Patent Application 17801593 - TREATMENT APPARATUS AND TREATMENT METHOD FOR RAW - Rejection
Patent Application 17801593 - TREATMENT APPARATUS AND TREATMENT METHOD FOR RAW
Title: TREATMENT APPARATUS AND TREATMENT METHOD FOR RAW MATERIAL
Application Information
- Invention Title: TREATMENT APPARATUS AND TREATMENT METHOD FOR RAW MATERIAL
- Application Number: 17801593
- Submission Date: 2025-05-14T00:00:00.000Z
- Effective Filing Date: 2022-08-23T00:00:00.000Z
- Filing Date: 2022-08-23T00:00:00.000Z
- National Class: 110
- National Sub-Class: 250000
- Examiner Employee Number: 86281
- Art Unit: 3762
- Tech Center: 3700
Rejection Summary
- 102 Rejections: 1
- 103 Rejections: 2
Cited Patents
The following patents were cited in the rejection:
Office Action Text
DETAILED ACTION
Application Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to Applicant’s submission dated 08/23/2022. Claim(s) 1–8 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1–2 & 6–7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2016/0257897 to Kara et al.
With regard to claims 1 & 6, Kara discloses a treatment apparatus for a raw material and its associated method of use (abstract), comprising: a fluidized-bed furnace having a pyrolysis chamber (102) and a combustion chamber (124) therein (¶¶ 0073, 0077), the pyrolysis chamber (102) and the combustion chamber (124) being separated by a partition wall (Fig. 1); an electrolysis device (118) configured to electrolyze water (120) to generate hydrogen (122) and oxygen (136) (¶¶ 0082, 0127); a methanation reactor (110, 114) configured to produce methane from carbon dioxide discharged from the combustion chamber and the hydrogen (¶¶ 0078, 0081, 0115, 0121); a first fluidizing-gas supply line (106) configured to supply a first fluidizing gas to the pyrolysis chamber (102) (¶¶ 0075, 0107); and a second fluidizing-gas supply line (128) configured to introduce a second fluidizing gas to the combustion chamber (124) (¶¶ 0089, 0109–0110), the second fluidizing gas including the oxygen (136) and a part of the carbon dioxide (140) (Fig. 1; ¶¶ 0085, 0094, 0109, 0127).
With regard to claims 2 & 7, Kara further discloses the electrolysis device (118) is electrically connected to a CO2-free power generator (225) (¶ 0138).
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 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.
Claims 3 & 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kara in view of US 3,853,498 to Bailie.
Kara fails to disclose the first fluidizing-gas supply line comprises an oxygen-free-gas supply line configured to supply oxygen-free gas as the first fluidizing gas into the pyrolysis chamber. Bailie teaches the first fluidizing-gas supply line comprises an oxygen-free-gas supply line configured to supply oxygen-free gas as the first fluidizing gas into the pyrolysis chamber (Col. 4, lines 57–62; Col. 5, lines 40–44). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the treatment apparatus of Kara with the oxygen-free pyrolysis reactor of Bailie because such a combination would have been the simple substitution of one known element (a gasifier) for another (pyrolyzer) yielding only predictable results (producing a fuel with a higher energy content but needing to provide external heat).
Claims 4–5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kara in view of US 2020/0208274 to Gorse et al.
With regard to claim 4, Kara fails to disclose a hydrogen holder configured to store the hydrogen generated by the electrolysis device, wherein the hydrogen holder is arranged between the electrolysis device and the methanation reactor. Gorse teaches a hydrogen holder configured to store the hydrogen generated by the electrolysis device (¶¶ 0027, 0078), wherein the hydrogen holder is arranged between the electrolysis device and the methanation reactor (¶¶ 0027, 0078). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the treatment apparatus of Kara with the hydrogen storage of Gorse because such a combination would have had the added benefit of creating a buffer to ensure an adequate supply of hydrogen.
With regard to claim 5, Kara fails to disclose an oxygen holder configured to store the oxygen generated by the electrolysis device, wherein the oxygen holder is arranged between the electrolysis device and the combustion chamber. Gorse teaches an oxygen holder configured to store the oxygen generated by the electrolysis device (¶¶ 0023, 0078), wherein the oxygen holder is arranged between the electrolysis device and the combustion chamber (¶¶ 0023, 0078).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see attached PTO-892. Applicant is encouraged to review the cited references prior to submitting a response to this office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J LAUX whose telephone number is (571)270-7619. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:30 M-F.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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.
/DAVID J LAUX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
May 9, 2025
