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 . Claims 1-18 of the amended claim set received 11/27/2024 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “feeding the hydrogen containing stream to a purification unit and increasing the hydrogen content of the hydrogen containing stream to produce a hydrogen-enriched stream and a tail gas” of claim 5; “feeding the tail gas to the fuel combustion zone” of claim 14; and “wherein the fuel stream comprises one or more additional fuel sources selected from hydrogen, natural gas, methane, refinery off gas, biogas, the tail gas from the hydrogen purification unit, and a portion of the hydrogen containing stream from the ammonia cracking reactor” of claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "may" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Claim 9 also recites “oxygen in an amount greater of from 5 mol% to 25 mol%” where it is unclear what values are being claimed.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention.
Claim 15 recites the limitations "the tail gas" and “the hydrogen purification unit”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7-8, 12-13, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bulat (US 2018/0355794).
Regarding Claim 1, Bulat discloses in the figure, a process for generating power using a gas turbine 2+6 fueled by a carbon free fuel 24 derived from the catalytic cracking of ammonia 3, the process comprising:
supplying an ammonia stream to an ammonia cracking reactor 5;
cracking the ammonia in the ammonia stream (from 3) in the ammonia cracking reactor 5 to produce a hydrogen containing stream 24;
combining the hydrogen containing stream with an oxygen containing feed (compressed flow from compressor 1) and combusting the hydrogen containing stream 24 with the oxygen containing feed to produce a combusted gas stream 26;
using the combusted gas stream 26 to drive a gas turbine 6 and produce an oxygen containing off-gas stream 34;
supplying at least a portion of the oxygen containing off-gas stream 34 to a fuel combustion zone 7; and
combusting a fuel stream 30 or 28 and the oxygen containing off-gas stream 34 in the fuel combustion zone 7 to produce heat energy (in the stream 20) for the ammonia cracking reactor 5 (as read in para. 0016).
Regarding Claim 7, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the oxygen containing feed (compressed flow from compressor 1) is a compressed oxygen containing feed.
Regarding Claim 8, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the oxygen containing feed is air, oxygen, or oxygen-enriched air (read first sentence of para. 0016).
Regarding Claim 12, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the fuel stream 28 comprises ammonia (the fuel stream 28 is an ammonia stream as read in para. 0018).
Regarding Claim 13, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the fuel stream 28 comprises ammonia in an amount of from 1 mol% to 100 mol% of the total fuel stream (the fuel stream 28 is an ammonia stream as read in para. 0018), preferably from 5 mol% to 75 mol%, from 10 mol% to 50 mol%, or from 15 mol% to 30 mol% of the total fuel stream.
Regarding Claim 15, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the fuel stream 30 comprises one or more additional fuel sources selected from hydrogen, natural gas, methane, refinery off gas, biogas, the tail gas from the hydrogen purification unit, and a portion of the hydrogen containing stream from the ammonia cracking reactor (hydrogen as read at para. 0018).
Regarding Claim 16, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the fuel stream 28 comprises ammonia and the ammonia containing fuel stream is supplied from the same source 38 as the ammonia stream being supplied to the ammonia cracking reactor 5.
Regarding Claim 17, Bulat discloses in the figure, wherein the heat energy produced by combustion using the oxygen containing off-gas stream in the combustion zone 7 provides more than 50% and up to 100% of the heat energy required by the ammonia cracking reactor 5 (the elevated temperature of the reactor 5 is achieved by the flow 20 produced in the combustion zone 7 while no other heat input is shown).
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 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bulat (US 2018/0355794) in view of Cocks (US 2022/0162999).
Regarding Claims 2 and 3, Bulat discloses the invention as discussed above. Bulat does not disclose the step of pre-heating the ammonia stream to a temperature of from 350 °C to 1000 °C or wherein the temperature of the ammonia stream at the inlet of the ammonia cracking reactor is in the range of 350 °C to 1000 °C, from 400 to 950°C, from 450 °C to 850 °C, or from 500 °C to 750 °C. Bulat discloses heating the ammonia stream in the reactor 5 as opposed to pre-heating the ammonia stream.
Cocks also discloses, as shown in Fig. 1, supplying an ammonia stream 78 to an ammonia cracking reactor 74; cracking the ammonia in the ammonia stream in the ammonia cracking reactor 74 to produce a hydrogen containing stream 80; and combining the hydrogen containing stream 80 with an oxygen containing feed 58 and combusting (within 46) the hydrogen containing stream with the oxygen containing feed to produce a combusted gas stream 60 and using the gas stream 60 to drive a gas turbine 48. Cocks teaches in Fig. 1 and para. 0036 preheating the ammonia flow 78 before the inlet of the cracking reactor 74 as shown in the figure at the left-most arrow 56 of the figure and wherein the ammonia stream 78 at the inlet of the ammonia cracking device 74 is preheated in the range of 350 °C to 1000 °C (above 500°C as read in the citation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Bulat to include pre-heating the ammonia stream at the inlet of the ammonia cracking reactor to 350 °C to 1000 °C as taught by Cocks in order to achieve ammonia decomposition (Cocks paras. 0035-0036).
Regarding Claim 4, Bulat discloses the claimed invention as discussed above. Bulat discloses the decomposition/cracking of the reactor can be controlled (para. 0016) but does not explicitly disclose the hydrogen containing stream comprises from 40 mol% to 75 mol% hydrogen.
Cocks also discloses, as shown in Fig. 1, supplying an ammonia stream 78 to an ammonia cracking reactor 74; cracking the ammonia in the ammonia stream in the ammonia cracking reactor 74 to produce a hydrogen containing stream (outlet flow from reactor 74); and combining the hydrogen containing stream with an oxygen containing feed 58 and combusting (within 46) the hydrogen containing stream with the oxygen containing feed to produce a combusted gas stream 60 and using the gas stream 60 to drive a gas turbine 48. Cocks teaches in paras. 0034 and 0038, a conversion rate of ammonia to hydrogen and nitrogen over 80%, which amounts to a hydrogen containing stream comprising 66.7 to 75 mol% hydrogen.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include wherein the hydrogen containing stream comprises from 40 mol% to 75 mol% hydrogen as part of an art recognized suitability teaching by Cocks of this mol% for the intended purpose of providing a hydrogen containing stream suitable for combustion with an oxygen containing stream in a gas turbine.
Regarding Claims 5 and 6, Bulat discloses the claimed invention as discussed above but does not disclose further comprising the step of feeding the hydrogen containing stream to a purification unit and increasing the hydrogen content of the hydrogen containing stream to produce a hydrogen-enriched stream and a tail gas and wherein the hydrogen-enriched stream comprises from 50 mol% to 100 mol% hydrogen.
Cocks also discloses, as shown in Fig. 1, supplying an ammonia stream 78 to an ammonia cracking reactor 74; cracking the ammonia in the ammonia stream in the ammonia cracking reactor 74 to produce a hydrogen containing stream (outlet flow from reactor 74); and combining the hydrogen containing stream with an oxygen containing feed 58 and combusting (within 46) the hydrogen containing stream with the oxygen containing feed to produce a combusted gas stream 60 and using the gas stream 60 to drive a gas turbine 48. Cocks teaches in Fig. 1 feeding the hydrogen containing stream to a purification unit 76 and increasing the hydrogen content of the hydrogen containing stream to produce a hydrogen-enriched stream 80 and a tail gas 82 and wherein the hydrogen-enriched stream comprises from 50 mol% to 100 mol% hydrogen (residual ammonia is removed as read in para. 0039 such that the hydrogen enriched stream is at least 75 mol% given the molar breakdown of ammonia into its constituents described in the same paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Bulat to include the purification unit taught by Cocks in order to remove residual ammonia to provide lower NOx emissions (Cocks para. 0039).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bulat (US 2018/0355794) in view of Allam (2023/0150817).
Regarding Claims 9 and 10, Bulat discloses the claimed invention as discussed above. Bulat discloses the oxygen containing off-gas is the exhaust stream of the gas turbine engine but does not disclose wherein the oxygen containing off-gas stream may comprise oxygen in an amount greater of from 5 mol% to 25 mol% and wherein the oxygen containing off-gas stream is supplied to the fuel combustion zone at a temperature of from 500 °C to 800 °C, from 500 °C to 750 °C, or from 600 °C to 700 °C.
Allam discloses in para. 0146, a gas turbine engine exhaust stream/oxygen containing off-gas generally contains about 11-13% oxygen and has a temperature of about 400 to 650 C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the time of invention that the oxygen containing off-gas contains oxygen in an amount from 5 mol% to 25 mol% and a temperature of 500 to 800 C given the Allam teaching that these are values typically found in gas turbine exhaust streams.
Claims 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bulat (US 2018/0355794) in view of Pedersen (2008/0132588).
Regarding Claim 18, Bulat discloses the claim 1 invention as discussed above. Bulat discloses the fuel source for the gas turbine is ammonia 3 but does not disclose implementing the process of claim 1 in an ammonia production facility.
Pedersen discloses in Fig. 1, a process for generating power using a gas turbine engine 160 for generating power 187 and fueled by a fuel 40. Pedersen teaches the fuel 40 is produced within the same plant (captured in Fig. 1; produced at 30) where the gas turbine engine 160 is located.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Bulat such that the process of claim 1 is implemented at a fuel production facility where the fuel source is produced as taught by Pedersen in order to have an integrated fuel production and electric power production facility that can provide both the fuel and electric power (Pedersen para. 0004). It is further obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Bulat operates on ammonia so would be implemented in an ammonia production facility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 14 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose or form a reasonable combination teaching the following in combination with the base claim and intervening claim limitation -
Regarding Claim 11, “wherein the portion of the oxygen containing off-gas stream supplied to the fuel combustion zone is from 5% to 75%, from 7% to 50%, from 8% to 30%, or from 9% to 20% of the total off-gas stream exiting the gas turbine.”
Regarding Claim 14, “wherein the process comprises the step of feeding the tail gas to the fuel combustion zone; and combusting the fuel stream and the tail gas with the oxygen containing off-gas.”
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the attached Notice of References Cited.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENE D FORD whose telephone number is (571)272-8140. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.D.F/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights