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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
1. The amendment filed on 12/17/2025 has been made of record and entered.
Claims 1-19, 25, & 31-34 have been canceled.
Claims 20-21, 27, & 29 have been amended.
Claims 20-24 & 26-30 are currently pending in this application and under consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(2)
2. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
A. Claim(s) 20-24 & 26-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 2023/0149906 A1), hereinafter “Huang et al. ‘906”.
Huang et al. ‘906 discloses a method of producing a composition comprising zirconium, cerium, optionally yttrium, optionally one or more rare earths other than cerium and yttrium, comprising the steps of:
(a) mixing aqueous oxalic acid, zirconium solution, cerium solution, optionally yttrium solution, and optionally one or more rare earth solutions other than cerium and yttrium solution to provide a mixture;
(b) adding the mixture to a basic solution to form a precipitate;
(c) dewatering with alcohol and dispersing and heating in alcohol; and
(d) calcining the precipitate to provide a composition comprising zirconium, cerium, optionally yttrium, and optionally one or more rare earths other than cerium and yttrium (see page 7, claim 15).
Regarding claims 20 & 24, the reference teaches the same method of producing a composition as claimed, thus anticipates the instant claims.
Regarding claim 21, the reference discloses the same mixture as claimed (see page 7, claim 16).
Regarding claim 22, the reference teaches “yttrium” is included in step (a) of the disclosed method and this can be found on page 7, claim 17.
Regarding claim 23, the reference discloses the claimed washing and precipitation step on page 7, claim 18.
Regarding claim 26, the reference discloses the claimed “oxalic acid” weight % on page 7, claim 19.
Regarding claim 27, the reference discloses the claimed basic solution and concentration on page 7, claim 20.
Regarding claim 28, the reference discloses the claimed calcining temperature and time on page 7, claim 22.
Regarding claim 29, the reference teaches the process as disclosed further comprises a supercritical drying and at the claimed temperature range and time (see page 5, [0054]).
Regarding claim 30, the reference teaches the claimed limitation on “the process does not include an active comminution step” (see page 7, claim 26).
B. Claim(s) 20-24 & 26-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 2023/0083341 A1), hereinafter “Huang et al. ‘341”.
Huang et al. ‘341 discloses a method of producing a composition comprising zirconium, cerium, optionally yttrium, optionally one or more other rare earths other than cerium and yttrium, comprising the steps of:
(a) mixing aqueous oxalic acid, zirconium solution, cerium solution, optionally yttrium solution, optionally one or more rare earth solutions other than cerium and yttrium solution to provide a mixture;
(b) adding the mixture to a basic solution comprising lauric acid and diethylene glycol mono-n-butyl ether to form a precipitate; and
(c) calcining the precipitate to provide a composition comprising zirconium, cerium, optionally yttrium, and optionally one or more rare earths other than cerium and yttrium (see page 6, claim 15).
Regarding claims 20 & 24, the reference teaches the same method of producing a composition as claimed, thus anticipates the instant claims.
Regarding claim 21, the reference discloses the same mixture as claimed (see page 6, claim 16).
Regarding claim 22, the reference teaches “yttrium” is included in step (a) of the disclosed method and this can be found on page 6, claim 17.
Regarding claim 23, the reference discloses the claimed washing and precipitation step on page 6, claim 18.
Regarding claim 26, the reference discloses the claimed “oxalic acid” weight % on page 6, claim 19.
Regarding claim 27, the reference discloses the claimed basic solution and concentration on page 6, claim 20.
Regarding claim 28, the reference teaches the calcining is conducted at a temperature of about 700oC to 900oC and for about 3 to 7 hours, which temperature range falls within the claimed temperature range of 400oC to 1100oC and for about 0.25 to 24 hours (see page 6, claim 22).
Regarding claim 29, the reference teaches the process as disclosed further comprises a supercritical drying and at the claimed temperature range and time (see page 4, [0051]).
Regarding claim 30, the reference discloses the claimed limitation on “the process does not include an active comminution step” (see page 6, claim 25).
C. Claim(s) 20-24 & 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ITANI et al. (US 2020/0188885 A1), hereinafter “ITANI et al. ‘885”.
ITANI et al. ‘885 discloses a process of preparing a mixed oxide, the process comprising:
(a1) introducing an acidic aqueous solution of precursors of cerium, zirconium, lanthanum, and optionally a rare-earth metal other than cerium and lanthanum, in which an aluminum hydrate is dispersed, into a stirred tank containing a basic solution to form a precipitate dispersion;
(a2) optionally heating the precipitate dispersion;
(a3) adding a texturing agent to the precipitate dispersion;
(a4) recovering solid from the precipitate dispersion by solid/liquid separation and optionally washing the solid;
(a5) optionally drying the solid;
(a6) calcining the dried solid at a temperature of between 700oC and 1100oC to result in the mixed oxide;
(a7) optionally grinding the mixed oxide.
See page 16, claim 13.
The reference further discloses the texturing agent may be added to the dispersion resulting from step (a1) or else from step (a2), preferably added to a dispersion with temperature is at most 40oC, and at the amount of between 1% and 60%, etc. (see page 7, [0129]). Carboxylic acids including “oxalic acid” is listed as being suitable as texturing agent (see page 7, [0127]).
Regarding claims 20 & 21, the reference appears to teach the same process including steps (a), (b), and (c) as claimed, thus anticipates the instant claims.
Regarding claim 22, Example 1 of the reference discloses “yttrium” was used to produce a mixed oxide comprising Al2O3(30%)-ZrO2(35%)-CeO2(27%)-La2O3(4%)-Y2O3(4%) (see page 10, [0169] - [0174]), which meets the claim limitation.
Regarding claim 23, the reference teaches the claimed step of washing the precipitate with water prior to supercritical drying, thus the claim is met.
Regarding claims 24 & 26, the reference teaches surfactants, such as alcohols can be used as a texting agent in step (a3), which meets the claim limitation on “further comprising dewatering with an alcohol prior to supercritically drying step (see page 7, [0124]). The disclosed acid amount appears falling within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 27, the reference teaches alkali metal or alkaline-earth metal hydroxide, such as aqueous ammonia solution can be used as basic compound and at a concentration of 2 mol/l (see page 5, [0089]). The reference further discloses stoichiometric excess amount of the basic compound of at least 20 mol% relative to all of the solution of precursors may be used in order to ensure an optimal and complete precipitation, which would inherently include the claimed amount of 4.5N.
Regarding claim 28, the reference teaches the calcining temperature of between 700oC and 1100oC, which encompass the claimed temperature range of about 400oC to 1100oC.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
Claim(s) 29 & 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ITANI et al. (US 2020/0188885 A1), hereinafter “ITANI et al. ‘885”.
ITANI et al. ‘885 discloses a process of preparing a mixed oxide as discussed in the precedent paragraph, except for the following difference.
Regarding claim 29, the instant claim further defines the supercritical drying of the claimed process is conducted at approximately at 250 – 350oC and approximately 130 – 140 bar.
While the reference does not disclose the drying temperature, the reference however does teach that the solids can be dried in a spray dryer (see page 8, [0132]). It is considered the temperature of the spray dryer can be determined and optimized to the most effective temperature range in order to ensure complete drying of the solids to result in a high purity mixed oxides product, see In re Boesch and In re Aller.
Regarding claim 30, the instant claim further defines that the claimed process does not include an active comminution step is noted.
It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time the invention was made (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) to eliminate the grounding step disclosed by the reference to obtain a mixed oxides solid mass without grinding into small particles for convenience of storage, handling, and transportation purposes and generally communition, such as cutting, grinding, etc. into small particles is only needed for a specific use of the product.
Response to Applicants’ Arguments
4. The remarks submitted with the amendment on 12/17/2025 has been fully reviewed and considered, the amendments to the claims appeared overcome the claim objections made in the last office action.
With respect to the art rejection, the applied references (Huang et al. ‘906 (US 2023/0149906 A1), Huang et al. ‘341 (US 2023/0083341 A1), and ITANI et al. ’885 (US 2020/0188885 A1)) have an earlier filling date of February 27, 2020, which is prior to the earliest effective filling date of 03/16/2020 of the instant application, which qualified as prior art under a 102(a)(2). See rejection section for changes made.
Conclusion
5. Claims 20-24 & 26-30 are pending. Claims 20-24 & 26-30 are rejected. No claims are allowed.
Contacts
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner CAM N. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1357. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9:30 am – 5:00 pm) at alternative worksite or at cam.nguyen@uspto.gov.
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, Anthony Zimmer, can be reached at 571-270-3591. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Cam N. Nguyen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/CNN/
February 11, 2026