DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cui (“Efficient CO2 absorption by azolide-based deep eutectic solvents,” Chem. Commun., 2019, 55, 1426-1429).
In regards to claims 1-3, Cui teaches a carbon dioxide adsorbent comprising an ionic liquid (Abstract, “Deep eutectic solvents formed by solid azolide ionic liquids and ethylene glycol (EG) can efficiently capture CO2”)
comprising an imidazole-based anion, with R1, R2, and R3 being hydrogen (shown below)
And an aliphatic alcohol, such as ethylene glycol (a polyhydric aliphatic alcoholic solvent)
Or monoethanolamine (an aliphatic monohydric alcohol solvent). See the last full paragraph on page 1426, the paragraph bridging pages 1426 and 1427 as well as scheme 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
95
189
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 4, Cui teaches that the ionic liquid can comprise imidazolium (Page 1426, “Zhang et al.37 studied the CO2 absorption capacities of DESs formed by imidazolium-based IL BmimCl and monoethanolamine (MEA) under ambient conditions”).
In regards to claims 5 and 6, Cui teaches an aliphatic monohydric of ethylene glycol and polyhydric alcoholic solvent of monoethanolamine as discussed above, which are C2 aliphatic alcohols.
In regards to claim 7, Cui teaches aliphatic alcohols where the boiling point is 130°C or higher. Ethylene glycol has a boiling point of 197.61°C while monoethanolamine has a boiling point of 170° as evidenced by Pubchem (see attached).
In regards to claim 8, Cui teaches aliphatic alcohols where the heat capacity is 4.9 kJ/kg°C or less. Ethylene glycol has a heat capacity of 2.35 kJ/kg·K which is equivalent to 2.35 kJ/kg·C as evidenced by Elchemy (see attached).
In regards to claim 9, Cui teaches that the carbon dioxide absorption equivalent is 0.7 or more (Page 1428, “The results show that these azolide-based DESs have the tendency to capture one mole of CO2 per mole of solvent”).
In regards to claims 10 and 11, Cui does not explicitly teach that a compound is formed by reacting an adsorbent with carbon dioxide and an aliphatic carbonate. However, the adsorbent of Cui is the same as the adsorbent claimed in the instant application being reacted with CO2. The reaction would proceed with the same mechanism as claimed in the instant application involving an aliphatic carbonate with the alcohol present and produce the product as claimed in the instant application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAANZEB RAJA whose telephone number is (703)756-4531. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:30-6.
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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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.
/JAANZEB C RAJA/Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights