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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2009-203860 to Tomota (Tomota).
In reference to claim 1, Tomota teaches a process for feeding, with gaseous CO₂ (FIG. 1-4), a site (FIG. 1-4) comprising an installation (84, FIG. 1-4) requiring CO₂ or a mixture comprising CO₂ (abstract), the process comprising the steps of supplying hot water to the site using a boiler (20, FIG. 1-4), the boiler employing oxy-fuel combustion between a fuel (71, FIG. 1-4) and pure oxygen (52, FIG. 1-4), the pure oxygen fed to the boiler (20, FIG. 1-4) being obtained from a liquid oxygen source (51, FIG. 1-4) present on the site; recovering (at 80, FIG. 1-4) all or part of CO₂ contained in flue gases produced by the boiler (20, FIG. 1-4), arranging heat exchange (within 60, FIG. 1-4) between the flue gases and the liquid oxygen in a heat exchanger (60, FIG. 1-4) and recovering CO₂ in its gaseous form or its liquid form (at 84, FIG. 1-4), while having purified in the heat exchange all or part of water comprised in the flue gases (water separated in combustion and recovered in 83, FIG. 1-4).
In reference to claim 2, Tomota teaches the process as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein CO₂ recovered in its gaseous form (80, FIG. 1-4) is stored or sequestered for the purpose of subsequent use on the site under consideration (84, FIG. 1-4), or else used "as a just-in-time stream", as a stream "synchronized" with a hot water requirement (par 0051).
In reference to claim 3, Tomota teaches the process as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the CO₂ thus recovered is in its liquid form is stored in a tank as liquid CO₂ for the purpose of subsequent use on the site under consideration (par 0047).
In reference to claim 4, Tomota teaches the process as explained in the rejection of claim 3 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the heat exchanger (60, FIG. 1-4) in which heat exchange between the flue gases and the liquid oxygen is arranged is configured to convey the flue gases entering the heat exchanger under pressure and temperature conditions to liquefy CO₂ present in the flue gases, thus taking advantage of cold of the liquid oxygen present on the site, thereby without a need for a contribution of electrical energy (inherent in the process depicted in FIG. 1-4).
In reference to claim 8, Tomota teaches the process as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the heat exchange between the flue gases and the liquid oxygen (in 60, FIG. 1-4) is preceded by one or more treatments of the flue gases by physical and/or chemical and/or cryogenic separation methods (in 51, FIG. 1-4), the one or more treatments comprising heating the liquid oxygen and the fuel gas in order to improve the combustion occurring in the boiler and to reduce the discharges of nitrogen oxides; condensing a steam of the flue gases and removing possible dust generated by a furnace of the boiler (condensation of 82 of water 83 suppresses dust).
In reference to claim 9, Tomota teaches a device for feeding, with gaseous CO₂, a site (FIG. 1-4) comprising an installation (20) (84, FIG. 1-4) requiring CO₂ or a mixture comprising CO₂ (abstract), the device comprising a boiler (20, FIG. 1-4) configured to and capable of providing hot water to the site (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1-4 is capable of performing said functional language), the boiler employing oxy-fuel combustion between a fuel (71, FIG. 1-4) and pure oxygen (52, FIG. 1-4), the oxygen fed to the boiler being obtained from a liquid oxygen source (51, FIG. 1-4) present on the site and a heat exchanger (60, FIG. 1-4) configured to arrange heat exchange between the flue gases and the liquid oxygen in order to recover (at 84, FIG. 1-4) all or part of CO₂ contained in the flue gases produced by the boiler (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1-4 is capable of performing said functional language), and to feed to, using the recovered CO₂, installation; wherein the heat exchanger (60, FIG. 1-4) is configured to recover, according to the use which will be made thereof on the site under consideration, CO₂ in its gaseous form or its liquid form (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1-4 is capable of performing said functional language), while having purified in the heat exchange all or part of water comprised in the flue gases (water separated in combustion and recovered in 83, FIG. 1-4).
In reference to claim 10, Tomota teaches the device as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the heat exchanger (60, FIG. 1-4) in which the heat exchange between the flue gases and the liquid oxygen is arranged and configured to convey the flue gases entering the heat exchanger under pressure and temperature conditions to liquefy CO₂ present in the flue gases, thus taking advantage of cold of the liquid oxygen present on the site, thereby without a need for a contribution of electrical energy (inherent in the structure of FIG. 1-4).
In reference to claim 11, Tomota teaches the device as explained in the rejection of claim 9 above, and Tomota additionally teaches further comprising steps for treatment of the flue gases before their arrival in the heat exchanger (60, FIG. 1-4), wherein the treatment steps employ physical and/or chemical and/or cryogenic separation methods (in 51, FIG. 1-4), the treatment steps comprising one or more of the following actions heating the oxygen and the fuel gas in order to improve the combustion occurring in the boiler (20, FIG. 1-4) and to reduce the discharges of nitrogen oxides; condensing the a steam of the flue gases; and removing possible dust generated by the a furnace of the boiler (condensation of 82 of water 83 suppresses dust).
In reference to claim 12, Tomota teaches the device as explained in the rejection of claim 9 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the installation requiring CO2 is an installation for anesthesia of poultry or animals, before slaughtering (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1-4 is capable of performing said functional language).
In reference to claim 13, Tomota teaches the device as explained in the rejection of claim 9 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the installation requiring CO₂ is an installation for cultivation of plants in a greenhouse (intended use recitation; the system in FIG. 1-4 is capable of performing said functional language).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomota.
In reference to claim 5, Tomota teaches the process as claimed in claim 1, but does not teach wherein the installation requiring CO₂ is an installation for anesthesia of poultry or animals, before slaughtering.
However, the Examiner takes the Official Notice of facts not in the record by relying on “common knowledge” of various cryopreservation facilities utilizing carbon dioxide for livestock processing to be obvious in order to use waste energy resulting from air combustion.
In reference to claim 6, Tomota teaches the process as claimed in claim 1, but does not teach wherein the installation requiring CO₂ is an installation for cultivation of plants in a greenhouse.
However, the Examiner takes the Official Notice of facts not in the record by relying on “common knowledge” of various cryopreservation facilities utilizing carbon dioxide for plant cultivation to be obvious in order to use waste energy resulting from air combustion.
In reference to claim 7, Tomota teaches the process as explained in the rejection of claim 6 above, and Tomota additionally teaches wherein the requirement for CO₂ occurs essentially during the day, whereas the requirement for heating the greenhouse occurs essentially during the night, CO₂ recovered in liquid form during the night being stored in a tank for liquid CO₂ for the purpose of use of CO₂ during the day when the greenhouse requires CO₂ (inherent in the process depicted in FIG. 1-4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
See attached PTO-892 for relevant prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILIP ZEC whose telephone number is (571)270-5846. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri; 9-5.
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, JD Fletcher can be reached at 5712705054. 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.
/FILIP ZEC/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
8/8/2026
Prosecution Insights