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 Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 30 be found allowable, claim 31 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 14-17, and 19-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claims are rejected for the following reasons.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the frequency of the electrical energy" in line 14 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is also unclear as what the term “frequency of the electrical energy” is intended to denote. It is unclear whether the term is intended to denote the number of times electrical energy is provided within a given period of time, the number of times an alternating current electrical energy changes its direction per a given period of time, the number of times a current level of the electrical energy is adjusted within a given period of time, or another yet undefined frequency of an electrical energy.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the frequency of the electrical energy" in line 11 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is also unclear whether the term “frequency of the electrical energy” is intended to denote the number of times electrical energy is provided within a given period of time, or the number of times an alternating current electrical energy changes its direction per a given period of time, the number of times a current level of the electrical energy is adjusted within a given period of time, or another yet undefined frequency of an electrical energy.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 14-17, and 19-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carr et al. (US 2024/0024834) in view of Permuy (US 2025/0305722).
Regarding claim 1, the reference Carr et al. discloses a method of heating a reactor system, wherein the reactor system comprises: a plurality of reactor tubes, wherein each of the plurality of reactor tubes has at least one electrically conductive surface; and wherein fluid enters each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes via an associated inflow pipe header and exits each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes via an associated outflow pipe header (see para. [0099]); and
wherein the method comprises:
galvanically isolating the plurality of reactor tubes such that each of the plurality of reactor tubes can be directly connected to the inflow pipe header and the outflow pipe header (see para. [0119]-[0123]; Fig. 10);
providing electrical energy to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes (see para. [0099]; and
individually adjusting a current level of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube (see paras. [0091]; [0099]).
The reference Carr et al., however, does not specifically specify individually adjusting the frequency of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube.
The reference Permuy teaches a method of heating a reactor system (1), wherein the reactor system (see paras. [0047]-[0062]; Fig. 1) comprises: a plurality of reactor tubes (4a-4e), wherein each of the plurality of reactor tubes has at least one electrically conductive surface (see para. [0052]); and wherein fluid enters each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes (4a-4e) via an associated inflow pipe header (3a) and exits each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes via an associated outflow pipe header (3b) (see paras. [0054]-[0056]; Fig. 1); wherein the method comprises providing electrical energy to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes (see paras.[0056]-[0060]; Fig. 1). The reference Permuy further teaches increasing the frequency of the electrical current flowing through the wall of the plurality of reactor tubes to obtain a skin effect, which refers to the tendency of alternating electrical current to flow near the surface or skin of a conductor, increases the electrical resistance, and thereby, reduce the electrical current required for heating (see paras. [0125]-[0127]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Carr et al. and Permuy, and modified the method Carr et al. to include the process step of individually adjusting the frequency of the electric current flowing through the wall of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube as claimed by applicant, since the reference Carr et al. suggests adjusting the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube (see paras. [0089]; [0091]). Furthermore, the reference Permuy teaches that increasing the frequency of alternating electrical current flowing through the wall of a reactor tube, advantageously increases the electrical resistance, and thereby, reduce the electrical current required for heating the reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0127]).
Regarding claim 2, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the frequency of a current of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes is increased (see Permuy paras. [0125]-[0127]).
Regarding claim 17, the reference Carr et al. teaches that the method comprises a temperature control feedback loop for adjusting the current level of the power supplied based on the temperature of the at least one electrically conductive surface, one or more reactor tube, or combinations thereof (see paras. [0095]-[0096]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the frequency of the voltage and/or current of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes adjusted based on the temperature of the at least one electrically conductive surface, one or more reactor tube, or combinations thereof, since the reference Carr et al. suggests adjusting the electrical energy supplied to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes based on the temperature of the at least one electrically conductive surface, one or more reactor tube, or combinations thereof (see paras. [0095]-[0096]).
Regarding claim 19, the references Carr et al. and Permuy do not specifically specify wherein a ratio of heat penetration depth to tube diameter is about 1:8. However, the reference Permuy teaches that increasing the frequency of alternating electric current flowing through the wall of an electrically conductive reactor tube increases the electrical resistance heating near the surface or skin of the reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0126]). Thus, the reference Permuy teaches that a heat penetration depth (i.e., the electrical resistance heating near the surface or skin of the reactor tube) in an electrically conductive reactor tube is a result effective variable subject to optimization by adjusting the frequency of alternating electric current flowing through the wall of the electrically conductive reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0126]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a ratio of heat penetration depth to tube diameter within the ranges as claimed by applicant through a mere routine experimentation and optimization based on the teachings of Permuy, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 20, the references Carr et al. and Permuy do not specifically specify wherein each reactor or reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes has a thickness of about 15 mm or less. However, the reference Permuy teaches that the electrical resistance heating can be optimized by modifying the geometrical aspect of the reactor tube (see para. [0089]). The reference Permuy further provide an example wherein the plurality of reactor tubes have a diameter of 100 mm, a wall thickness of 20 mm, and a length of 10 m (see para. [0087]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, depending on the relative size of the reactor desired, to construct the plurality of reactor tubes such that each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes has a tube thickness within the ranges as claimed by applicant, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 21, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes has a catalyst disposed therein (see Carr et al. para. [0099]).
Regarding claim 22, the references Carr et al. and Permuy do not specifically disclose wherein the method comprises individually adjusting the frequency of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube and the catalyst disposed therein. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Carr et al. to include the step of individually adjusting the frequency of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube and the catalyst disposed therein, since the reference Carr et al. suggests adjusting the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube (see paras. [0089]; [0091]). Furthermore, the reference Permuy teaches that increasing the frequency of the alternating electrical current flowing through the wall of the plurality of reactor tubes, advantageously increases the electrical resistance, and thereby, reduce the electrical current required for heating each tube (see paras. [0125]-[0127]).
Regarding claim 26, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube comprises a material selected from carbon steel or carbon steel alloys, stainless steel or stainless steel alloys, nickel or nickel alloys, iron, chromium, molybdenum, silicon, vanadium, titanium, niobium, or combinations thereof (see Carr et al.: paras. [0067]-[0068]; Permuy: para. [0051]).
Regarding claim 28, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube comprises a material selected from ASTM A192, ASTM A210 Gr A-1, ASTM A209 Gr Ti, ASTM A213 Gr T11, ASTM A213 Gr T22, ASTM A213 Gr T21, ASTM A213 Gr T5, ASTM A213 Gr T5b, ASTM A213 Gr T9, ASTM A213 T91, ASTM 213 ASTM TP 304, ASTM A213 TP 304H, ASTM A213 TP 304L, ASTM A213 TP 316, ASTM A213 TP 316H, ASTM A213 TP 316L, ASTM A213 TP 317, ASTM A213 TP 317L, ASTM A213 TP 321, ASTM A213 TP 321H, ASTM A213 TP 347, ASTM A213 TP 347H, ASTM B407, ASTM A213 TP 310H, or combinations thereof (see Carr et al.: para. [0068]).
Regarding claims 30 and 31, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the temperature difference between the hottest reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes and the coolest reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes is about 50°C or less (see Carr et al. para. [0058]).
Regarding claim 14, the reference Carr et al. discloses a method of heating a system comprising a plurality of tubes, wherein each of the tubes comprises at least one electrically conductive surface; and wherein fluid enters each tube of the plurality of tubes via an associated inflow pipe header and exits each tube of the plurality of tubes via an associated outflow pipe header (see para. [0099]); and
wherein the method comprises:
galvanically isolating the plurality of tubes such that each of the plurality of tubes can be directly connected to the inflow pipe header and the outflow pipe header (see para. [0119]-[0123]; Fig. 10);
providing electrical energy to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube of the plurality of tubes (see para. [0099]; and
individually adjusting a current level of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube of the plurality of tubes to individually control the temperature of each tube (see paras. [0091]; [0099]).
The reference Carr et al., however, does not specifically specify individually adjusting the frequency of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube of the plurality of tubes to individually control the temperature of each tube.
The reference Permuy teaches a method of heating a reactor system (1), wherein the reactor system (see paras. [0047]-[0062]; Fig. 1) comprises: a plurality of reactor tubes (4a-4e), wherein each of the plurality of reactor tubes has at least one electrically conductive surface (see para. [0052]); and wherein fluid enters each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes (4a-4e) via an associated inflow pipe header (3a) and exits each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes via an associated outflow pipe header (3b) (see paras. [0054]-[0056]; Fig. 1); wherein the method comprises providing electrical energy to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes (see paras.[0056]-[0060]; Fig. 1). The reference Permuy further teaches increasing the frequency of the electrical current flowing through the wall of the plurality of reactor tubes to obtain a skin effect, which refers to the tendency of alternating electrical current to flow near the surface or skin of a conductor, increases the electrical resistance, and thereby, reduce the electrical current required for heating (see paras. [0125]-[0127]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Carr et al. and Permuy, and modified the method Carr et al. to include the process step of individually adjusting the frequency of the electric current flowing through the wall of each tube of the plurality of tubes to individually control the temperature of each tube as claimed by applicant, since the reference Carr et al. suggests adjusting the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube of the plurality of tubes to individually control the temperature of each tube (see paras. [0089]; [0091]). Furthermore, the reference Permuy teaches that increasing the frequency of alternating electrical current flowing through the wall of a reactor tube, advantageously increases the electrical resistance, and thereby, reduce the electrical current required for heating the reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0127]).
Regarding claim 15, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the frequency of a current of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of the plurality of reactor tubes is increased (see Permuy paras. [0125]-[0127]).
Regarding claim 23, the reference Carr et al. teaches that the method comprises a temperature control feedback loop for adjusting the current level of the power supplied based on the temperature of the at least one electrically conductive surface, one or more reactor tube, or combinations thereof (see paras. [0095]-[0096]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the frequency of the voltage and/or current of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube of the plurality of tubes adjusted based on the temperature of the at least one electrically conductive surface, one or more tube, or combinations thereof, since the reference Carr et al. suggests adjusting the electrical energy supplied to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube of the plurality of tubes based on the temperature of the at least one electrically conductive surface, one or more tube, or combinations thereof (see paras. [0095]-[0096]).
Regarding claim 24, the references Carr et al. and Permuy do not specifically specify wherein a ratio of heat penetration depth to tube diameter is about 1:8. However, the reference Permuy teaches that increasing the frequency of alternating electric current flowing through the wall of an electrically conductive reactor tube increases the electrical resistance heating near the surface or skin of the reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0126]). Thus, the reference Permuy teaches that a heat penetration depth (i.e., the electrical resistance heating near the surface or skin of the reactor tube) in an electrically conductive reactor tube is a result effective variable subject to optimization by adjusting the frequency of alternating electric current flowing through the wall of the electrically conductive reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0126]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a ratio of heat penetration depth to tube diameter within the ranges as claimed by applicant through a mere routine experimentation and optimization based on the teachings of Permuy, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 25, the references Carr et al. and Permuy do not specifically specify wherein each tube of the plurality of tubes has a thickness of about 15 mm or less. However, the reference Permuy teaches that the electrical resistance heating can be optimized by modifying the geometrical aspect the reactor tube (see para. [0089]). The reference Permuy further provide an example wherein the plurality of tubes have a diameter of 100 mm, a wall thickness of 20 mm, and a length of 10 m (see para. [0087]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, depending on the relative size of the tube desired, to construct the plurality of tubes such that each tube of the plurality of tubes has a tube thickness within the ranges as claimed by applicant, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 27, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube comprises a material selected from carbon steel or carbon steel alloys, stainless steel or stainless steel alloys, nickel or nickel alloys, iron, chromium, molybdenum, silicon, vanadium, titanium, niobium, or combinations thereof (see Carr et al.: paras. [0067]-[0068]; Permuy: para. [0051]).
Regarding claim 29, the references Carr et al. and Permuy disclose the method, wherein the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube comprises a material selected from ASTM A192, ASTM A210 Gr A-1, ASTM A209 Gr Ti, ASTM A213 Gr T11, ASTM A213 Gr T22, ASTM A213 Gr T21, ASTM A213 Gr T5, ASTM A213 Gr T5b, ASTM A213 Gr T9, ASTM A213 T91, ASTM 213 ASTM TP 304, ASTM A213 TP 304H, ASTM A213 TP 304L, ASTM A213 TP 316, ASTM A213 TP 316H, ASTM A213 TP 316L, ASTM A213 TP 317, ASTM A213 TP 317L, ASTM A213 TP 321, ASTM A213 TP 321H, ASTM A213 TP 347, ASTM A213 TP 347H, ASTM B407, ASTM A213 TP 310H, or combinations thereof (see Carr et al.: para. [0068]).
Claims 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carr et al. in view of Permuy as applied to claims 3 and 14 above, and further in view of Mekjean (US 3,596,034).
Regarding claims 3 and 16, the references Carr et al. and Permuy are silent with respect to utilizing a frequency converter to adjust the frequency of the voltage and/or current of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each tube or reactor tube. However, as evidenced by the reference Mekjean (see col. 12, lines 70-74), it is conventional in the art to utilize a frequency converter to produce an electric current having the desired electrical frequency for supply to an electrical heating means. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly utilize a frequency converter to adjust the frequency of an electric current of the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube of tube of Carr et al. and Permuy, since the reference Carr et al. suggests adjusting the electrical energy provided to the at least one electrically conductive surface of each reactor tube or tube to individually control the temperature of each reactor tube or tube (see paras. [0089]; [0091]). Furthermore, the reference Permuy teaches that increasing the frequency of alternating electrical current flowing through the wall of a reactor tube, advantageously increases the electrical resistance, and thereby, reduce the electrical current required for heating the reactor tube (see paras. [0125]-[0127]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lessanework T Seifu whose telephone number is (571)270-3153. The examiner can normally be reached M-T 9:00 am - 6:30 pm; F 9:00 am - 1:00 pm.
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 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.
/LESSANEWORK SEIFU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights