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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on March 10, 2025. These drawings are acceptable.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mariano et al. (US Patent No. 11,846,034 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Mariano teaches a CO2 conversion method comprising:
• generating CO and H2O by a RWGS reaction from CO2 and H2 (= a step 103 of generating, using the volume of carbon dioxide provided in step 102 and the RWGS reactor 110, a volume of carbon monoxide in a RWGS reaction (col. 12, lines 5-8 and Fig. 1); and
CO2 + H2 ↔ CO + H2O (6) RWGS
(col. 11, line 19));
• generating C2H4 (= in this case, the carbon monoxide reduction products include one or more of the following: ethylene (C2H4)) [col. 23, lines 47-49] and H2 (= the cathode of the electrolyzer can conduct a parasitic reduction reaction (in addition to the targeted carbon monoxide reduction reaction) which produces dihydrogen) [col. 5, lines 15-17; and col. 32, lines 19-22] by CO electrolysis from the CO and H2O (= a step 104 of supplying the volume of carbon monoxide generated in step 103 to a cathode area of an electrolyzer 120 (col. 12, lines 20-22) comprising a cathode area where carbon monoxide reduction takes place according to equation 8 (col. 17, lines 34-35 and 42-43: xCO + (x+y-z)H2O + (2x+y-2z)e- ↔ CxHyOz + (2x+y-2z)OH- (8)) and where the RWGS reactor will generally already provide carbon monoxide with water mixed in and there will no longer be a need to separate out the water (col. 17, lines 51-53 and 58-60)); and
• using the H2 generated by the CO electrolysis as the H2 of the RWGS reaction (= and this dihydrogen can be provided back to be an input to the RWGS reactor) [col. 5, lines 17-19].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Mariano as described
above because choosing from the list of specific embodiments1 for use in the flow chart 100 illustrated in Fig. 1 for a set of methods for the valorization of carbon dioxide using RWGS reactions is choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP § 2143).
Regarding claim 2, the method of Mariano differs from the instant invention because Mariano does not disclose wherein a C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is 66.6 % or less.
Mariano teaches that:
In specific embodiments of the inventions disclosed herein, carbon monoxide humidification upstream of the carbon monoxide electrolyzer is a key parameter of the process chain. Depending on electrolyzer configuration, humidification of the carbon monoxide gas stream may be important for improving electrolysis efficiency (page 23, lines 10-12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the CO2 electrolysis described by Mariano with wherein a C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is 66.6 % or less because:
(i) Mariano teaches a method in a similar manner as presently claimed. Since all of the elements of the claimed method were accounted for in the prior art, the discovery of a previously unappreciated property or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning does not render the method patentably new to the discoverer. The property or function does not necessarily mean the method is unobvious since this property or function may be presumed
or inherent in the prior art (MPEP § 2112).
(ii) Depending on the electrolyzer configuration, humidification of the carbon monoxide gas stream may be important for improving electrolysis efficiency.
Regarding claim 3, Mariano teaches wherein the H2 generated by the CO electrolysis is used as the H2 of the RWGS reaction (= the cathode of the electrolyzer can conduct a parasitic
reduction reaction (in addition to the targeted carbon monoxide reduction reaction) which produces dihydrogen, and this dihydrogen can be provided back to be an input to the RWGS reactor) [col. 5, lines 15-19] and a heat source (= to reduce the amount of external heat applied, the gas stream leaving the RWGS reactor is typically at high temperature and can be harvested using heat exchangers and recirculated around the RWGS reactor to provide process insulation) [col. 10, lines 38-45].
Regarding claim 4, the method of Mariano differs from the instant invention because Mariano does not disclose wherein a C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is set to be equal to or more than a value where excess H2 is not generated in accordance with a H2 thermal efficiency.
Mariano teaches that:
At the outlet of a carbon monoxide electrolyzer, a gas stream consisting of unconverted carbon monoxide, undesired dihydrogen, ethylene gas, and/or other hydrocarbons is produced. In specific embodiments of the invention, because the dihydrogen content in the gas stream is fractional, it can be uneconomical to invest in the downstream infrastructure required to condition the undesired dihydrogen for further processing or sale so this approach, in which the dihydrogen is still utilized, provides significant benefits (col. 32, lines 22-31).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the CO2 electrolysis described by Mariano with wherein a C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is set to be equal to or more than a value where excess H2 is not generated in accordance with a H2 thermal efficiency because:
(i) Mariano teaches a method in a similar manner as presently claimed. Since all of the elements of the claimed method were accounted for in the prior art, the discovery of a previously unappreciated property or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning does not render the method patentably new to the discoverer. The property or function does not necessarily mean the method is unobvious since this property or function may be presumed
or inherent in the prior art (MPEP § 2112).
(ii) Since the dihydrogen content in the gas stream at the outlet of a carbon monoxide electrolyzer is fractional, the C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is at least equal to a value where excess H2 is not generated in accordance with a H2 thermal efficiency.
Regarding claim 5, Mariano teaches wherein the H2 generated by the CO electrolysis is
used as the H2 of the RWGS reaction (= the cathode of the electrolyzer can conduct a parasitic
reduction reaction (in addition to the targeted carbon monoxide reduction reaction) which produces dihydrogen, and this dihydrogen can be provided back to be an input to the RWGS reactor) [col. 5, lines 15-19] and a heat source (= to reduce the amount of external heat applied, the gas stream leaving the RWGS reactor is typically at high temperature and can be harvested using heat exchangers and recirculated around the RWGS reactor to provide process insulation) [col. 10, lines 38-45].
Regarding claim 6, the method of Mariano differs from the instant invention because
Mariano does not disclose wherein a C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is set to be equal
to or more than a value where excess H2 is not generated in accordance with a H2 thermal efficiency.
Mariano teaches that:
At the outlet of a carbon monoxide electrolyzer, a gas stream consisting of unconverted carbon monoxide, undesired dihydrogen, ethylene gas, and/or other hydrocarbons is produced. In specific embodiments of the invention, because the dihydrogen content in the gas stream is fractional, it can be uneconomical to invest in the downstream infrastructure required to condition the undesired dihydrogen for further processing or sale so this approach, in which the dihydrogen is still utilized, provides significant benefits (col. 32, lines 22-31).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the CO2 electrolysis described by Mariano with wherein a C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is set to be equal to or more than a value where excess H2 is not generated in accordance with a H2 thermal efficiency because:
(i) Mariano teaches a method in a similar manner as presently claimed. Since all of the elements of the claimed method were accounted for in the prior art, the discovery of a previously unappreciated property or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning does not render the method patentably new to the discoverer. The property or function does not necessarily mean the method is unobvious since this property or function may be presumed
or inherent in the prior art (MPEP § 2112).
(ii) Since the dihydrogen content in the gas stream at the outlet of a carbon monoxide electrolyzer is fractional, the C2H4 current efficiency in the CO electrolysis is at least equal to a value where excess H2 is not generated in accordance with a H2 thermal efficiency.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDNA WONG whose telephone number is (571) 272-1349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM- 3:30 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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/EDNA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
1 Mariano teaches that FIG. 1 illustrates a flow chart 100 for a set of methods for the valorization of carbon dioxide using RWGS reactions in accordance with specific embodiments of the inventions disclosed herein (col. 11, lines 23-26). In specific embodiments of inventions disclosed herein, the dihydrogen or syngas production device is advantageously integrated with a carbon monoxide electrolyzer comprising a cathode area where carbon monoxide reduction takes place according to equation 8 (col. 17, lines 31-35).