DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 9/3/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 15-20 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 202303404 U) in view of Knight (US 20210009412 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a per- and polyfluoroalkyls (PFA) removal system comprising:
a torch reaction zone (a combustion zone within the incinerator 10);
an organic compound stream (7), the organic compound stream injected into the torch reaction zone;
a hydrogen stream (3), the hydrogen stream injected into the torch reaction zone;
an oxygen stream (1) the oxygen stream injected into the torch reaction zone;
a waste stream (4), the hot waste stream injected into the torch reaction zone; and
a flue gas stream (Fig. 1: stream exiting the incinerator), the flue gas stream discharged from the torch reaction zone.
Xu fails to disclose:
where the waste stream is a hot waste stream
Knight teaches a waste removal system comprising: a hot waste stream (Fig. 1: input feedstock 154 is preheated in the heat exchanger 112 by the hot flue gas 110; paras. 39, 46), the hot waste stream injected into the torch reaction zone (Fig. 1, 102).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time of effective filing of the application to modify Xu where the waste stream is a hot waste stream that is injected into the torch reaction zone. By using the flue gas to preheat the waste stream in the heat exchanger, combustion efficiency is increased (see para. 39 of Knight).
Regarding claim 2, modified Xu discloses the PFA removal system of claim 1, wherein the waste stream includes gas, liquid, and organics (Xu, para. 1).
Regarding claim 3, modified Xu discloses the PFA removal system of claim 1, wherein the organics include PFAs. Xu discloses where the waste removal system is designed to eliminate fluorine containing waste (para. 1), and PFAs is a fluorine containing waste. Official Notice is also taken that it is well-known and common knowledge to incinerate PFAs.
Regarding claim 4, modified Xu discloses the PFA removal system of claim 1, wherein the flue gas stream includes syngas (water and CO2; para. 24 of Xu).
Regarding claim 5, modified Xu discloses the PFA removal system of claim 1 further comprising a heat exchanger, the heat exchanger adapted to cool the flue gas stream to form a cooled flue gas stream using a cold waste stream to form the hot waste stream (see Knight in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Xu discloses the PFA removal system of claim 5 further including a condenser (Xu, quencher 11), the condenser adapted to cool the cooled flue gas stream to form a wet flue gas stream (Official Notice is taken that a quencher is used to cool an exhaust gas by spraying the gas with a liquid).
Regarding claim 7, modified Xu discloses the PFA removal system of claim 6 further comprising a vapor liquid separator (Xu, both falling film absorber 15 and wash tower 16 can separate the liquid from the gas), the vapor liquid separator adapted to separate the wet flue gas stream to a gas stream (gas streams 19, 20, and/or gas stream entering the wash tower 16) and a condensate stream (condensate stream enters tank 12 or 17 of Xu).
The cited separators in Xu can separate a gas from a liquid, but it is unclear if the separated gas is syngas. Nevertheless, Knight teaches a vapor liquid separator (Fig. 1, 114+120), the vapor liquid separator adapted to separate the wet flue gas stream (Fig. 1, 14) to a syngas stream (Fig. 1, 122 and/or 124) and a condensate stream (Fig. 1, 116).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time of effective filing of the application to modify Xu to include a vapor liquid separator, the vapor liquid separator adapted to separate the wet flue gas stream to a syngas stream and a condensate stream. The motivation to combine is so that the separated flue stream components can be disposed of or used for a downstream purpose (Knight, para. 43)
Regarding claim 8, modified Xu discloses (see rejection of claim 1 for citations) a per- and polyfluoroalkyls (PFA) removal process comprising: introducing an organic compound stream, a hydrogen stream and an oxygen stream into a torch reaction zone; reacting the organic compound stream, the hydrogen stream, and the oxygen stream in the torch reaction zone to form a hydrogen-organic compound torch; reacting a hot waste stream in the torch reaction zone to form a flue gas stream; discharging the flue gas stream from the torch reaction zone.
Regarding claim 9, modified Xu discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the hot waste stream comprises PFAs (see rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 10, modified Xu discloses the method of claim 8, except wherein the amount of PFAs in the hot waste stream is reduced by at least 97% by reaction with the hydrogen-organic compound torch. However, the percentage is a destruction efficiency, which is a matter of optimization. A person skilled in the art would have the requisite skill and knowledge to mix the various reactants in a combustion zone, so that the PFAs are reduced to the desired level. Moreover, PFAs are harmful to the environment and to people; therefore, a person skilled in the art would be motivated to maximize the destruction efficiency.
Regarding claim 11, modified Xu discloses the method of claim 8 further comprising: exchanging heat in the flue gas stream in a heat exchanger to form a cooled flue gas stream using a cool waste stream to form the hot waste stream (see rejection of claim 5).
Regarding claim 12, modified Xu discloses the method of claim 11 further comprising passing the cooled flue gas stream through a condenser to form a wet flue gas stream (see rejection of claim 6).
Regarding claim 13, modified Xu discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the condenser is a down flow condenser (Xu discloses a quencher 11 and Official Notice is taken that a quencher operates by spraying a liquid into the flue gas, and this spray flows downward).
Regarding claim 14, modified Xu discloses the method of claim 11 further comprising separating the wet flue gas stream into a condensate stream and a syngas stream (see rejection of claim 7).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON LAU whose telephone number is (571)270-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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 LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762