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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on March 17, 2026 has been received and considered. Claim 11 is canceled. Claims 1-10 and 12-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on March 17, 2026 have been fully considered.
A. Applicant has amended independent claim 8 to incorporate the subject matter from dependent claim 11, which was not rejected based upon prior art. As such, the rejection of claim 8 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hall et al. (US 7,108,070) and the rejections of claim 9, 10, and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. in view of secondary references are withdrawn. Also, the rejections of claims 8-10 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff (GB 2357140 A) in view of secondary references are withdrawn.
B. With respect to the rejections of claims 13-16 and 18-20 based upon the prior art to Hall et al., Applicant’s arguments are not found persuasive.
For the rejection of claims 13-14 under 35 U.S.C. 102, Applicant (at pages 11-12) argues, “Hall does not disclose “sustainable aviation fuel””. The Office respectfully disagrees.
Independent claim 13 recites an apparatus comprising “a sustainable aviation fuel system which produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the dry natural gas.” As described by Applicant’s specification (see, e.g., paragraph [0025]), shown in FIG. 3, and set forth by dependent claim 14, the structural elements which perform the recited function of producing sustainable aviation fuel 235 include: (i) a natural gas reforming apparatus 210, (ii) a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus 220, and (iii) a product upgrading apparatus 230.
Hall discloses an apparatus (see FIG. 2) comprising a fuel system (i.e., a GTL conversion facility 10) that produces hydrocarbon fuels such as diesel, gasoline, or any other desired fuel from dry natural gas. The fuel system 10 likewise includes: (i) a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a syngas production apparatus comprising a syngas reactor 30; see column 4, lines 4-27); (ii) a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a F-T Synthesis apparatus with a liquids production unit 32; see column 4, lines 28-34); and (iii) a product upgrading apparatus (i.e., a hydro-cracking apparatus comprising a hydrocracker unit 34; see column 5, lines 34-44). Thus, the apparatus of claims 13-14 is anticipated by Hall. The particular type of fuel to be produced by the apparatus, however, pertains to an intended use of the apparatus. Apparatus claims must be differentiated in terms of structure, rather than function. See MPEP §2114.
Applicant (at page 12) further argues, “Hall does not disclose “wellhead””. The Office respectfully disagrees.
Hall discloses a subsea well (see FIG. 1; column 3, lines 19-33), wherein the well is fluidly connected to processing equipment on an offshore platform 12 via a riser pipe 20. It is well-known in the art that a subsea well is inherently equipped with a wellhead for enabling the connection of a riser pipe to the well. For instance, Regan (US 4,433,939 A) discloses a conventional arrangement of subsea well equipment, including a subsea well (i.e., a well formed by a subsea well casing 14) equipped with a wellhead 15 for enabling the connection of a riser pipe (i.e., a conductor 20 formed of conduit sections 21 and having a connector 24) to the subsea well, so that well fluids produced by the subsea well can be conveyed from the well, via the riser pipe, to equipment on an offshore platform 10.
For the rejections of claims 15, 16, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. in view of the cited secondary references, Applicant’s arguments (at pages 14-16) are based on the asserted deficiencies in Hall et al. Therefore, the same comments apply.
For the rejection of claims 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. in view of Parkhurst, Applicant (at page 16) argues, “Parkhurst does not explicitly disclose “wellhead includes no compressor” as in claim 19 or “no compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point as in claim 20.” The Office respectfully disagrees.
Parkhurst (see FIG. 1) discloses a system comprising a wellhead (i.e., a high pressure producing well 10 having a well head; see column 2, lines 4-10) and downstream equipment for processing the well fluids received from the wellhead (i.e., driers 26, a separation-absorber 15, a synthesis gas generator 140, and a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 146), wherein the pressure at the wellhead 10 is sufficiently high to render a compressor unnecessary. In fact, Parkhurst discloses that the well fluids are reduced in pressure (i.e., by a pressure reduction valve 14; see page 3, first column, lines 40-46; also page 1, first column, lines 11-31) in order to facilitate the subsequent processing of the well fluids. Thus, it would be evident to one of ordinary skill in the art that “no compressor” is provided at the well head or between the well head and the natural gas collection point, given that the well fluids require pressure reduction.
C. With respect to the rejections of claims 13-16 and 18-20 based on Rummelhoff and secondary references, Applicant’s arguments are not found persuasive.
For the rejection of claims 13-14, Applicant (at page 17) argues, “… there is no disclosure of “sustainable” in O’Rear, or any of the references.” The Office respectfully disagrees.
Independent claim 13 recites an apparatus comprising “a sustainable aviation fuel system which produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the dry natural gas.” As described by Applicant’s specification (e.g., paragraph [0025]), shown in FIG. 3, and set forth by dependent claim 14, the structural elements that perform the recited function of producing sustainable aviation fuel 235 include: (i) a natural gas reforming apparatus 210, (ii) a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus 220, and (iii) a product upgrading apparatus 230.
O’Rear (see FIG. 1-3) discloses a fuel production system that likewise includes: (i) a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a synthesis gas production unit 65), (ii) a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a Fischer-Tropsch unit 75), and (iii) a product upgrading apparatus (i.e., an upgrading unit 85). The fuel production system can be used to produce fuels 300 such as jet fuel, also known as aviation fuel (see page 6, lines 10-13). Thus, the apparatus of claims 13-14 was obvious over the combination of Rummelhoff and O’Rear. The particular type of fuel to be produced using the apparatus, however, pertains to an intended use of the apparatus. Apparatus claims must be differentiated in terms of structure, rather than function.
For the rejections of claims 15, 16, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being upatentable over Rummelhoff in view of the cited secondary references, Applicant’s arguments (at pages 17-20) are based upon the asserted deficiencies in the combination of Rummelhoff and O’Rear. Therefore, the Office’s same comments apply.
For the rejection of claims 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff in view of O’Rear and Parkhurst, Applicant (at page 21) argues, “Parkhurst does not explicitly disclose “wellhead includes no compressor” as in claim 19 or “no compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point as in claim 20.” The Office respectfully disagrees.
Parkhurst (see FIG. 1) discloses an apparatus comprising a wellhead (i.e., a high pressure producing well 10 having a well head; see column 2, lines 4-10) and downstream equipment for processing the well fluids received from the wellhead (i.e., driers 26, a separation-absorber 15, a synthesis gas generator 140, and a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 146), wherein the pressure at the wellhead 10 is sufficiently high to render a compressor unnecessary. In fact, Parkhurst discloses that the well fluids must be reduced in pressure (i.e., by a pressure reduction valve 14; see page 3, first column, lines 40-46; also page 1, first column, lines 11-31) in order to facilitate the subsequent processing of the well fluids. Thus, it would be evident to one of ordinary skill in the art that “no compressor” is provided at the well head or between the well head and the natural gas collection point, given that the well fluids require a reduction in pressure.
D. With respect to the provisional rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/922,444, the rejection is withdrawn because the copending application has been abandoned.
E. With respect to the statutory double patenting rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-7 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,795,402, Applicant’s argument (at page 21) regarding the filing of a terminal disclaimer is not persuasive. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. A statutory type double patenting rejection is overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope.
F. With respect to the statutory double patenting rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-7 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,827,856, Applicant’s argument (at pages 21-22) regarding the filing of a terminal disclaimer is not persuasive, for the same reason set forth above.
G. With respect to the statutory double patenting rejection of claims 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-2 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,180,425, Applicant’s argument (at page 22) regarding the filing of a terminal disclaimer is not persuasive, for the same reason set forth above.
H. With respect to the rejection of claims 8-10 and 12-20 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,795,402, the rejection is maintained because a terminal disclaimer has not been filed.
I. With respect to the rejection of claims 8-10 and 12-20 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,827,856, the rejection is maintained because a terminal disclaimer has not been filed.
J. With respect to the rejection of claims 3-10 and 12-20 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,180,425, the rejection is maintained because a terminal disclaimer has not been filed.
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 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hall et al. (US 7,108,070)
Regarding claim 13, the “system” claim is considered an apparatus claim. Hall et al. discloses a system (see FIG. 1-3) comprising:
a fuel system (i.e., GTL conversion facility 10; see column 3, lines 49-51) which produces fuel (i.e., hydrocarbon fuels, such as diesel, gasoline, or any other desired fuel; see column 5, lines 37-40) from dry natural gas (i.e., natural gas that has been processed to remove water);
a natural gas plant (i.e., gas processing facility 26) operably coupled to the fuel system via a first pipeline;
a natural gas collection point (i.e., at an oil/gas/water separation unit 24) operably coupled to the natural gas plant via a second pipeline; and
a wellhead (i.e., at the one or more subsea wells, not shown; see column 3, lines 26-28) operably coupled to the natural gas collection point via a third pipeline.
The recitation with respect to the intended use of the apparatus for producing “sustainable aviation fuel” for the fuel does not impart further structural limitations to the claim. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115.
Regarding claim 14, Hall et al. discloses that the fuel system 10 (see FIG. 1-3) comprises:
a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a syngas production apparatus comprising a syngas reactor 30; see column 4, lines 4-27) that receives dry natural gas from the natural gas plant 26 and that produces synthetic gas (i.e., syngas) from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a F-T Synthesis apparatus with a liquids production unit 32; see column 4, lines 28-34) operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas; and
a product upgrading apparatus (i.e., a hydro-cracking apparatus comprising a hydrocracker unit 34; see column 5, lines 34-44) operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus 32 and that receives the hydrocarbon chain and produces fuel (i.e., hydrocarbon fuels, such as diesel, gasoline, or any other desired fuel; see column 5, lines 37-40) from the hydrocarbon chain.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (US 7,108,070) in view of Tomlinson (US 2006/0189702).
Hall et al. discloses that the natural gas reforming apparatus 30, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus 32, and the product upgrading apparatus 34 are apparatuses within a GTL conversion facility 10 installed on an offshore platform 12 (see FIG. 3). Hall et al., however, does not specifically disclose a utility apparatus operably coupled to apparatuses 30, 32, 34.
Tomlinson discloses a utility apparatus (i.e., a “utilities section”; see paragraph [0036]) for supplying utilities for all of the processes conducted within an overall, integrated apparatus. The apparatus (see paragraph [0035]) comprises a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a “synthesis gas module” for conversion of gaseous hydrocarbons to synthesis gas); a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a “Fischer-Tropsch module” with one or more Fischer-Tropsch reactors); and product upgrading apparatus (i.e., one or more product modules for upgrading products of Fischer-Tropsch synthesis into one or more higher value products, e.g., a “transportation fuel product module” with a hydrocracking unit for processing a HFTL fraction to obtain a synthetic transportation fuel). Some common utilities that are listed include steam, power, air, nitrogen, cooling, and refrigeration (see paragraph [0035]), and “An integrated utility facility will provide the most synergy of the various utilities needed for the processes.”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operably couple a utility apparatus to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus, and the product upgrading apparatus in the system of Hall et al. because a common utility apparatus would allow for the utilities to be shared amongst the various equipment of the apparatus, so as to provide the most synergy of the various utilities needed for the processes, as taught by Tomlinson.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (US 7,108,070) in view of Tomlinson (US 2006/0189702) and Waycuilis (US 6,313,361).
Hall et al. discloses that the natural gas reforming apparatus 30, Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus 32, and product upgrading apparatus 34 are apparatuses within a GTL conversion facility 10 on an offshore hydrocarbon production platform 12 (see FIG. 3). Hall et al., however, does not specifically disclose a utility apparatus that exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air, and nitrogen with the apparatuses 30, 32, and 34.
Tomlinson discloses a utility apparatus (i.e., a “utilities section”; see paragraph [0036]) for supplying utilities for all of the processes conducted within an overall, integrated apparatus. The apparatus (see paragraph [0035]) comprises a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a “synthesis gas module” for conversion of gaseous hydrocarbons to synthesis gas); a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a “Fischer-Tropsch module” with one or more Fischer-Tropsch reactors); and product upgrading apparatus (i.e., one or more product modules for upgrading products of Fischer-Tropsch synthesis into one or more higher value products, e.g., a “transportation fuel product module” with a hydrocracking unit for processing a HFTL fraction to obtain a synthetic transportation fuel). Some common utilities that are listed include steam, power, air, nitrogen, cooling, and refrigeration (see paragraph [0035]), and “An integrated utility facility will provide the most synergy of the various utilities needed for the processes.”
Waycuilis further discloses an apparatus (see FIG. 1) comprising: a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a reformer 12) that receives natural gas (i.e., via a hydrocarbon feed gas line 32) and that produces synthetic gas (i.e., via an outlet line 50) from the natural gas; and a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., including a Fischer-Tropsch (F/T) reactor 14, F/T reactor cooler 70, vapor separator 72, F/T reactor condenser 74, phase separator 76, and fluidized bed heat exchanger (FBHX) 17). Waycuilis also discloses that glycol is a conventional heat transfer medium for utility apparatus (i.e., coolant circulated through inlet line 164 and outlet line 166 of the FBHX 17 comprises a liquid heat transfer medium such as a glycol-water mixture, which is a conventional commercially available heat transfer liquid; see column 8, lines 30-37).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operably couple a utility apparatus to exchange steam, power, glycol, instrument air, and nitrogen, with the natural gas reforming apparatus, Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus, and product upgrading apparatus in the system of Hall et al. because a common utility apparatus would allow for utilities to be shared amongst the various equipment of the apparatus, so as to provide the most synergy of the utilities needed for the processes, as taught by Tomlinson, and furthermore, glycol would have been considered a conventional heat transfer medium for cooling utilities by one of ordinary skill in the art, as taught by Waycuilis.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (US 7,108,070) in view of Nataraj et al. (US 6,114,400) and Ackerson (US 2005/0082202).
Hall et al. discloses that the product upgrading apparatus 34 comprises a hydrocracker to convert the hydrocarbon chain into hydrocarbon fuels, wherein the techniques used to effect such conversions are readily understood by those of ordinary skill in the art (see column 5, lines 37-41). Hall et al., however, does not disclose the claimed product upgrading apparatus, further including a pressure swing adsorption device, an H2 compressor, product separation drums, and a production pump.
Nataraj et al. (FIG. 3) discloses an apparatus comprising a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., including Fischer-Tropsch reactor 337) for producing a hydrocarbon chain (i.e., liquid hydrocarbons in product 341) from a synthetic gas (i.e., synthesis gas product 335); and a product upgrading apparatus operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus to receive the hydrocarbon chain (i.e., through stream 347) to produce a fuel from the hydrocarbon chain; wherein the product upgrading apparatus comprises a PSA (i.e., a H2 PSA 373) producing a hydrogen stream 381 and operably coupled to an H2 compressor 383 which is operably coupled (i.e., via compressed hydrogen stream 355) to a hydrocracker (i.e., a hydrotreating reactor 353 which cracks heavy hydrocarbons) which is operably coupled to product separation drums (i.e., wax separator 351; separator drum 361).
Ackerson discloses a production pump (i.e., a product pump 616; see FIG. 4 and paragraph [0076]) for conveying a final product 632. The production pump 616 is a component of a product upgrading apparatus (i.e., a hydroprocessing unit 400) which comprises a hydrocracker (i.e., a reactor 504) receiving hydrocarbons to be upgraded (i.e., feed stock 401) and hydrogen 420 from an H2 compressor 422. The product upgrading apparatus also comprises product separators (i.e., a reactor outlet separator 512; a rectifier 552) operably coupled (i.e., by way of a rectified product line 610) to the production pump 616.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a PSA, a H2 compressor, a hydrocracker, and product separation drums for the product upgrading apparatus in the system of Hall et al. because such equipment would have been conventional in a product upgrading apparatus for upgrading Fischer-Tropsch products to fuels, as taught by Nataraj et al. It would have further been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a production pump in the product upgrading apparatus in the system of Hall et al. because the provision of a pump to facilitate the conveyance of the final product from the system would have been well-known in the art, as taught by Ackerson.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hall et al. (US 7,108,070) in view of Parkhurst (US 2,324,172).
Regarding claim 19, Hall et al. (see FIG. 2) discloses that the fuel system 10 draws dry natural gas from the natural gas plant 26 through the first pipeline; the natural gas plant 26 draws natural gas from the natural gas collection point 24 through the second pipeline; and the natural gas collection point 24 draws natural gas from the wellhead (i.e., at a subsea well, not shown) through the third pipeline.
Hall et al. does not specifically state that no compressor is located at the wellhead. However, it is well-known in the petroleum engineering art that subsea reservoirs are high pressure reservoirs. Parkhurst (see FIG. 1) further discloses a system comprising a wellhead (i.e., a deep high pressure producing well 10) and downstream equipment for processing fluids recovered from the wellhead (i.e., driers 26, a separation-absorber 15, a synthesis gas generator 140, and a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 146), wherein the pressure at the wellhead 10 is sufficiently high to render a compressor at the wellhead unnecessary.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to omit a compressor at the wellhead in the system of Hall because one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the pressure at the wellhead of a subsea well to be sufficiently high to convey the produced fluids from the wellhead to the natural gas collection point, as taught by Parkhurst, and the omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired. See MPEP § 2144.04 II. A.
Regarding claim 20, Hall et al. (see FIG. 2) discloses that the fuel system 10 draws dry natural gas from the natural gas plant 26 through the first pipeline; the natural gas plant 26 draws natural gas from the natural gas collection point 24 through the second pipeline; and the natural gas collection point 24 draws natural gas from the wellhead (i.e., at a subsea well, not shown) through the third pipeline.
Hall et al. does not specifically state that no compressor is located between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point. However, it is well-known in the petroleum engineering art that subsea reservoirs are high pressure reservoirs. Parkhurst (see FIG. 1) further discloses a system comprising a wellhead (i.e., a deep high pressure producing well 10) and downstream equipment for processing fluids recovered from the wellhead (i.e., driers 26, a separation-absorber 15, a synthesis gas generator 140, and a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 146), wherein the pressure at the wellhead 10 is sufficiently high to render a compressor between the wellhead and the downstream equipment unnecessary.
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to omit a compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point in the system of Hall because one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the pressure at the wellhead of a subsea well to be sufficiently high to convey the produced fluids from the wellhead to the natural gas collection point, as taught by Parkhurst, and, furthermore, the omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired. See MPEP § 2144.04 II. A.
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff (GB 2357140 A) in view of O’Rear (WO 2008/079802 A1).
Regarding claim 13, the “system” claim is considered an apparatus claim. Rummelhoff discloses a system (see FIG. 1-3) comprising:
a methanol production system (i.e., METHANOL PRODUCTION in FIG. 1; including units for REFORMING, COMPRESSION, and SYNTHESIS as shown in FIG. 2) for producing methanol from dry natural gas (i.e., from a METHANE stream as shown in FIG. 2; the methane stream comprising a flashed methane-rich gas through pipeline 34 as shown in FIG. 3);
a natural gas plant (i.e., LNG PRODUCTION plant in FIG. 1; the plant including units for GAS SWEETENING & DEHYDRATION, PRE-COOLING & HEAVIES REMOVAL, LIQUEFACTION, and LIQUID EXPANSION & PHASE SEPARATION as shown in FIG. 2) operably coupled to the methanol production system via a first pipeline (i.e., via a METHANE stream in FIG. 2; via the pipeline 34 in FIG. 3);
a natural gas collection point (i.e., a Floating Production Unit, see FIG. 1; shallow water platforms and land-based sources are also suitable, see page 3, last paragraph) operably coupled to the natural gas plant via a second pipeline; and
a wellhead (i.e., at a Wellhead Platform, see FIG. 1) operably coupled to the natural gas collection point via a third pipeline.
Rummelhoff discloses that in addition to the methanol production, shown, “The methane could also be used for other processes such as a Fischer Tropsch process” (see page 3, at lines 24-25). Rummelhoff, however, does not provide details of the Fischer-Tropsch process.
O’Rear discloses an apparatus (see FIG. 1-3) comprising:
a sustainable aviation fuel system (i.e., a system including a synthesis gas production unit 65, a Fischer-Tropsch unit 75, and an upgrading unit 85; the system for producing upgraded Fischer-Tropsch products 300, including jet fuel (sustainable aviation fuel); see page 6, lines 10-13) from dry natural gas (i.e., purified natural gas 30).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operably couple the sustainable aviation fuel system of O’Rear to the natural gas plant in the system of Rummelhoff because it was specifically disclosed that the methane from the natural gas plant can also be used for other processes, and, in particular a Fischer-Tropsch process (see Rummelhoff at page 3, last paragraph), and the system of O’Rear would have been a conventionally known apparatus for conducting a Fischer-Tropsch process and producing valuable upgraded products, such as jet fuel, from the dry natural gas.
Regarding claim 14, O’Rear discloses that the sustainable aviation fuel production system (see FIG. 1-3) comprises: a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a synthesis gas production unit 65) that receives dry natural gas 30 and that produces synthetic gas 90; a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a Fischer-Tropsch unit 75) operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas 90 and produces a hydrocarbon chain 110 from the synthetic gas; and a product upgrading apparatus (i.e., an upgrading unit 85) that is directly and operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain 110 and that produces fuels (i.e., upgraded products 300, such as jet fuel; see page 6, lines 10-13) from the hydrocarbon chain.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff (GB 2357140 A) in view of O’Rear (WO 2008/079802 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Tomlinson (US 2006/0189702).
Rummelhoff discloses that the system is integrated as one gas utilization and conversion farm to provide a significant overall cost reduction (see page 4, first paragraph). O’Rear also discloses that the system is integrated to achieve overall integration process improvements, including energy integration, oxygen integration, and hydrogen integration (see FIG. 1-3; page 4, lines 11-30). Rummelhoff and O’Rear, however, do not specifically disclose a utility apparatus operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus, and product upgrading apparatus
Tomlinson discloses a utility apparatus (i.e., a “utilities section”; see paragraph [0036]) for supplying utilities for all of the processes conducted within an overall, integrated apparatus. The apparatus (see paragraph [0035]) comprises a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a “synthesis gas module” for conversion of gaseous hydrocarbons to synthesis gas); a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a “Fischer-Tropsch module” with one or more Fischer-Tropsch reactors); and product upgrading apparatus (i.e., one or more product modules for upgrading products of Fischer-Tropsch synthesis to one or more higher value products, e.g., a “transportation fuel product module” with a hydrocracking unit for processing a HFTL fraction to obtain a synthetic transportation fuel). Some common utilities that are listed include steam, power, air, nitrogen, cooling, and refrigeration (see paragraph [0035]), and “An integrated utility facility will provide the most synergy of the various utilities needed for the processes.”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operably couple a utility apparatus to the natural gas reforming apparatus, Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus, and product upgrading apparatus in the modified system of Rummelhoff because a common utility apparatus would allow for the utilities to be shared amongst the various equipment of the apparatus, so as to provide the most synergy of the utilities needed for the processes, as taught by Tomlinson.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff (GB 2357140 A) in view of O’Rear (WO 2008/079802 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Tomlinson (US 2006/0189702) and Waycuilis (US 6,313,361).
Rummelhoff discloses that the system is integrated as one gas utilization and conversion farm for significant overall cost reduction (see page 4, first paragraph). O’Rear also discloses that the system is integrated to achieve overall integration process improvements, including energy integration, oxygen integration, and hydrogen integration (see FIG. 1-3; page 4, lines 11-30). Rummelhoff and O’Rear, however, do not specifically disclose a utility apparatus that exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air, and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus, and the product upgrading apparatus.
Tomlinson discloses a utility apparatus (i.e., a “utilities section”; see paragraph [0036]) for supplying utilities for all of the processes conducted within an overall, integrated apparatus. The apparatus (see paragraph [0035]) comprises a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., a “synthesis gas module” for conversion of gaseous hydrocarbons to synthesis gas); a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., a “Fischer-Tropsch module” with one or more Fischer-Tropsch reactors); and product upgrading apparatus (i.e., one or more product modules for upgrading products of Fischer-Tropsch synthesis to one or more higher value products, e.g., a “transportation fuel product module” with a hydrocracking unit for processing a HFTL fraction to obtain a synthetic transportation fuel). Some common utilities that are listed include steam, power, air, nitrogen, cooling, and refrigeration (see paragraph [0035]), and “An integrated utility facility will provide the most synergy of the various utilities needed for the processes.”
Waycuilis further discloses an apparatus (see FIG. 1) comprising: a natural gas reforming apparatus (i.e., an autothermal reformer 12) that receives natural gas (i.e., natural gas via a hydrocarbon feed gas line 32) and that produces synthetic gas (i.e., synthesis gas through an outlet line 50) from the natural gas; and a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., including at least the Fischer-Tropsch (F/T) reactor 14, F/T reactor cooler 70, vapor separator 72, F/T reactor condenser 74, phase separator 76, and fluidized bed heat exchanger (FBHX) 17). Specifically, Waycuilis discloses that glycol is a conventional heat transfer medium for use in utility apparatus (i.e., coolant circulated through the inlet line 164 and the outlet line 166 of the FBHX 17 preferably comprises a liquid heat transfer medium, such as a glycol-water mixture, which is a conventional commercially available heat transfer liquid; see column 8, lines 30-37).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operably couple a utility apparatus to exchange steam, power, glycol, instrument air, and nitrogen, with the natural gas reforming apparatus, Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus, and product upgrading apparatus in the modified system of Rummelhoff because a common utility apparatus would allow for the utilities to be shared among the equipment of the apparatus, so as to provide the most synergy of the utilities needed for the processes, as taught by Tomlinson, and glycol would have been considered a conventional heat transfer medium for cooling utilities by one of ordinary skill in the art, as taught by Waycuilis.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff (GB 2357140 A) in view of O’Rear (WO 2008/079802 A1), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Nataraj et al. (US 6,114,400) and Ackerson (US 2005/0082202).
O’Rear (FIG. 1-3; page 6, lines 8-17) discloses that the product upgrading apparatus comprises a hydrogen production process 95 for producing a hydrogen stream 120 operably coupled to an upgrading reactor 85 for upgrading a waxy product 110 from the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus 75 to fuels 300. O’Rear, however, does not disclose a pressure swing adsorption device for the hydrogen production process 95, a compressor to compress the hydrogen 120, a hydrocracker for the upgrading reactor 85, production separation drums, and a production pump for separating and pumping fuels 300.
Nataraj et al. (see FIG. 3) discloses an apparatus comprising a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus (i.e., Fischer-Tropsch reactor 337) for producing a hydrocarbon chain (i.e., liquid hydrocarbons 341) from a synthetic gas 335; and a product upgrading apparatus operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus to receive the hydrocarbon chain (i.e., via stream 347) to produce a fuel from the hydrocarbon chain; wherein the product upgrading apparatus comprises a PSA device (i.e., H2 PSA 373) producing a hydrogen stream 381 and operably coupled to an H2 compressor 383 which is operably coupled (i.e., via hydrogen stream 355) to a hydrocracker (i.e., a hydrotreating reactor 353 which cracks heavy hydrocarbons) operably coupled to product separation drums (i.e., wax separator 351, separator drum 361).
Ackerson discloses a production pump (i.e., a product pump 616; see FIG. 4, paragraph [0076]) for conveying a final product 632. The production pump 616 is a component of a product upgrading apparatus (i.e., a hydroprocessing unit 400) which comprises a hydrocracker (i.e., a reactor 504) receiving hydrocarbons to be upgraded (i.e., feed stock 401) and hydrogen 420 from an H2 compressor 422. The product upgrading apparatus also comprises product separators (i.e., a reactor outlet separator 512; a rectifier 552), wherein the product separators are operably coupled (i.e., by way of a rectified product line 610) to the production pump 616.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a PSA device, a H2 compressor, a hydrocracker, and product separation drums for the product upgrading apparatus in the modified system of Rummelhoff because such equipment would have been conventional for upgrading Fischer-Tropsch products to fuels, as taught by Nataraj et al. Also, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a production pump in the product upgrading apparatus in the modified system of Rummelhoff because the provision of a pump for the conveyance of the final product from the system would have been well-known in the art, as taught by Ackerson.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rummelhoff (GB 2357140 A) in view of O’Rear (WO 2008/079802 A1), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Parkhurst (US 2,324,172).
Regarding claim 19, Rummelhoff discloses that the methanol production system (i.e., METHANOL PRODUCTION, FIG. 1) draws dry natural gas from the natural gas plant (i.e., LNG PRODUCTION plant, FIG. 1) through the first pipeline (i.e., pipeline 34, FIG. 3); the natural gas plant draws natural gas from the natural gas collection point (i.e., the Floating Production Unit, FIG. 1) through the second pipeline; and the natural gas collection point draws natural gas from the wellhead (i.e., the Wellhead Platform, FIG. 1) through the third pipeline. As noted above, a Fischer-Tropsch process can utilize the dry natural gas from the natural gas plant.
Rummelhoff does not specifically state that no compressor is located at the wellhead. However, it is well-known in the art that certain reservoirs are of such high pressure that further compression is unnecessary. Parkhurst (see FIG. 1) further discloses a system comprising a wellhead (i.e., a deep high pressure producing well 10) and downstream equipment for processing fluids from the wellhead (i.e., driers 26, a separation-absorber 15, a synthesis gas generator 140, and a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 146), wherein the pressure at the wellhead 10 is sufficiently high to render a compressor at the wellhead unnecessary.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to omit a compressor at the wellhead in the modified system of Rummelhoff when further compression was not required, such as when the pressure at a well head is sufficiently high to facilitate the conveyance of natural gas from the wellhead to downstream equipment, as taught by Parkhurst, and the omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired. See MPEP § 2144.04 II. A.
Regarding claim 20, Rummelhoff discloses that the methanol production system (i.e., METHANOL PRODUCTION, FIG. 1) draws dry natural gas from the natural gas plant (i.e., LNG PRODUCTION plant, FIG. 1) through the first pipeline (i.e., pipeline 34, FIG. 3); the natural gas plant draws natural gas from the natural gas collection point (i.e., the Floating Production Unit, FIG. 1) through the second pipeline; and the natural gas collection point draws natural gas from the wellhead (i.e., the Wellhead Platform, FIG. 1) through the third pipeline. As noted above, a Fischer-Tropsch process can utilize the dry natural gas from the natural gas plant.
Rummelhoff does not specifically state that no compressor is located between the wellhead and natural gas collection point. However, it is well-known in the art that certain reservoirs are of such high pressure that further compression is unnecessary to facilitate the conveyance of fluids between the wellhead and a point of natural gas collection. Parkhurst (see FIG. 1) further discloses a system comprising a wellhead (i.e., a deep high pressure producing well 10) and downstream equipment for processing fluids from the wellhead (i.e., driers 26, a separation-absorber 15, a synthesis gas generator 140, and a Fischer-Tropsch reactor 146), wherein the pressure at the wellhead 10 is sufficiently high to render a compressor between the wellhead and the downstream equipment unnecessary.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to omit a compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point in the modified system of Rummelhoff when further compression was not required, such as when the pressure at the wellhead was sufficiently high for the conveyance of natural gas from the wellhead to the downstream equipment, as taught by Parkhurst, and, furthermore, the omission of an element and its function is obvious if the function of the element is not desired. See MPEP § 2144.04 II. A.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-7 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,795,402. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-7 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,827,856. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-2 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,180,425. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 8-10 and 12-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,795,402 (hereafter US ‘402). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 8, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 1) claims an apparatus to produce a sustainable aviation fuel from a dry natural gas, the apparatus comprising:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas from a wellhead (see ref. claim 4) and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas, wherein the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further includes a membrane separator that is operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter that is operably coupled to a steam drum which is operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs synthetic water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain.
Regarding claim 9, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 2) claims the apparatus further comprises: a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 10, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 3) claims a utility apparatus exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 12, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 1) claims the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which are operably coupled to a production pump.
Regarding claim 13, US ‘402 (see ref. claims 1 and 4) claims a sustainable aviation fuel production system to produce sustainable aviation fuel from a dry natural gas, comprising:
a sustainable aviation fuel system which produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the dry natural gas (i.e., an apparatus according to ref. claim 1);
a natural gas plant which is operably coupled to the sustainable aviation fuel system via a first pipeline (see ref. claim 4);
a natural gas collection point operably coupled to the natural gas plant via a second pipeline (see ref. claim 4); and
a wellhead that is operably coupled to the natural gas collection point via a third pipeline (see ref. claim 4).
Regarding claim 14, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 1) claims the system further comprises:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas from the natural gas plant and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain.
Regarding claim 15, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 2) claims the system further comprises: a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 16, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 3) further claims a utility apparatus that exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 17, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 1) claims the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus includes a membrane separator operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter that is operably coupled to a steam drum that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch converter which is operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax.
Regarding claim 18, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 1) claims that the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which are operably coupled to a production pump.
Regarding claim 19, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 5) claims the wellhead includes no compressor.
Regarding claim 20, US ‘402 (see ref. claim 6) claims that the system includes no compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point.
Claims 8-10 and 12-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,827,856 (hereafter US ‘856). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 8, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 1) claims an apparatus to produce a sustainable aviation fuel from a dry natural gas, the apparatus comprising:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas from a wellhead (see ref. claim 4) and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas, wherein the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further includes a membrane separator that is operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter that is operably coupled to a steam drum which is operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs synthetic water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain.
Regarding claim 9, US 856 (see ref. claim 2) claims the apparatus further comprises: a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 10, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 3) claims a utility apparatus exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 12, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 1) claims the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which are operably coupled to a production pump.
Regarding claim 13, US ‘856 (see ref. claims 1 and 4) claims a sustainable aviation fuel production system to produce sustainable aviation fuel from a dry natural gas, comprising:
a sustainable aviation fuel system which produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the dry natural gas (i.e., an apparatus according to ref. claim 1); a natural gas plant which is operably coupled to the sustainable aviation fuel system via a first pipeline (see ref. claim 4);
a natural gas collection point operably coupled to the natural gas plant via a second pipeline (see ref. claim 4); and a wellhead that is operably coupled to the natural gas collection point via a third pipeline (see ref. claim 4).
Regarding claim 14, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 1) claims the system further comprises:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas from the natural gas plant and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain.
Regarding claim 15, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 2) claims the system further comprises: a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 16, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 3) claims a utility apparatus exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 17, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 1) claims the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further includes a membrane separator that is operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter that is operably coupled to a steam drum that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch converter which is operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax.
Regarding claim 18, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 1) claims the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which are operably coupled to a production pump.
Regarding claim 19, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 5) claims the wellhead includes no compressor.
Regarding claim 20, US ‘856 (see ref. claim 6) claims the system includes no compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point.
Claims 3-10 and 12-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,180,425 (hereafter US ‘425). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 3, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 3) claims the apparatus of instant claim 1, which is an apparatus to produce sustainable aviation fuel from dry natural gas, comprising:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is directly and operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas, wherein the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further comprises a membrane separator that is operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter being operably coupled to a steam drum, the Fischer-Tropsch converter being operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs synthetic water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain, wherein the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which is operably coupled to a production pump;
wherein (see ref. claim 3) a utility apparatus exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
US ‘425 (see ref. claim 2) further claims a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus. It is noted that ref. claim 3 does not depend from ref. claim 2.
However, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further “operably couple” the utility apparatus to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus in the claimed apparatus of US ‘425 because the apparatuses would have required fluid and electrical connections therebetween to enable the claimed exchange of steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen between the apparatuses.
Regarding claim 4, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 4) claims the apparatus of instant claim 1, which is an apparatus to produce sustainable aviation fuel from dry natural gas, comprising:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is directly and operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas, wherein the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further comprises a membrane separator that is operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter being operably coupled to a steam drum, the Fischer-Tropsch converter being operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs synthetic water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain, wherein the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which is operably coupled to a production pump;
wherein the apparatus (see ref. claim 4) further comprises:
a natural gas plant which is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus via a first pipeline; a natural gas collection point operably coupled to the natural gas plant via a second pipeline; and a wellhead that is operably coupled to the natural gas collection point via a third pipeline.
Regarding claim 5, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 7) claims the wellhead includes no compressor.
Regarding claim 6, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 8) claims the apparatus includes no compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point.
Regarding claim 7, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 9) claims the apparatus draws the dry natural gas from the natural gas plant through the first pipeline, thus lowering pressure of natural gas at the natural gas plant, which draws the dry natural gas from the natural gas collection point through the second pipeline, which lowers pressure of the dry natural gas at the natural gas collection point.
Regarding claim 8, US ‘425 (see ref. claims 1 and 4) claims an apparatus to produce a sustainable aviation fuel from a dry natural gas, the apparatus comprising:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas from a wellhead and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas, wherein the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further includes a membrane separator operably coupled to a guard bed operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter operably coupled to a steam drum operably coupled to a wax trap operably coupled to a heat exchanger operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs synthetic water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain.
Regarding claim 9, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 2) claims a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 10, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 3) claims a utility apparatus exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 12, US ‘425 (see ref. claims 1 and 4) claims the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which are operably coupled to a production pump.
Regarding claim 13, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 4) claims a sustainable aviation fuel production system to produce sustainable aviation fuel from a dry natural gas, comprising:
a sustainable aviation fuel system which produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the dry natural gas; a natural gas plant which is operably coupled to the sustainable aviation fuel system via a first pipeline; a natural gas collection point operably coupled to the natural gas plant via a second pipeline; and a wellhead that is operably coupled to the natural gas collection point via a third pipeline.
Regarding claim 14, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 4) claims the sustainable aviation fuel production system further comprises:
a natural gas reforming apparatus that receives the dry natural gas from the natural gas plant and that produces synthetic gas from the dry natural gas;
a Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus and that receives the synthetic gas and produces a hydrocarbon chain from the synthetic gas; and
a product upgrading apparatus that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus that receives the hydrocarbon chain and that produces the sustainable aviation fuel from the hydrocarbon chain.
Regarding claim 15, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 5) claims the system further comprises: a utility apparatus that is operably coupled to the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 16, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 6) claims a utility apparatus exchanges steam, power, glycol, instrument air and nitrogen with the natural gas reforming apparatus, the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus and the product upgrading apparatus.
Regarding claim 17, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 4) claims the Fischer-Tropsch conversion apparatus further includes a membrane separator that is operably coupled to a guard bed that is operably coupled to a Fischer-Tropsch converter that is operably coupled to a steam drum that is operably coupled to the Fischer-Tropsch converter which is operably coupled to a wax trap which is operably coupled to a heat exchanger which is operably coupled to a converter separator that outputs tail gas, the converter separator is also operably coupled to an oil/water cyclone which is operably coupled to a condenser which is operably coupled to a condensate pump which outputs water, the converter separator and the wax trap are both operably coupled to a wax degasser which is operably coupled to a wax pump which outputs wax.
Regarding claim 18, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 4) claims the product upgrading apparatus further comprises a pressure swing adsorption device that is operably coupled to an H2 compressor which is operably coupled to a hydrocracker which is operably coupled to product separation drums, which are operably coupled to a production pump.
Regarding claim 19, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 7) claims that the wellhead includes no compressor.
Regarding claim 20, US ‘425 (see ref. claim 8) claims that the system includes no compressor between the wellhead and the natural gas collection point.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
* * *
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A LEUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-1449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM 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, CLAIRE X WANG can be reached at (571)270-1051. 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.
/JENNIFER A LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights