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 Objections
Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 15 recites “ammonia” and should recite “the ammonia”.
Claim 2, line 6 recites “remaining part of the heated ammonia” and should recite “a remaining part of the heated ammonia”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2, line 4 recites “liquid ammonia”. It is unclear if this refers to the ammonia recited in base claim 1 or an additional element. Clarification is required.
Claims dependent thereon are rejected for inheriting the deficiency of the respective base claim.
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.
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 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dowdy et al. (US 5,761,896) in view of Kasuga et al. (US 2012/0047870).
Regarding claim 1, Dowdy teaches a combustion system (Figure 3) using fuel (from 46), the combustion system comprising:
a combustor (10’);
a reheating burner (10”) that is in fluid communication with the combustor and that heats exhaust gas (18’) supplied from the combustor (Figure 3);
heat utilization equipment (2) that is in fluid communication with the reheating burner and that uses heat of the exhaust gas (Figure 3);
a re-circulation flow path (flow from 31 to 5 to 82 to 60 to 64 to 66’) that supplies a part of the exhaust gas (water vapor from the exhaust gas) used in the heat utilization equipment to the combustor (via 66’); and
a first heat exchanger (on line 82) arranged on the re-circulation flow path (Figure 3), the first heat exchanger supplying cooled exhaust gas to the combustor (Figure 3 shows the cooled exhaust gas vapor flows from the heat exchanger through onto the combustor 10’ and reheat combustor 10”).
Dowdy is silent on the combustion system using ammonia as fuel; the first heat exchanger exchanging heat between the exhaust gas and ammonia, the first heat exchanger supplying vaporized ammonia to the reheating burner.
Kasuga teaches the combustion system using ammonia as fuel (Figures 8A and B, liquid ammonia on the left side of the figure); the first heat exchanger (14) exchanging heat between the exhaust gas (flowing out of 10) and ammonia (liquid ammonia), the first heat exchanger supplying vaporized ammonia to the reheating burner (Gaseous ammonia flows from the heat exchanger 14 to combustor 2. In the system of Dowdy in view of Kasuga, the fuel is delivered to both the combustor and the reheat combustor).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dowdy’s invention to include the combustion system using ammonia as fuel; the first heat exchanger exchanging heat between the exhaust gas and ammonia, the first heat exchanger supplying vaporized ammonia to the reheating burner in order to reduce NOx emissions as suggested and taught in paragraph 4.
Regarding claim 5, Dowdy in view of Kasuga teach the invention as claimed and described above. Kasuga further teaches further comprising an injector (12) that directly injects liquid ammonia to the exhaust gas (from turbine 3) flowing through the re-circulation flow path. (extending from 10)
Regarding claim 6, Dowdy in view of Kasuga teach the invention as claimed and described above. Kasuga further teaches further comprising a denitrification equipment (10) that reduces a nitrogen oxide in the exhaust gas (paragraph 33),
wherein the first heat exchanger supplies a part of the vaporized ammonia to the denitrification equipment (Figure 8B shows the first heat exchanger 14 delivers the gaseous ammonia to the denitrification equipment 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record fails to anticipate and/or render obvious, either alone or in combination, a second heat exchanger arranged on the re-circulation flow path, the second heat exchanger exchanging heat between the exhaust gas and liquid ammonia, the second heat exchanger supplying a part of heated ammonia to the combustor and supplying remaining part of the heated ammonia to the first heat exchanger as described in claim 2.
Claims dependent thereon inherit the allowable subject matter of the respective base claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katheryn Malatek whose telephone number is (571)272-5689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9 am - 6 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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/KATHERYN A MALATEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights