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
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, 3, 5, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2022-009048.
Regarding claim 1, JP ‘048 (see the claims, paragraphs [0008], [0074]-[0087], and [0097]-[0105], example 2, fig. 1, 3, 7, and 8A, etc.) describes a process for generating hydrogen and graphitic carbon by bringing hydrocarbon gas and iron oxide, which serves as a catalyst, into contact in a plurality of pressure reactors disposed in series and indicates that the catalyst flows from a first reactor to a reactor of a higher pressure (corresponding to the "step for continuously causing a catalyst to flow through the first reactor and then to flow through the second reactor" of the present application).
Further, JP ‘048 describes an aspect in which the hydrocarbon gas is supplied to a reactor of a higher pressure and caused to flow against the flow of the catalyst and an aspect in which the hydrocarbon gas is supplied to a reactor of a lower pressure and caused to flow in parallel with the flow of the catalyst. The former corresponds to the aspect of the present application in which the "starting material gas" flows from the "second reactor" toward the "first reactor", and the latter corresponds to the aspect of the present application in which the "starting material gas" flows from the "first reactor" toward the "second reactor".
Regarding claim 3, JP ‘048 indicates that the pressure in the reactor of the lower pressure is 1 bar (atmospheric pressure) and that the pressure in the reactor of the higher pressure is 18 bar (1.8 MPa) (Preferred Embodiment of Invention).
Regarding claim 5, JP ‘048 indicates that the temperature when the catalyst and the hydrocarbon gas are brought into contact is 600°C-1000°C (Claim 1).
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.
Claim(s) 4, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2022-009048.
Regarding claim 4, JP ‘048 indicates that, when the pressure is increased, the methane conversion amount decreases and the carbon yield increases, and that, when the pressure is decreased, the methane conversion amount increases and the carbon yield decreases (example 2). Consequently, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art, on the basis of the above-mentioned description, to select the methane conversion ratio to suit the demand of hydrogen and carbon, by deciding the pressure accordingly.
Regarding claims 6-7, from fig. 7 of JP ‘048, it can be seen that the gas having flown out from the reactor of the lower pressure (corresponding to the "first reactor" of the present application) is separated by PSA into hydrocarbon gas and hydrogen, and the hydrocarbon gas is supplied to the reactor of the higher pressure (corresponding to the "second reactor" of the present application), and therefore, JP ‘048 is considered to describe returning a part of the gas having flown out from the reactor to the reactor and reusing said part of the gas.
Consequently, it would have been obvious to return some of the outflow gas to the reactor in order to reuse the hydrocarbon gas also in the aspect of the invention described in JP ‘048 in which the hydrocarbon gas is supplied to the reactor of the lower pressure and caused to flow in parallel to the flow of the catalyst (corresponding to the aspect in which the "starting material gas" flows from the "first reactor" toward the "second reactor").
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2022-009048 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2006-315891.
JP ‘048 does not expressly state that the catalyst is an unsupported catalyst comprising an aggregate of a plurality of metallic particles having an iron purity of 86% or more.
JP ‘891 teaches a similar process of direct cracking of hydrocarbons (Technical Problem). The catalyst may be fine iron particles (Example 2). The catalyst may be unsupported (Best Mode), which would mean that the catalyst may be solely fine iron particles (Example 2).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art to perform the process of JP ‘048 including the catalyst is an unsupported catalyst comprising an aggregate of a plurality of metallic particles having an iron purity of 86% or more in view of JP ‘891. The rationale for doing so would have been to select a known catalyst used in a similar way that would have provided predictable results. See MPEP 2143.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A FIORITO whose telephone number is (571)272-9921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Amber Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/JAMES A FIORITO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1731
Prosecution Insights