10552551 (B.P.A.I. Jul. 30, 2012)

Ex Parte Berggren et al

Board of Patent Appeals and InterferencesJul 30, 2012

10552551 (B.P.A.I. Jul. 30, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 10/552,551 02/06/2007 Wouter Detlof Berggren TS1481 US 2312 23632 7590 07/31/2012 SHELL OIL COMPANY P O BOX 2463 HOUSTON, TX 772522463 EXAMINER MERKLING, MATTHEW J ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 1723 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 07/31/2012 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________ Ex parte WOUTER DETLOF BERGGREN and FRANCISCUS JOHANNA ARNOLDUS MARTENS ____________ Appeal 2011-007905 Application 10/552,551 Technology Center 1700 ____________ Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, RICHARD E. SCHAFER, and LINDA M. GAUDETTE, Administrative Patent Judges. GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134 from the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) of claims 1, 2, and 4-6 as unpatentable over Fuderer (US 4,650,651, issued Mar. 17, 1987). We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6. We AFFIRM. Appeal 2011-007905 Application 10/552,551 2 Appellants claim a process for the preparation of a gas containing hydrogen and carbon monoxide from a carbonaceous feedstock comprising partially oxidizing a carbonaceous feedstock in a vertically oriented tubular partial oxidation reactor vessel and catalytically steam reforming a carbonaceous feedstock in the presence of steam in a convective steam reformer zone in a second vessel (claim 1). Representative claim 1 reads as follows: 1. A process for the preparation of a gas containing hydrogen and carbon monoxide from a carbonaceous feedstock, the process comprising: (a) partially oxidizing a carbonaceous feedstock in a vertically oriented tubular partial oxidation reactor vessel having an upper end, and a lower end having an inlet, the vessel comprising a burner at the upper end thereby obtaining a first gaseous product of hydrogen and carbon monoxide having a temperature between 1100 Â°C and 1500 Â°C; (b) catalytically steam reforming a carbonaceous feedstock in the presence of steam in a convective steam reformer zone in a second vessel thereby obtaining a steam reformer product; (c) reducing the temperature of the first gaseous product by between 300Â°C and 750 Â°C by mixing the first gaseous product with the steam reformer product by feeding the steam reformer product into said inlet yielding a first mixture; (d) contacting the first mixture with a bed of reforming catalyst positioned in the lower end of the partial oxidation reactor vessel just below said inlet and obtaining a second mixture having a temperature between 950Â°C and 1100Â°C; and (e) feeding the second mixture to the second vessel and providing heat for the convective steam reforming reaction zone in step (b) by convective heat exchange between the second mixture having a temperature between 950Â°C and 1100 Â°C and the steam reformer reactor zone thereby obtaining a Appeal 2011-007905 Application 10/552,551 3 hydrogen and carbon monoxide containing gas having a reduced temperature. Appellants do not separately argue the claims under rejection (Br. 3- 4). As a consequence, the rejected claims will stand or fall with sole independent claim 1. The Examiner finds that Fuderer discloses a partial oxidation reactor vessel (see, e.g., zone 6 of sole Fig.) and a convective steam reformer zone in a second vessel (see, e.g., zone 5 of Fig.) as required by claim 1 (Ans. 3- 4). The only reasonably specific argument presented by Appellants against the rejection on appeal relates to the above finding. Specifically, Appellants contest the Examiner's finding by stating that "the primary and secondary reformer zones [of Fuderer] are contained within a single vessel" (id. at 3) whereas "[t]he present invention . . . comprises two reaction vessels" (id.). We agree with the Examiner's finding that Fuderer discloses the two vessels required by claim 1. Although Fuderer's vessels are vertically stacked and housed within a single apparatus, Appellants offer no support whatsoever for the proposition that claim 1 requires the recited vessels to be separate vessels next to one another as shown in their Figure 1. On the other hand, the Specification discloses that the use of separate vessels next to one another is merely a preference (Spec. 5:8-10). This disclosure supports the Examiner's finding that claim 1 encompasses an embodiment wherein the recited vessels are housed within a single apparatus as taught by Fuderer. Appeal 2011-007905 Application 10/552,551 4 For the above stated reasons, we sustain the Â§ 103 rejection of the appealed claims as unpatentable over Fuderer. The decision of the Examiner is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. Â§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED ssl