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 .
Status of Claims
The instant application is a divisional application of Application No. 17/911,609.
Claims 1-11 are pending. This is the first office action on the merits.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 1-11 are apparatus claims. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. MPEP 2114 I-II. Accordingly, a functional limitation does not differentiate a claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP 2114. II. In addition, inclusion of a material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claim. MPEP 2115.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 / § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zandona (US 4,405,444).
Regarding claim 1, Zandona discloses an apparatus comprising:
a fluid inlet configured to receive a pressurized mixture of a heavy crude oil and a hydrogen containing gas at least partially dissolved in the heavy crude oil (see Fig. 1: the area at the bottom of the riser 24 receiving feeds corresponds to the claimed fluid inlet; col. 5, lines 58-62: “…the pressured oil feed is preheated…”; col. 6, lines 6-10: “The heated oil feed, water and purge gas meet prior to flowing through an orifice restriction…”; col. 7, lines 44-49: alternatively, “an oil inlet chamber” may correspond to a fluid inlet);
a chamber (“riser 24”) (col. 6, lines 23-26);
a nozzle (“orifice restriction 22”) interposed between the fluid inlet and the chamber and of a smaller diameter than the fluid inlet or the chamber (col. 6, lines 6-10; col. 7, lines 49-65); and
a fluid outlet (“withdrawal conduit 40”) connected to the chamber (col. 6, lines 36-40);
wherein the apparatus is configured to cause foaming of the pressurized mixture upon passing through the nozzle and into the chamber (col. 6, lines 6-10: “The heated oil feed, water and purge gas meet prior to flowing through an orifice restriction 22 in the foam producing nozzle and thence through an expanded opening before discharge as a foam into the bottom of the riser reactor.”).
Zandona does not disclose that the oil feed contains an at least partially dissolved hydrogen gas. However, Zandona discloses that liquid water (Fig. 1, 14) is added to the oil feed, which has been preheated to a temperature of 204-316°C, to initiate foaming of the oil charge before introduction to the foam producing nozzle (col. 5, lines 58-68). This suggests that at least part of the added water is vaporized or at least partially dissolved in the oil feed. Alternatively, Zandona teaches all the structural limitations of claim 1. Therefore, the apparatus of Zandona is considered to be capable of carrying out claimed functional limitation of receiving and foaming a mixture of a crude oil and a hydrogen containing gas at least partially dissolved in the crude oil.
Zandona does not explicitly teach that the chamber (riser) is maintained at or near atmospheric pressure. However, this limitation is related to the manner in which the claimed apparatus is intended to be employed and does not serve to distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of structure. MPEP 2114.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Zandona does not teach that the oil feed contains (i) a C1-C5 hydrocarbon gas (claim 2), or (ii) methane, ethane, propane, n-butane, iso-butane, n-pentane, iso-pentane, or neo-pentane (claim 3), the hydrocarbon gas being at least partially dissolved in the oil feed. However, these claims are directed to an apparatus, and inclusion of a material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claim. MPEP 2115. Since Zandona teaches all the structural limitations of claim 1, it would be obvious to conclude that the apparatus of Zandona is capable of processing a mixture of a crude oil and an at least partially dissolved hydrocarbon gas, as recited.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation recited in claim 4 is related to the manner in which the claimed apparatus is intended to be employed and does not serve to distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in terms of structure. MPEP 2114.
In any event, Zandona discloses that the oil feed may be pressured to pressuring within the range of atmospheric pressure up to about 200 psig (col. 6-9). It is also generally known that a fluidized bed reactor is operable at near-atmospheric pressure. Thus, the apparatus taught by Zandona can be configured to provide a pressure difference between the fluid inlet and the chamber of greater than 140 psig.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-11 are allowable over the prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. No prior art of record, individually or in combination, teaches or reasonably suggests an apparatus for converting a heavy crude oil to lighter hydrocarbons, the apparatus comprising: (i) a jet injector configured to inject a hydrogen containing gas into a portion of a heavy crude oil to form a pressurized mixture; (ii) a foam generator configured to generate a foam of the pressurized mixture into a chamber, and (ii) a non-thermal plasma reactor connected to a fluid outlet of the chamber, the reactor comprising at least two electrodes connected to pulsed high voltage source.
Zandona (US 4,405,444) teaches an apparatus capable of generating a foam of a heavy crude oil, as discussed above. However, the reference is directed to catalytic cracking of a heavy oil in a rise reactor and does not teach or suggest employing a non-thermal plasma reactor.
Jemison et al. (WO 2019/204739 A1, cited in IDS dated 02/24/2025) disclose an apparatus and a process for cracking liquid heavy oil to lighter hydrocarbon fraction, the process comprising: forming a mixture of a heavy crude oil 34 (Fig. 1) and a light hydrocarbon gas (serving as a hydrogen atom source) 66 within a reactor 13 ([0042]-[0043]; [0056]); and subjecting the mixture to a spark discharge plasma formed in an inter-electrode gap within the reactor (the inter-electrode gap referring to a space between one end of a positive electrode and one end of a negative electrode), thereby converting the heavy crude oil into lighter hydrocarbons ([0042]; [0058]; [0062]-[0063]). The reference, however, does not teach or reasonably suggest employing a foam generator configured to generate a foam of the mixture of the heavy crude oil and light hydrocarbon gas, as required in the claimed invention. The prior art of record fails to provide guidance or hint which would have reasonably motivated one skilled art to form a crude oil foam from a pressurized mixture of a hydrogen containing gas and a heavy crude oil, prior to subjecting said crude oil foam to the non-thermal plasma reactor to convert at least a portion of the heavy crude oil into lighter hydrocarbons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason Y Chong whose telephone number is (571)431-0694. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:30pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571)272-5954. 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.
/JASON Y CHONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights