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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 21, 2025 has been entered.
The rejection of claims 1-2, 5, 17-28, 23, 28-29 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 6, 14, 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon in view of Guzmann et al is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 8 and 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon in view of Zok is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 19-20, 22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon in view of Wang et al is withdrawn of Applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 23-25 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon in view of Meyer is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 5, 8, 11, 16, 20, 22-23, 28-29, 44-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (US Patent Application 2018/0079977 (already of record)) in view Zok (DE3511760 (already of record)) in view of Wang et al (US Patent 10,125,306 (already of record)) in view of Esche Jr et al (US Patent 6,599,865).
Regarding claims 1-2, 5, 8, 11, 16, 20, 22-23, 28-29, 44-49, Solomon teaches a deposition reducing composition for crude oil (which satisfies claimed deposition inhibiting) (Abstract) comprising 0.1-20wt% of a corrosion inhibitor including an imidazoline compound (Paragraphs 38-46), 0.1-0wt% of an asphaltene inhibitor such as polyolefin esters and polyisobutylene succinic anhydride (Paragraph 59), 0.1-20wt% of a scale inhibitor such as a phosphate ester (Paragraph 61) and about 1-80wt% of an organic solvent such as xylene (Paragraph 37). Solomon further teaches imidazolines:
PNG
media_image1.png
665
418
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Solomon fails to specifically disclose a mixture of a monoalkyl phosphate ester and dialkyl phosphate ester, polyisobutylene succinic ester and a sulfurized olefin.
In the same field of endeavor, Zok teaches a composition for prevention of deposits for oil (Paragraphs 37, 40) comprising phosphate ester having the formula
PNG
media_image2.png
98
457
media_image2.png
Greyscale
s=0-3, r,t=0-2, r+t=3, m=1-15
wherein R is up to 22 carbon atoms, wherein the phosphate esters can be mixtures of monoester and diesters (Paragraphs 39-40, 64).
In the same field of endeavor, Wang et al teaches an asphaltene inhibiting agent in an oil which is a reaction product of a polyisobutylene succinic anhydride and a polyol such as pentaerythritol (Col. 3, Line 8-Col. 4, Line 23).
In the same field of endeavor, Esche Jr et al teaches a improving the antioxidancy or deposition formation properties of oil compositions comprising a sulfurized olefin, including C4-C24 alpha-olefins (which satisfies claimed sulfurized 1-decene) (Col. 4, Lines 40-60).
With regard to a mixture of a monoalkyl phosphate ester and dialkyl phosphate ester, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a mixture of monoalkyl phosphate ester and dialkyl phosphate ester in Solomon in view of Zok in order to provide a component that prevents deposits in oil; wherein Solomon already encompasses the incorporation of phosphate ester scale inhibitors. It is well settled that it is prima facie obvious to combine ingredients, each of which is targeted by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose. In re Linder 457 F,2d 506,509, 173 USPQ 356, 359 (CCPA 1972).
With regard to polyisobutylene succinic ester, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the polyisobutylene succinic ester in Solomon in view of Wang et al in order to provide the claimed asphaltene inhibiting properties wherein the broad teachings of Solomon encompass asphaltene inhibitors including polyolefin esters and polyisobutylene succinic anhydride. Simple substitution of one known asphaltene inhibitor for another would provide the predictable results of inhibiting asphaltene.
With regard to a sulfurized olefin, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a sulfurized olefin in Solomon in view of Esche Jr et al in order to provide antioxidancy or deposit formation properties. It is well settled that it is prima facie obvious to combine ingredients, each of which is targeted by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose. In re Linder 457 F,2d 506,509, 173 USPQ 356, 359 (CCPA 1972).
Claims 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solomon (US Patent Application 2018/0079977 (already of record)) in view Zok (DE3511760 (already of record)) in view of Wang et al (US Patent 10,125,306 (already of record)) in view of Esche Jr et al (US Patent 6,599,865) as applied to claims 1-2, 5, 8, 11, 16, 20, 22-23, 28-29, 44-49 above, and in further view of Meyer (US Patent 7,057,050 (already of record)).
Regarding claims 23-25, Solomon, Zok, Wang et al and Esche Jr et al disclose the invention substantially as claimed. Solomon, Zok, Wang et al and Esche Jr et al teach the features above. However, Solomon, Zok, Wang et al and Esche Jr et al fails to specifically disclose the imidazoline corrosion inhibitor in the instant claims.
In the same field of endeavor, Meyer teaches imidazoline corrosion inhibitors of the formula
PNG
media_image3.png
220
409
media_image3.png
Greyscale
for oil and oilfield applications (Abstract, Col. 2, Lines 1-15, Col. 2, Lines 63-Col. 3, Lines 18)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the imidazoline corrosion inhibitor of Meyer in Solomon, Zok, Wang et al and Esche Jr et al in order to provide corrosion inhibiting properties in oil and the broad teachings of Solomon already encompass an imidazoline corrosion inhibitor in the composition. Simple substitution of one known imidazoline corrosion inhibitor for another would achieve the predictable results of inhibiting corrosion.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 8, 11, 16, 20, 22-25, 28-29 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANISHA DIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-7730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday and Friday, 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/TANISHA DIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 February 4, 2026