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 .
Responsive to correspondence
This office action is in response to correspondence filed on 11/26/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
No IDS has been filed.
Abstract
The abstract filed 11/15/2024 appears to be acceptable.
Claim Objections
Following claim(s) are objected to because of the grammatical errors and informalities, for consistency and accuracy of the claim languages:
Claim 1 line 12 recites “wherein, when heated, adsorbed carbon dioxide is separated from the carbon dioxide source material and provided as a carbon dioxide supply stream to the carbon dioxide output.”, this should be read as “when heated, adsorbed carbon dioxide is separated from the carbon dioxide source material and provided as a carbon dioxide output.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21, 31, 33, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S Publication number 2010/0018218 A1 to RILEY et al. (RILEY).
Re: Claim 21:
RILEY discloses:
A direct air capture (DAC) system, comprising:
an ambient airflow (See Fig.1: ambient air flow “external air” entering air separation unit (ASU) 10)) input through which ambient air enters the DAC system;
a carbon dioxide output (See Fig.1: carbon dioxide output from ASU 10);
a carbon dioxide source material (See Fig.1: exhaust gases containing carbon dioxide source material from steam generator 16) disposed within an airflow path (See Fig.1: external air entering combustion chamber 36) between the airflow input (See Fig.1: external air entering combustion chamber 36) and the carbon dioxide output (See Fig.1: carbon dioxide exiting from ASU 10), the carbon dioxide source material comprising an adsorbent to which carbon dioxide from the ambient air bonds (See Fig.1: ¶0023, ¶0036, ¶0041: discloses adsorbent being particulates/water), wherein the adsorbent comprises a solid adsorbent (See Fig.1: ¶0023, ¶0030, ¶0032: discloses particulate matter which is solid particles);
a circuit (See Fig.1: ¶0023, ¶0030-¶0032: circuit via collection tank 20, water/particulate pump 28 as shown) configured to flow the adsorbent with the circuit; and
a heating system (See Fig.1: heating system 36, using waste heat of combustion) configured to heat a heating fluid (See Fig.1: heating fluid water/steam) and transfer heat from the heating fluid to the carbon dioxide source material (See Fig.1: exhaust gases containing carbon dioxide source material from steam generator 16),
wherein the carbon dioxide source material is arranged to receive heat from the heating fluid (See Fig.1: exhaust of combustion gases receiving heat from steam generator 16 corresponds to the heating fluid which typically operable with a fluid i.e., water or steam), and
wherein the heating system (See Fig.1: heating system 36 implicitly adds thermal energy to the heating fluid water/steam) is configured to add thermal energy to the heating fluid, and
wherein, when heated, adsorbed carbon dioxide (See Fig.1: carbon dioxide exiting from ASU 10) is separated from the carbon dioxide source material (See Fig.1: exhaust gases containing carbon dioxide source material from steam generator 16) and provided as a carbon dioxide supply stream to the carbon dioxide output (See Fig.1: as shown in figure 1).
Regarding method claim 33: RILEY discloses all the limitations of method claim 33.
Re: Claim 31:
RILEY discloses:
The system of claim 21, RILEY discloses all the limitations of claim 21, and wherein the carbon dioxide source material comprises a filter (See Fig.1: ¶0023: heat exchanger/moisture removal units comprising a heat exchanger 18 using liquid/gaseous nitrogen to cool the exhaust gases) and the adsorbent is flowed within the circuit (See Fig.1: ¶0023, ¶0030-¶0032: circuit via collection tank 20, water/particulate pump 28 as shown) to transfer the carbon dioxide from the filter to the carbon dioxide output ((See Fig.1: ¶0023, ¶0030-¶0032: carbon dioxide in exhaust gases flow to air separation unit 10).
Re: Claim 34:
RILEY discloses:
The method of claim 33, RILEY discloses all the limitations of claim 33, and wherein the carbon dioxide source material comprises a filter (See Fig.1: ¶0023: heat exchanger/moisture removal units comprising a heat exchanger 18 using liquid/gaseous nitrogen to cool the exhaust gases).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 22, 23, 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Publication number 2010/0018218 A1 to RILEY et al. (RILEY), as applied to claims 21 and 33 above, and further in view of U.S Publication number 2011/0266500 A1 to SCHUBERT (SCHUBERT).
Re: Claim 22:
RILEY discloses:
The system of claim 21, RILEY discloses all the limitations of claim 21, and wherein the heating system is configured to heat the heating fluid using waste heat from an outside source (RILEY: See Fig.1: ¶0010, ¶ 0035: discloses an outside combustion heating system 36); however, RILEY is silent regarding:
wherein the heating system comprises a supplemental heating system configured to heat the heating fluid using the waste heat of the outside source and add supplemental thermal energy to the heating fluid.
However adding supplemental thermal energy from a supplemental heat source is well known in the art, such a supplemental thermal energy to the heating fluid is explicitly taught by SCHUBERT, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide supplemental thermal emerging using supplemental heat source, because such a system is useful because the carbon content in the reactor ash can be controlled by appropriately monitoring and controlling process variables for example, the moisture content of the biomass using of one or more "moisture sensors" and the water content of the syngas using of one or more "water sensors." (SCHUBERT: See Fig.2: ¶0023).
Re: Claim 23:
RILEY modified by SCHUBERT discloses:
The DAC system of claim 22, modified RILEY discloses all the limitations of claim 21, and wherein an outside source comprises an industrial process (RILEY: See Fig.1: ¶0010, ¶ 0035: outside heating source features a steam generator arranged to combust a variety of fuels, such as, natural gas, liquefied natural gas, synthesis gas, coal, petroleum coke, biomass, MSW (Municipal Solid Waste), or any other gaseous, liquid, or solid fuel in the presence of combustion air).
Re: Claim 36:
RILEY discloses:
The method of claim 33, RILEY discloses all the limitations of claim 21, and wherein the heating of the heating fluid uses waste heat from an outside source (RILEY: See Fig.1: ¶0010, ¶ 0035: discloses an outside combustion heating system 36) in a DAC system; however, RILEY is silent regarding:
wherein a heating system comprises a supplemental heating system configured to heat the heating fluid using the waste heat of the outside source and add supplemental thermal energy to the heating fluid.
However adding supplemental thermal energy from a supplemental heat source is well known in the art, such a supplemental thermal energy to the heating fluid is explicitly taught by SCHUBERT, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide supplemental thermal emerging using supplemental heat source, because such a system is useful because the carbon content in the reactor ash can be controlled by appropriately monitoring and controlling process variables for example, the moisture content of the biomass using of one or more "moisture sensors" and the water content of the syngas using of one or more "water sensors." (SCHUBERT: See Fig.2: ¶0023).
Claim 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Publication number 2010/0018218 A1 to RILEY et al. (RILEY), as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of KR 20110013953 A to HAM (HAM).
Re: Claim 32:
RILEY discloses:
The system of claim 21, RILEY discloses all the limitations of claim 21, and the heating system (RILEY: See Fig.1: heating system 36) , RILEY is silent regarding wherein the heating system comprises a heat-pump system.
However, it is well known in the art that heating system may comprise a heat pump , such a heating system is explicitly taught by HAM, because HAM discloses a heat pump providing heat to water for generating steam in a steam generator/boiler (HAM: See Figs. 1-4: page 9 of English Translation), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to employ a heat pump to heat feedwater prior to feeding to a steam generator to recover waste heat of heat pump condenser which is cost effective and would have yielded similar benefits in the system of RILEY.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-30, 35, 37-40 are 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record were considered relevant to applicant’s disclosure but were not relied upon as the prior art fails to teach the invention as set forth in dependent claim (s) 24-30, 35, 37-40 in combination with corresponding base claims and intervening claims and the examiner can find no teaching nor reasons within the cited prior arts or on his own to combine the elements of these references to fully encompass the said dependent claims in combination with the base claims 21 and 33 and intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAFIQ A MIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4925. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am to 6:30 pm (Monday thru Thursday).
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, MARK LAURENZI can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/SHAFIQ MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
15 December 2025