DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "The logic control system" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This may be changed to “The apparatus” to overcome this rejection.
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) 1-5, 8-11 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Christensen (US 2023/0137348 A1).
Christensen ‘348 teaches an air treatment system comprising a first desiccant wheel (9) that receives ambient air (1) for moisture removal to produce a second stream (20), a process unit including a second desiccant wheel (14) and a temperature swing adsorption carbon dioxide capture unit (34) that each undergo an adsorption/regeneration cycle, and a cooler (16) upstream of the second desiccant wheel. A product stream (33) exiting the carbon dioxide capture unit is divided into portions (21,5) that are used to desorb moisture from regeneration sectors of the desiccant wheels such that a mixture of the product stream and desorbed moisture are discharged to atmosphere (see figure 1, paragraphs 33-37, 40, 42-46). The desiccant and carbon dioxide adsorbents can both be considered to be bifunctional in that they are inherently capable of adsorbing other types of gases or acting as heat exchangers. The cooler (16) controls the second stream to a temperature of 15°C (paragraph 61).
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9, 10 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ritter et al. (US 2020/0009494 A1).
Ritter et al. ‘494 teach an air treatment system comprising a first desiccant wheel (32) that receives ambient air (2) for moisture removal to produce a second stream (4), and a process unit including a second desiccant wheel (30) and a pressure swing adsorption carbon dioxide capture unit (PSA) that each undergo an adsorption/regeneration cycle. A product stream (4) exiting the carbon dioxide capture unit is used to desorb moisture from regeneration sectors of the desiccant wheels such that a mixture of the product stream and desorbed moisture is vented (see figure 4, paragraphs 22, 26, 27, 29, 35, 36, 39, 41 and 42). The desiccant and carbon dioxide adsorbents can both be considered to be bifunctional in that they are inherently capable of adsorbing other types of gases or acting as heat exchangers.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any one of Christensen ‘348 of Ritter et al. ‘494 in view of Cirucci et al. (US 2024/0017202 A1).
Any one of Christensen ‘348 of Ritter et al. ‘494 discloses all of the limitations of the claim except that the carbon capture unit is a moisture swing unit. Cirucci et al. ‘202 disclose a carbon dioxide capture system that can use moisture swing adsorption as an alternative to pressure or temperature swing adsorption (see abstract, paragraph 34). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the carbon capture unit of the primary references by using a moisture swing arrangement in order to avoid the need for heating or pressurization and their related costs.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christensen ‘348 in view of Repasky et al. (US 2025/0058272 A1).
Christensen ‘348 discloses all of the limitations of the claims except that there is a logic control system including a processor and memory with instructions to receive a temperature or moisture content measurement of a stream and then adjust the temperature or moisture content of the stream based on a cost to capture CO2 on a net removal basis. Repasky et al. ‘272 disclose a carbon dioxide capture arrangement that uses a controller with a computer readable medium to compare a sensed temperature in a stream with a threshold and adjust the stream (see abstract, paragraph 173). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Christensen ‘348 by using the control arrangement of Repasky et al. ‘272 in order to provide automated control and optimization of process streams so that an acceptable level of moisture or CO2 is captured without wasting excess energy in the capture and release cycle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional references listed on the attached PTO-892 form disclose moisture and carbon dioxide capture arrangements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK LAWRENCE whose telephone number is (571)272-1161. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-7pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK M LAWRENCE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
fl
Prosecution Insights