollow fiber membranes are primarily used because they have the ability to provide devices with very high packing densities, which affects the effective film surface for separation ([0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Deng2 with a pump and hollow fiber membranes of Deng and JP941 as JP941 teaches that hollow fiber membranes can create devices with very high packing densities which would allow for more effective film surface for separation ([0010]).
Claim 16: Deng2 teaches the liquid phase is pressurized to a greater extent than the gas phase, such that a pressure differential exists therebetween (gas pressure of membrane contactor can be lower than liquid, [0068]).
Claim 18: Deng and JP941 teaches the plurality of hollow fibers are hydrophobic fibers (Deng [0008], JP941 [0010]).
Claim 19: Deng teaches the hydrophobic fibers include polypropylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, polysulfone, or polyvinylidene fluoride ([0120], [0147]).
Claim 21: Deng2 teaches the physical solvent is a pure physical solvent (ionic liquid, [0085]-[0086]), such that the liquid phase does not include a diluting component (preferable for liquid absorbent to be free of water, [0102]).
Rejection in view of Deng2, Deng, JP941, and CN456
Claim 17: Deng2, Deng, and JP941 do not explicitly teach the physical solvent includes reline, ethaline, glyceline, or diethyl sebacate. The prior arts teach the invention of claim 15. Deng2 teaches the use of ionic liquids also known as green solvents ([0085]-[0086]). CN456 teaches that membrane separation is a common and known method for CO2 removal (page 1, Background technique, second paragraph). CN456 teaches the use of deep eutectic solvents, which are a new type of green solvent and has similar properties to ionic liquids (page 1, Background technique, third paragraph). CN456 teaches choline chloride + urea which is reline (pages 1-2, Background technique, fourth paragraph). CN456 teaches that this has the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation (last paragraph of page 2 to first paragraph of page 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Deng2 in view of Deng and JP941 to use reline as the solvent as CN456 teaches that deep eutectic solvents are similar in property to ionic liquids and also have the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation.
Claim 20: Deng2, Deng, and JP941 do not explicitly state the liquid phase includes a mixture of water and a deep eutectic solvent with a ratio (wt %) of between 1:1 and 3:1, inclusive. The prior arts teach the invention of claim 15. Deng2 teaches the use of ionic liquids also known as green solvents ([0085]-[0086]). CN456 teaches that membrane separation is a common and known method for CO2 removal (page 1, Background technique, second paragraph). CN456 teaches the use of deep eutectic solvents, which are a new type of green solvent and has similar properties to ionic liquids (page 1, Background technique, third paragraph). CN456 teaches that the deep eutectic solvent is a 3:1 mixture of water and deep eutectic solvent (water content is 75% by mass, page 2, Summary of the invention, fourth paragraph). CN456 teaches that this solvent has the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation (last paragraph of page 2 to first paragraph of page 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Deng2 in view of Deng and JP941 to use the deep eutectic solvent with a water content of 75% by mass as the solvent as CN456 teaches that deep eutectic solvents are similar in property to ionic liquids and also have the benefit of being low in cost, no pollution, no corrosion to equipment, and simple preparation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20190282953 teaches hollow fiber membranes for CO2 with a desorption step.
US20180200675 teaches using hollow fiber membranes to remove gas with a circulating liquid.
US20140260968 teaches desorption of CO2 in a liquid stream.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP Y SHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8171. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 9-5:30.
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 (571) 270-7872. 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.
/P.Y.S/Examiner, Art Unit 1776 09/02/2026
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights