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. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 4, 7, 10, and 20 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. Regarding claims 4, 7, 10, and 20, the phrases "like" and/or “such as” renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "like" and/or “such as”), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). 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. Claim(s) 18 and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Cornelissen et al. (US 2017/0204207 A1) . Regarding Claim 18 , Cornelissen et al. reference discloses a removable reactor liner for removably lining an interior surface of a reactor, the liner comprising a liner body defining an interior space and an opening, wherein the interior space of the liner forms a reaction compartment in an enclosed chamber of the reactor (Abstract and Figures 7-9, numeral 80) . Regarding Claim 20 , Cornelissen et al. reference discloses the removable reactor liner of claim 18, wherein the liner comprises material comprising chemically inert polymers including inert fluoropolymers like polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE) or perfluoroalkoxy copolymer (PFA), and fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) (Abstract - polytetrafluoroethylene ) . Regarding Claim 21 , Cornelissen et al. reference discloses the removable reactor liner of claim 18, wherein the liner comprises a thickness ranging from about 0.001 to about 0.1 inches, from about 0.002 to 0.02 in, or from about 0.05 to 0.08 in (Paragraph [0006] – 0.02 to 0.20mm) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 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. Claim (s) 1- 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortes (WO-2018053659A1) in view of Cornelissen et al. ( US 2017/0204207 A1 ) . Regarding Claim 1 , Cortes reference discloses a stirred tank reactor system (Figure 2 , numeral 120 – agitation unit ) , the tank reactor system comprising: a. a reactor comprising: i. a vessel comprising an interior surface defining an interior space and a sealing rim defining a vessel opening (Figure 2, numerals 100D – interior tank, 100E – external tank) ; ii. a upper cover wherein the vessel and the upper cover form an enclosed reaction chamber within the reactor (Figure 2, numeral 104 - Upper cover) ; and iv. two or more ports in fluid communication with the reaction chamber of the reactor ( Figure 2, numerals 110 – inlet duct and 130 – discharge) ; and b. a removable liner removably lining the interior surface of the vessel (Figure 2, numeral 100D – the internal tank can be removable) . However, Cortes reference does not disclose a mechanical closure operable to releasably seal the lid to the vessel and the liner comprising a liner body defining an interior space and an opening, wherein the interior space of the liner forms a reaction compartment in the enclosed chamber. Cornelissen et al. reference discloses a separation vessel for use in polymerization process wherein a polytetrafluoroethylene lining that covers the interior surfaces of the vessel, and a cover mounting assembly including an annular clamp for detachably mounting a cover over the vessel (Abstract and Figure 2, numeral 36, 40a and 40b, Figure 5, and Figure 7, numerals 30 – vessel walls, 80 – skin layer that lines the inner surface (32) of the walls 30). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vessel of Cortes with the polytetrafluoroethylene lining and a cover mounting assembly including an annular clamp for detachably mounting a cover over the vessel as taught by Cornelissen et al. , since Cornelissen et al. states at column line# that such a modification would reduce the amount of downtime for cleaning operations necessary to maintain a high quality polyethylene product. Regarding Claim 2 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, wherein the reactor is a continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) (Cortes – Figure 2) . Regarding Claim 3, Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1 except for the liner further comprising a lip encircling an opening in a vessel of a reactor, wherein the lip is interposed between a lid and the vessel of the reactor at a sealing rim of the vessel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the liner opening with a lip encircling an opening in a vessel of a reactor since the liner lip would keep the liner in place and does not expose the reactor wall to the reactants inside the reactor due to the liner is very thin (Paragraph [0006] - 0.02 to 0.20 mm). Regarding Claim 4 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, wherein the liner comprises material comprising chemically inert polymers including inert fluoropolymers like polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE) or perfluoroalkoxy copolymer (PFA), and fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) ( Cornelissen et al. - Abstract - polytetrafluoroethylene ) . Regarding Claim 5 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, wherein the liner comprises a thickness ranging from about 0.001 to about 0.1 inches, from about 0.002 to 0.02 in, or from about 0.05 to 0.08 in ( Cornelissen et al. - Paragraph [0006] – 0.02 to 0.20mm) . Regarding Claim 6 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, further comprising a gasket interposed between the lid and sealing rim operable to releasably seal the lid to the vessel (Cornelissen et al. – Paragraph [0006] – gasket) . Regarding Claim 7 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 6 except for the gasket comprises material comprising elastomers, coated elastomers such as fluoropolymer-coated elastomeric gaskets, such as PTFE-coated viton. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the same material for the gasket and the polytetrafluoroethylene lining since it was known in the art to use the same/similar material for parts inside the reactor in which the reactants being contacted. Regarding Claim 8 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, further comprising an agitator operable to agitate contents of the reactor system (Cortes – Figure 2, numeral 120 – agitation unit) . Regarding Claim 9 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 8, wherein the agitator is selected from an overhead stirrer, a magnetic stirrer, and a shaking device (Cortes – Figure 2, numeral 120 – agitation unit). Regarding Claim 10 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, wherein the mechanical closure is selected from a band clamp, a sanitary clamp such as a Ladish or Rickover clamp, “Tri Clamps” or “Tri-clover” or “S-Clamp” or “3A pipe fittings”, mated threads, or combinations thereof (Cornelissen et al. – Paragraphs [0006] and [0027]) . Regarding Claim 11 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, further comprising a temperature control device operable to control the temperature of reagents in the reaction space ( Cortes - Page 3, Lines 8-25 – a control unit by means of at least one temperature sensor located in the air outlet of the heating equipment to control the temperature supplied by said heating equipment ) . Regarding Claim 12 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 11, wherein the temperature control device is selected from a conduction device, a thermoelectric device, a resistance device, an impedance device, an induction device, a microwave dielectric heating device, and any combination thereof ( Cortes - Page 3, Lines 8-25 and Figure 1, numeral 310 – heating unit, 400 – control unit ). Regarding Claim 13 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 11, wherein the temperature control device comprises a jacket surrounding the vessel, a heat plate, a bath, or combinations thereof ( Cortes - Page 3, Lines 8-25 – a control unit by means of at least one temperature sensor located in the air outlet of the heating equipment to control the temperature supplied by said heating equipment and Figure 2, numeral 140 – air inlet for providing heat to the reactor ). Regarding Claim 14 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, wherein the lid comprises at least one material input port and at least one material output port (Cortes – Figure 2, numeral 110 – material inlet port, 115 – flue outlet) . Regarding Claim 15 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, further comprising a pressure relief valve attached to an attachment port in the reactor lid, wherein the pressure relief valve is in fluid communication with the interior space of the liner (Cortes – Page 3, Line 22 – regulate the pressure inside the reactor by evacuating gases through at least one chimney – acting as pressure relief valve) . Regarding Claim 16 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, further comprising a pressure relief valve attached to an attachment port in the reactor lid, one or more sampling ports in the reactor lid, one or more sensors attached to sensor ports in the reactor lid (Cortes – Figure 2, numerals 110, 115) . Regarding Claim 17 , Cortes and Cornelissen et al. references the reactor system of claim 1, wherein a portion or all of the reactor vessel, a portion or all of the reactor lid, a portion or all of the removable liner, or any combinations thereof, is comprises translucent/transparent material (Cornelissen et al. - Paragraph [0006] – 0.02 to 0.20mm -thin layer of polytetrafluoroethylene is considered as translucent/transparent material) . Claim (s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cornelissen et al. (US 2017/0204207 A1) . Regarding Claim 19, Cornelissen et al. reference discloses the removable reactor liner of claim 18 except for the liner further comprising a lip encircling an opening in a vessel of a reactor, wherein the lip is interposed between a lid and the vessel of the reactor at a sealing rim of the vessel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the liner opening with a lip encircling an opening in a vessel of a reactor since the liner lip would keep the liner in place and does not expose the reactor wall to the reactants inside the reactor due to the liner is very thin (Paragraph [0006] - 0.02 to 0.20 mm). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT HUY-TRAM NGUYEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3167 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-W, 7:00am - 3pm, EST . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Claire X Wang can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-1051 . 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. /HUY TRAM NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1774