DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/27/2026 amending Claims 1, 57 – 63, and 65 – 69, canceling Claim 64, and adding new Claims 70 – 74 has been entered. Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 56 – 63, and 65 – 74 are examined.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 08/27/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim 58 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 58, l. 1 “The reactor assembly of claim 1, wherein” is believed to be in error for --The engine of claim 1, wherein-- to maintain consistency among the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1, l. 26 “fuel intake system” interpreted as ‘system for fuel intake’ and the functional limitation Claim 1, ll. 27 - 28 “fuel intake system delivers the fuel into the combustion chamber”. In MPEP2181(I)(A) “system for…” was among a list of non-structural generic placeholders that may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) when coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, published in 1990 defined system as “1d: a group of devices or artificial objects or an organization forming a network esp. for distributing something or serving a common purpose <a telephone ~> <a heating ~> <a highway ~> <a data processing ~>”.
Claim 1, l. 29 “oxidant delivery system” interpreted as ‘system for oxidant delivery’ and the functional limitation Claim 1, ll. 30 - 31 “oxidant delivery system delivers an oxidizing agent into the combustion chamber”. In MPEP2181(I)(A) “system for…” was among a list of non-structural generic placeholders that may invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) when coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, published in 1990 defined system as “1d: a group of devices or artificial objects or an organization forming a network esp. for distributing something or serving a common purpose <a telephone ~> <a heating ~> <a highway ~> <a data processing ~>”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. On Pgs.12 – 13 of the 08/27/2026 reply Applicant stated on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 11, 12, 56 – 63, and 65 – 74 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gotzig et al. (10,968,865) in view of Nagel (10,889,892).
Regarding Claim 1, Gotzig teaches, in Figs. 1 – 7, the invention as claimed including an expulsive combustion engine (10 - shown in Fig. 1) energized by combustion of a fuel to produce thrust [Designed and intended use of bi-propellant rocket engines, i.e., expulsive combustion engine], comprising: (b) a source (24) of an oxidizing agent (oxygen - Col. 8, ll. 55 - 65); (c) a fuel intake system (16 and/or 42-30-32-28) [As discussed above ‘fuel intake system’ invokes 112(f) interpretation. The broadest reasonable interpretation reads on pipes/conduits and valves that the fuel flowed through to flow into 12.] in fluid communication with and a combustion chamber (12), wherein the fuel intake system (42-30-32-28) delivers the fuel into the combustion chamber (12 - Col. 8, ll. 30 - 35); (d) an oxidant delivery system (14 and/or 40-24-26-22) [As discussed above ‘fuel intake system’ invokes 112(f) interpretation. The broadest reasonable interpretation reads on pipes/conduits and valves that the oxidant flowed through to flow into 12.] in fluid communication with the source (24) of the oxidizing agent and the combustion chamber (12), wherein the oxidant delivery system (14 and/or 40-24-26-22) delivers the oxidizing agent into the combustion chamber (12 - Col. 8, ll. 15 - 20); (e) a control system (20) being operatively coupled (dashed lines from 20 to 26 and 32) to the fuel intake system (14 and/or 40-24-26-22) and the oxidant delivery system (14 and/or 40-24-26-22), wherein the control system (20) regulates delivery of a preselected fuel amount (Col. 8, ll. 40 – 45 “The control unit 20 is configured to control the hydrogen mass flow to be supplied to the combustion chamber 12 via the hydrogen supply valve 32.”) and a preselected oxidizing agent amount (Col. 8, ll. 25 – 30 “The control unit 20 is configured to control the oxygen mass flow to be supplied to the combustion chamber 12 via the oxygen supply valve 26.”) into the combustion chamber (12), and wherein the control system (20) controls the combustion of the fuel and the oxidizing agent when the preselected fuel amount and the preselected oxidizing agent amount are present in the combustion chamber (12 - Col. 8, ll. 5 – 20), thereby producing energy and exhaust gases [Inherent result of combustion of fuel and oxidizing agent in the combustion chamber.]; and (f) a nozzle (44) in fluid communication with the combustion chamber (12), through which the exhaust gases exit the combustion chamber (12) in a preselected direction to produce the thrust (Col. 8, l. 64 to Col. 9, l. 6).
Gotzig is silent on (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, wherein the foil envelops the reactor cup; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to an RA frequency generator and power supply; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more pairs of lamps wherein the pairs of lamps are disposed circumferentially around the RA coils and define a space between the pairs of lamps and the RA coils; and a computer processing unit configured to control the power supply, the frequency generator, and the pair of lamps; (e) a control system comprising the computer processing unit.
Nagel teaches, in Figs. 1 – 15I, Col. 1, l. 50 to Col. 2, l. 15, Col. 20, l. 25 to Col. 21, l. 15, and Col. 26, ll. 10 - 20, (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel (hydrogen - Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20 and Col. 17, ll. 30 – 50), wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet (1520 – Fig. 15B) and one or more gas outlets (1519 – Fig. 15B); a reactor chamber (1534), containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder (204 – Col. 2, ll. 20 – 30 “the nanoporous carbon powder charged to the reactor assembly”) disposed within a reactor cup (206 – Figs. 2B, 6A, and 6B) and covered with a reactor cap (205 – Figs. 2B, 6A, and 6B); a first porous frit (203, 1535 – bottom frit below 204) defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit (203, 1533 – top frit above 204) defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap (205 – Figs. 2B, 6A, and 6B); wherein each porous frit (Col. 1, ll. 60 – 65 and Col. 20, ll. 30 – 40) has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space (shown in Figs. 2B, 6A, and 6B) disposed above the reactor cap (205 – Figs. 2B, 6A, and 6B); a foil (Col. 20, ll. 40 – 45) disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, wherein the foil envelops the reactor cup (Col. 24, ll. 10 – 20 “a foil can optionally encase the chamber containing the charge material on the inside and/or outside of the frits and/or cup, thereby creating a metal boundary surrounding the starting material.”); 2, 3, 4, 5 or more RA coils (Col. 20, l. 65 to Col. 21, l. 10 and Col. 39, ll. 30 – 50) surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to an RA frequency generator and power supply; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more pairs of lamps (Col. 20, l. 65 to Col. 21, l. 10 and Col. 39, ll. 30 – 50) wherein the pairs of lamps are disposed circumferentially around the RA coils and define a space between the pairs of lamps and the RA coils; and a computer processing unit (Col. 3, ll. 25 – 30, Col. 20, ll. 50 – 55, Col. 21, ll. 5 – 15, and Col. 39, ll. 45 – 50) configured to control the power supply, the frequency generator, and the pairs of lamps (Col. 18, ll. 60 – 67); (e) a control system comprising the computer processing unit (Col. 3, ll. 25 – 30, Col. 18, ll. 60 – 67, Col. 20, ll. 50 – 55, Col. 21, ll. 5 – 15, and Col. 39, ll. 45 – 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, with the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, wherein the foil envelops the reactor cup; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to an RA frequency generator and power supply; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more pairs of lamps wherein the pairs of lamps are disposed circumferentially around the RA coils and define a space between the pairs of lamps and the RA coils; and a computer processing unit configured to control the power supply, the frequency generator, and the pairs of lamps, (e) a control system comprising the computer processing unit, taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the expulsive combustion engine energized by combustion of a fuel to produce thrust, comprising (b) a source of an oxidizing agent; (c) a fuel intake system in fluid communication with combustion chamber, wherein the fuel intake system delivers the fuel into the combustion chamber; (d) an oxidant delivery system in fluid communication with the source of the oxidizing agent and the combustion chamber, wherein the oxidant delivery system delivers the oxidizing agent into the combustion chamber; (e) a control system operatively coupled to the fuel intake system and the oxidant delivery system, and the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, wherein the foil envelops the reactor cup; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to an RA frequency generator and power supply; 2, 3, 4, 5 or more pairs of lamps wherein the pairs of lamps are disposed circumferentially around the RA coils and define a space between the pairs of lamps and the RA coils; and a computer processing unit configured to control the power supply, the frequency generator, and the pair of lamps; (e) a control system comprising the computer processing unit, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., integrating the set of one or more reactor assemblies in line (28) would have fluidly communicated the set of one or more reactor assemblies to the fuel intake system that delivered the fuel into the combustion chamber. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(A). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that in the combination of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, the control system would have comprised the computer processing unit (interpreted as a generic computer) which was configured to independently control (interpreted as a program running on the generic computer) a plurality of different devices, as taught by Nagel in Col. 3, ll. 25 – 30, Col. 18, ll. 60 – 67, Col. 20, ll. 50 – 55, Col. 21, ll. 5 – 15, Col. 39, ll. 45 – 50, and Col. 40, ll. 20 – 25.
Re Claim 4, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the fuel comprises hydrogen (Gotzig - Col. 8, ll. 55 – 65 and Nagel - Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20 and Col. 17, ll. 30 – 50).
Re Claim 5, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except, wherein the source of the oxidizing agent is a second set of RAs that produces the oxidizing agent. Nagel further teaches, in Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20 and Col. 17, ll. 30 – 50, a set of RAs that produces an oxidizing agent, e.g., oxygen.
MPEP2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts cites In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (…Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, by duplicating the reactor assembly (RA) into a plurality of reactor assemblies (RAs) which are consecutively numbered from 1 to n, where n = total number of reactor assemblies, for example, n = 6 or 10, where the even numbered RAs are the ‘first set’ that produces the fuel and the odd numbered RAs are the ‘second set’ that produces the oxidizing agent because it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Applicant’s original Specification failed to recite a new and unexpected result from a second set of RAs producing the oxidizing agent.
Re Claim 8, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including a method of producing thrust (Gotzig - Col. 8, l. 64 to Col. 9, l. 6) to propel a vehicle (rocket, see Title), comprising: (a) operatively associating the vehicle (rocket) with the expulsive combustion engine of claim 1; (b) activating the set of one or more RAs to produce the fuel (hydrogen - Col. 8, ll. 55 - 65); (c) directing (Col. 8, ll. 30 - 45) the fuel produced by the set of one or more RAs to enter the fuel intake system (14 and/or 40-24-26-22) in fluid communication with the combustion chamber (12), wherein the fuel intake system (14 and/or 40-24-26-22) directs the fuel into the combustion chamber (12); (d) providing a source (24) of the oxidizing agent (oxygen - Col. 8, ll. 55 - 65); (e) directing the oxidizing agent (oxygen - Col. 8, ll. 55 - 65) from the source (24) of the oxidizing agent into the combustion chamber (12 - Col. 8, ll. 15 - 20); (f) mixing the fuel and the oxidizing agent to form a combustion mixture (Col. 8, l. 64 to Col. 9, l. 6); (g) igniting (18) the combustion mixture to produce a combustion (Col. 7, l. 65 to Col. 8, l. 5), wherein the combustion produces energy and exhaust gases (Col. 8, ll. 64 - 67); and (h) directing the exhaust gases to exit (46 - Col. 9, ll. 1 - 6) the combustion chamber (12) in a preselected direction (toward the bottom of Fig. 1), thereby producing the thrust to propel the vehicle (Col. 9, ll. 1 - 6).
Re Claim 11, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the fuel comprises hydrogen (Gotzig - Col. 8, ll. 55 – 65 and Nagel - Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20 and Col. 17, ll. 30 – 50).
Re Claim 12, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except, wherein the source of the oxidizing agent is a second set of RAs. Nagel further teaches, in Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20 and Col. 17, ll. 30 – 50, a set of RAs that produces an oxidizing agent, e.g., oxygen.
MPEP2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts cites In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (…Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, by duplicating the reactor assembly (RA) into a plurality of reactor assemblies (RAs) which are consecutively numbered from 1 to n, where n = total number of reactor assemblies, for example, n = 6 or 10, where the even numbered RAs are the ‘first set’ that produces the fuel and the odd numbered RAs are the ‘second set’ that produces the oxidizing agent because it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Applicant’s original Specification failed to recite a new and unexpected result from a second set of RAs producing the oxidizing agent.
Re Claim 56, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the oxidizing agent is selected from the group consisting of oxygen, halogen, and hydrogen peroxide, Gotzig - Col. 8, ll. 55 – 65 and Nagel - Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20 and Col. 17, ll. 30 – 50.
Re Claim 57, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the cup is composed of graphite, Nagel - Col. 23, ll. 40 – 45.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the cup is composed of graphite, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the cup is composed of graphite, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the graphite cup material, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited cup material of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., the graphite cup material would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claim 58, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the foil is composed of platinum, Nagel - Col. 24, ll. 15 – 20.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the foil is composed of platinum, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the foil is composed of platinum, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the platinum foil material, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited foil material of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., the platinum foil material would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claims 59 and 60, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including (Claim 59) wherein the reactor assembly further comprises a pole (Nagel - Col. 27, ll. 15 – 50) disposed below the reactor chamber and above the gas inlet (1520 – Fig. 15B) and (Claim 60) wherein the pole is composed of quartz, Nagel - Col. 27, ll. 15 – 50.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the reactor assembly further comprises a quartz pole disposed below the reactor chamber and above the gas inlet arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the quartz pole disposed below the reactor chamber and above the gas inlet arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., integrating the quartz pole below the reactor chamber and above the gas inlet would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 61, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein: (Nagel - Col. 17, ll. 30 – 40 and Claim 2, Col. 40, ll. 25 – 35) the gas inlet is in fluid connection with at least one gas supply selected from the group consisting of air, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, neon, argon, krypton, xenon, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and mixtures thereof; the gas supply is free of metal salts and vaporized metals; and the gas supply is directed through a gas manifold controlled by mass flow meters.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the gas inlet is in fluid connection with at least one gas supply selected from the group consisting of air, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, neon, argon, krypton, xenon, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and mixtures thereof; the gas supply is free of metal salts and vaporized metals; and the gas supply is directed through a gas manifold controlled by mass flow meters arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the gas inlet is in fluid connection with at least one gas supply selected from the group consisting of air, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, neon, argon, krypton, xenon, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and mixtures thereof; the gas supply is free of metal salts and vaporized metals; and the gas supply is directed through a gas manifold controlled by mass flow meters arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the gas inlet to be in fluid connection with at least one gas supply selected from the group consisting of air, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, neon, argon, krypton, xenon, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and mixtures thereof wherein the gas supply is free of metal salts and vaporized metals, and wherein the gas supply is directed through a gas manifold controlled by mass flow meters would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 62, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein (Nagel - Claim 4, Col. 40, ll. 40 – 50) a first RA coil comprises a copper wire winding, a second RA coil comprises a braiding of copper wire and silver wire, and a third RA coil is a platinum wire winding and each RA coil is configured to create a magnetic field and wherein each power supply independently provides AC and/or DC current.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the first RA coil comprises a copper wire winding, a second RA coil comprises a braiding of copper wire and silver wire, and a third RA coil is a platinum wire winding and each RA coil is configured to create a magnetic field and wherein each power supply independently provides AC and/or DC current, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the first RA coil comprises a copper wire winding, a second RA coil comprises a braiding of copper wire and silver wire, and a third RA coil is a platinum wire winding and each RA coil is configured to create a magnetic field and wherein each power supply independently provides AC and/or DC current, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the RA coil materials and arrangements, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited RA coil material and arrangement of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., the first RA coil being a copper wire winding, the second RA coil being a braiding of copper wire and silver wire, and the third RA coil being a platinum wire winding wherein each RA coil is configured to create a magnetic field and wherein each power supply independently provides AC and/or DC current to said RA coils would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claim 63, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including (Nagel - Claim 5, Col. 40, ll. 45 – 60) 5 RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to one or more RA frequency generators and one or more power supplies; wherein a first RA coil is aligned with the first frit, a second RA coil is aligned with the reactor chamber, a third RA coil is aligned with the second frit, a fourth RA coil is disposed between the first RA and the second RA coil and a fifth RA coil is disposed between the second RA coil and third RA coil.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the 5 RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to one or more RA frequency generators and one or more power supplies; wherein a first RA coil is aligned with the first frit, a second RA coil is aligned with the reactor chamber, a third RA coil is aligned with the second frit, a fourth RA coil is disposed between the first RA and the second RA coil and a fifth RA coil is disposed between the second RA coil and third RA coil arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the 5 RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space operably connected to one or more RA frequency generators and one or more power supplies; wherein a first RA coil is aligned with the first frit, a second RA coil is aligned with the reactor chamber, a third RA coil is aligned with the second frit, a fourth RA coil is disposed between the first RA and the second RA coil and a fifth RA coil is disposed between the second RA coil and third RA coil, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the RA coil arrangement, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited RA coil arrangement of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the 5 RA coils surrounding the reactor chamber and/or reactor head space to be operably connected to one or more RA frequency generators and one or more power supplies; wherein a first RA coil is aligned with the first frit, a second RA coil is aligned with the reactor chamber, a third RA coil is aligned with the second frit, a fourth RA coil is disposed between the first RA and the second RA coil and a fifth RA coil is disposed between the second RA coil and third RA coil would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claim 65, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including (Nagel - Claim 7, Col. 40, ll. 60 – 67) wherein a first pair of RA lamps are configured in a first plane defined by a center axis and a first radius of the reactor chamber, a second pair of RA lamps are configured in a second plane defined by the center axis and a second radius of the reactor chamber and a third pair of RA lamps are configured in a third plane defined by the center axis and a third radius of the reactor chamber.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the first pair of RA lamps are configured in a first plane defined by a center axis and a first radius of the reactor chamber, a second pair of RA lamps are configured in a second plane defined by the center axis and a second radius of the reactor chamber and a third pair of RA lamps are configured in a third plane defined by the center axis and a third radius of the reactor chamber arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the first pair of RA lamps are configured in a first plane defined by a center axis and a first radius of the reactor chamber, a second pair of RA lamps are configured in a second plane defined by the center axis and a second radius of the reactor chamber and a third pair of RA lamps are configured in a third plane defined by the center axis and a third radius of the reactor chamber arrangement, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the first pair of RA lamps are configured in a first plane defined by a center axis and a first radius of the reactor chamber, a second pair of RA lamps are configured in a second plane defined by the center axis and a second radius of the reactor chamber and a third pair of RA lamps are configured in a third plane defined by the center axis and a third radius of the reactor chamber arrangement, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited pairs of lamps arrangement of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the first pair of RA lamps in a first plane defined by a center axis and a first radius of the reactor chamber, a second pair of RA lamps are arranged in a second plane defined by the center axis and a second radius of the reactor chamber and a third pair of RA lamps are arranged in a third plane defined by the center axis and a third radius of the reactor chamber would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claim 66, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including wherein the reactor assembly further comprises (Nagel - Claim 1, Col. 39, l. 45 to Col. 40, l. 25) an electromagnetic embedding apparatus (E/MEE) located upstream of the gas inlet comprising: one or more gas supplies; a housing having a housing inlet and housing outlet; an upstream gas line that is in fluid connection with each gas supply and the housing inlet; an internal gas line in fluid connection with the housing inlet and housing outlet; a downstream gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and the RA gas inlet; at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned below the internal gas line, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned above the internal gas line and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned to the side of the internal gas line; wherein each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently rotatably mounted, located along the length of the internal gas line, and powered by the power supply; wherein the computer processing unit independently controls powering each E/MEE pencil lamp and the rotation position of each E/MEE pencil lamp.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the electromagnetic embedding apparatus (E/MEE) located upstream of the gas inlet comprising: one or more gas supplies; a housing having a housing inlet and housing outlet; an upstream gas line that is in fluid connection with each gas supply and the housing inlet; an internal gas line in fluid connection with the housing inlet and housing outlet; a downstream gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and the RA gas inlet; at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned below the internal gas line, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned above the internal gas line and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned to the side of the internal gas line; wherein each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently rotatably mounted, located along the length of the internal gas line, and powered by the power supply; wherein the computer processing unit independently controls powering each E/MEE pencil lamp and the rotation position of each E/MEE pencil lamp arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the electromagnetic embedding apparatus (E/MEE) located upstream of the gas inlet comprising: one or more gas supplies; a housing having a housing inlet and housing outlet; an upstream gas line that is in fluid connection with each gas supply and the housing inlet; an internal gas line in fluid connection with the housing inlet and housing outlet; a downstream gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and the RA gas inlet; at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned below the internal gas line, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned above the internal gas line and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned to the side of the internal gas line; wherein each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently rotatably mounted, located along the length of the internal gas line, and powered by the power supply; wherein the computer processing unit independently controls powering each E/MEE pencil lamp and the rotation position of each E/MEE pencil lamp arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the electromagnetic embedding apparatus (E/MEE) to be located upstream of the gas inlet comprising: one or more gas supplies; a housing having a housing inlet and housing outlet; an upstream gas line that is in fluid connection with each gas supply and the housing inlet; an internal gas line in fluid connection with the housing inlet and housing outlet; a downstream gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and the RA gas inlet; at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned below the internal gas line, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned above the internal gas line and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp positioned to the side of the internal gas line; wherein each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently rotatably mounted, located along the length of the internal gas line, and powered by the power supply; wherein the computer processing unit independently controls powering each E/MEE pencil lamp and the rotation position of each E/MEE pencil lamp would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 67, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including (Nagel - Claim 8, Col. 41, ll. 1 – 5) wherein the housing is closed and opaque, the internal gas line is transparent and external gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and gas inlet is opaque.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the housing is closed and opaque, the internal gas line is transparent and external gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and gas inlet is opaque arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the housing is closed and opaque, the internal gas line is transparent and external gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and gas inlet is opaque arrangement, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the housing is closed and opaque, the internal gas line is transparent and external gas line in fluid connection with the housing outlet and gas inlet is opaque arrangement, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited optical properties and fluid arrangement of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the housing to be closed and opaque, the internal gas line to be transparent and arranging the external gas line to be in fluid connection with the housing outlet and arranging the gas inlet to be opaque would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claim 68, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including (Nagel - Claim 1, Col. 39, l. 55 to Col. 40, l. 10) wherein: at least 5 E/MEE pencil lamps are located along the internal gas line; each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently placed such that its longitudinal axis is (i) parallel to the internal gas line, (ii) disposed radially in a vertical plane to the internal gas line, or (iii) perpendicular to the plane created along the longitudinal axis of the internal gas line or along the vertical axis of the internal gas line; and each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently affixed to one or more pivots that permit rotation between about 0 and 360 degrees with respect to the x, y, and/or z axis wherein (i) the x- axis is defined as the axis parallel to the gas line and its vertical plane, (ii) the y-axis defining the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its horizontal plane, and (iii) the z-axis is defined as the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its vertical plane.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the at least 5 E/MEE pencil lamps are located along the internal gas line; each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently placed such that its longitudinal axis is (i) parallel to the internal gas line, (ii) disposed radially in a vertical plane to the internal gas line, or (iii) perpendicular to the plane created along the longitudinal axis of the internal gas line or along the vertical axis of the internal gas line; and each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently affixed to one or more pivots that permit rotation between about 0 and 360 degrees with respect to the x, y, and/or z axis wherein (i) the x- axis is defined as the axis parallel to the gas line and its vertical plane, (ii) the y-axis defining the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its horizontal plane, and (iii) the z-axis is defined as the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its vertical plane arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the at least 5 E/MEE pencil lamps are located along the internal gas line; each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently placed such that its longitudinal axis is (i) parallel to the internal gas line, (ii) disposed radially in a vertical plane to the internal gas line, or (iii) perpendicular to the plane created along the longitudinal axis of the internal gas line or along the vertical axis of the internal gas line; and each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently affixed to one or more pivots that permit rotation between about 0 and 360 degrees with respect to the x, y, and/or z axis wherein (i) the x- axis is defined as the axis parallel to the gas line and its vertical plane, (ii) the y-axis defining the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its horizontal plane, and (iii) the z-axis is defined as the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its vertical plane arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the at least 5 E/MEE pencil lamps to be located along the internal gas line; each E/MEE pencil lamp is independently placed such that its longitudinal axis is (i) parallel to the internal gas line, (ii) disposed radially in a vertical plane to the internal gas line, or (iii) perpendicular to the plane created along the longitudinal axis of the internal gas line or along the vertical axis of the internal gas line; and arranging each E/MEE pencil lamp to be independently affixed to one or more pivots that permit rotation between about 0 and 360 degrees with respect to the x, y, and/or z axis wherein (i) the x- axis is defined as the axis parallel to the gas line and its vertical plane, (ii) the y-axis defining the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its horizontal plane, and (iii) the z-axis is defined as the axis perpendicular to the gas line and parallel to its vertical plane would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 69, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, including (Nagel - Claims 10 and 11, Col. 41, ll. 5 – 15) wherein at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a neon lamp, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a krypton lamp, and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is an argon lamp.
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a neon lamp, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a krypton lamp, and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is an argon lamp arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a neon lamp, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a krypton lamp, and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is an argon lamp arrangement, were known in the art, and one skilled in the art could have substituted the at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a neon lamp, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is a krypton lamp, and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp is an argon lamp arrangement, further taught by Nagel, for the non-recited E/MEE pencil lamp type and arrangement of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., substituted the at least one E/MEE pencil lamp to be a neon lamp, at least one E/MEE pencil lamp to be a krypton lamp, and at least one E/MEE pencil lamp to be an argon lamp arrangement would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Re Claim 73, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, and Nagel further teaches wherein the E/MEE apparatus further comprises a short wave lamp (105 – Fig. 1) and/or a long wave lamp (104 – Fig. 1) (Nagel - Col. 2, ll. 35 – 45, Col. 3, ll. 15 – 20, Col. 17, ll. 20 – 25, Col. 18, ll. 40 – 45, and Col. 19, ll. 40 – 45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the E/MEE apparatus further comprises a short wave lamp and/or a long wave lamp arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the E/MEE apparatus further comprises a short wave lamp and/or a long wave lamp arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the E/MEE apparatus include a short wave lamp and/or a long wave lamp arrangement would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 74, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, and Nagel further teaches wherein the E/MEE apparatus further comprises an E/MEE coil (120 – Fig. 1) wrapped around the internal gas line (102), (Nagel - Col. 2, ll. 65 – 67, Col. 3, ll. 15 – 20, Col. 17, ll. 20 – 25, Col. 18, ll. 50 – 60, and Col. 40, ll. 15 – 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the E/MEE coil wrapped around the internal gas line arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the E/MEE coil wrapped around the internal gas line arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the E/MEE coil to be wrapped around the internal gas line would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 70, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, and Nagel further teaches, in Col. 2, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 2, ll. 35 – 40, Col. 4, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 4, ll. 20 – 25, Col. 4, ll. 35 – 40, Col. 4, ll. 50 – 55, Col. 20, ll. 20 – 25, Col. 25, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 26, ll. 25 – 40, Col. 26, ll. 50 – 65, Col. 27, ll. 1 – 15, and Col. 28, l. 60 to Col. 29, l. 5, Col. 35, ll. 30 – 40, Col. 36, ll. 30 – 40, and Col. 39, ll. 40 – 45, wherein the reactor assembly further comprises an x-ray source (211 – Fig. 2C, 429 – Fig. 4A, and 424 – Fig. 4B, 1549 – Fig. 15E, 1562 – Fig. 15F, 1574 – Fig. 15G, 1588 – Fig. 15H, and 15104 – Fig. 15I) configured to expose the reactor head space to x-rays.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the x-ray source configured to expose the reactor head space to x-rays, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the x-ray source configured to expose the reactor head space to x-rays, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., integrating the x-ray source configured to expose the reactor head space to x-rays would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 71, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, and Nagel further teaches, in Col. 2, ll. 5 – 15, Col. 4, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 4, ll. 20 – 25, Col. 4, ll. 35 – 40, Col. 4, ll. 50 – 55, Col. 20, ll. 45 – 50, Col. 21, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 24, ll. 30 – 40, Col. 25, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 26, ll. 40 – 50, Col. 26, ll. 55 – 60, Col. 27, ll. 1 – 10, Col. 35, ll. 35 – 40, Col. 36, ll. 35 – 40, and Col. 40, ll. 55 – 60, wherein the reactor assembly further comprises one or more lasers configured to direct a laser towards a frit and/or through the reactor chamber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the one or more lasers configured to direct a laser towards a frit and/or through the reactor chamber, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the one or more lasers configured to direct a laser towards a frit and/or through the reactor chamber, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., configuring the one or more lasers to direct a laser towards a frit and/or through the reactor chamber would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Re Claim 72, Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above, and Nagel further teaches, in Col. 24, ll. 30 – 40, Col. 25, ll. 5 – 10, Col. 26, ll. 40 – 50, Col. 26, ll. 55 – 60, Col. 27, ll. 1 – 10, Col. 35, ll. 35 – 40, Col. 36, ll. 35 – 40, and Col. 40, ll. 55 – 60, wherein the reactor assembly comprises at least two lasers (212 – Fig. 2C, 426 and 427 – Fig. 4B, 1575 and 1576 – Fig. 15G, 1589 and 1590 – Fig. 15H, 15105 and 15106 – Fig. 15I) and wherein each laser is characterized by a different wavelength (Col. 35, ll. 35 – 40 “A 405 nm laser (427) was turned on immediately followed by a 532 nm laser (426) and held for 22 seconds.” And Col. 36, ll. 35 – 40 “A 405 nm laser was then turned on immediately followed by a 532 nm laser (426) followed by a 22 second hold period.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, with the at least two lasers characterized by a different wavelength arrangement, further taught by Nagel, because all the claimed elements, i.e., the (a) a set of one or more reactor assemblies (RAs) that produces the fuel, wherein each of the one or more reactor assemblies comprises: a gas inlet and one or more gas outlets; a reactor chamber, containing a nanoporous carbon material or powder disposed within a reactor cup and covered with a reactor cap; a first porous frit defining a floor of the reactor chamber, and a second porous frit defining the ceiling of the reactor chamber and disposed below the reactor cap; wherein each porous frit has a porosity that is sufficient to allow a gas to permeate into the reactor chamber and contain a nanoporous carbon material or powder; a reactor head space disposed above the reactor cap; a foil disposed between the reactor chamber and reactor cup, and the at least two lasers characterized by a different wavelength arrangement, were known in the art, in combination each one of the components would perform the same function as it did separately, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, with no change in their respective functions, to yield predictable results, i.e., arranging the at least two lasers to have different wavelength would have facilitated operation of the reactor assemblies. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1395; MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on Pg. 12 under heading “A. "Fuel Intake System" and "Oxidant Delivery System" Do Not Invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f)” that “A person of skill in the art would immediately recognize these terms as referring to structural flow paths carrying liquid or gaseous reactants to a combustion chamber.” This argument is not persuasive because the arguments of counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record. In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 43 USPQ2d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (“An assertion of what seems to follow from common experience is just attorney argument and not the kind of factual evidence that is required to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness.”); MPEP 2145. Applicant failed to cite any factual evidence in the record to support Applicant’s allegations. In fact, the combustion arts include “fuel intake systems” carrying solid reactants to a combustion chamber or carrying a slurry of reactants to a combustion chamber. Similarly, the combustion arts include “Oxidant Delivery systems” carrying solid reactants to a combustion chamber. Furthermore, on Pgs. 12 – 13 under heading “B. The Specification Discloses Overwhelming Corresponding Structure an Clear Linkage” Applicant stated on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed functions of the “fuel intake system” and “Oxidant Delivery system”. Consequently, the 112(f) interpretation is maintained.
Applicant argues on Pgs. 14 - 15 that “The Examiner's rejection is built upon a fundamental, factual misunderstanding of the disclosure of NAGEL. Specifically, the Examiner asserts that NAGEL teaches a reactor assembly that "produces the fuel" (specifically hydrogen), which is factually incorrect.” Applicant further argues on Pg. 15, second paragraph that “Although the metal nano- or macrostructures produced by NAGEL may comprise a gas such as hydrogen, NAGEL does not teach or suggest the instantiation, isolation, or output a combustible fuel substance (such as hydrogen) to be burned in an engine.” Applicant’s arguments are explicitly refuted by Nagel. Nagel explicitly teaches, in Col. 13, ll. 10 – 20, “Additionally, or alternatively, the invention can instantiate or quantum print materials containing carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorous, selenium, hydrogen, and/or halides (e.g., F, Cl, Br and I).” As taught by Gotzig, hydrogen and oxygen were known propellants, e.g., fuel and oxidizer, respectively, that were burned in a rocket engine to produce propulsive thrust. Nagel further teaches, in Col. 17, ll. 1 – 30, an apparatus for gas processing. Nagel further teaches, in Col. 1, ll. 54 – 60, “More specifically, the invention includes a reactor assembly comprising: (a) A gas inlet and one or more gas outlets;”. Nagel further teaches, in Col. 17, ll. 55 – 65, “FIG. 1 is an illustration of an E/MEE of the invention. Gas enters the E/MEE via the inlet 101, or entrance, in line 102 and exits at the outlet, or exit, 110. The inlet 101 and outlet 110 may optionally have valves.” Nagel further teaches, in Col. 17, ll. 45 – 55, a continuous flow rate of gases ranging from 0.01 standard liters per minute (SLPM) to 100 SLPM or more through the reactor assembly. Consequently, Applicant’s arguments are explicitly refuted by Nagel’s teachings. The rejections are maintained.
Applicant further argues on Pg. 15, fourth paragraph that “However, the introduction of elemental metal nanoparticles and elemental macrostructures from NAGEL would not provide the required oxygen-hydrogen fuel mixture, rendering GOTZIG's rocket engine completely inoperable.” This argument is not persuasive because Applicant is arguing against Applicant’s own invention. If, as alleged by Applicant, the combination of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, would be “completely inoperable” then Applicant’s claimed invention would similarly be “completely inoperable” because Nagel teaches reactor assemblies that were structurally and functional identical to the reactor assemblies of the claimed invention. The rejections are maintained.
In response to applicant's argument on Pg. 15, second from last paragraph that that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Applicant has failed to argue exactly what knowledge was allegedly gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure. Furthermore, the combination of Gotzig, i.v., Nagel, took into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, therefore such a reconstruction is proper. The rejections are maintained.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LORNE E MEADE whose telephone number is (571)270-7570. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 EST.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/LORNE E MEADE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
