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 Status
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 19, 20, 25, 30, 31, 33, 38, 39, 44, and 49 were amended, claims 17 and 41 were canceled, and claims 50-69 were newly added in the response filed 3/23/2026. Claims 1, 5-10, 14, 15, 19, 20, 25, 29-34, 38, 39, 43, 44, and 49-69 are currently pending.
Modified Claim Objections
Unless repeated below, the amendments filed on 3/23/2026 were persuasive to overcome the objections of record on p. 2-3 of the OA dated 1/30/2026.
Claims 14, 20, 38, 44, 51, 53-56, and 58-61 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 3-4 of claim 14, the limitation “(x is 2 and y is 0.5 to 8)” should be amended to recite “wherein x is 2 and y is 0.5 to 8”, where the limitation is not enclosed within parentheses.
In line 2 of claim 20, the word “and” should be inserted before the word “includes”.
In lines 3-4 of claim 38, the limitation “(x is 2 and y is 0.5 to 8)” should be amended to recite “wherein x is 2 and y is 0.5 to 8”, where the limitation is not enclosed within parentheses.
In line 3 of claim 44, the word “and” should be inserted before the limitation “Cr2O3”.
Lines 2-3 of claim 51 recite “fed separately fed separately”. One of the instances of “fed separately” should be deleted.
Lines 2-3 of claim 53 recite “fed separately fed separately”. One of the instances of “fed separately” should be deleted.
In line 5 of claim 54, the limitation “on” should be deleted and replaced by “one”.
In line 1 of claims 55, 56, 58, and 59, there is a comma missing after the phrase “claim X” in the preamble.
In line 2 of option a) in claims 60 and 61, the word “and” should be inserted before the limitation “SO4/SiO2”.
In line 1 of option b) in claims 60 and 61, the word “and” should be inserted before the limitation “WO3/Fe2O3”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Modified Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)-Necessitated by Amendment
The amendments and response (p. 16-22) filed on 3/23/2026 are persuasive to overcome the 35 USC 112(b) rejections of record on p. 3-5 of the OA dated 1/30/2026. Therefore, the rejections are withdrawn.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 49 is 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.
Claim 49 is rejected because it is not clear if liquid is returned to the column as liquid reflux when the reflux rate is 0%. Lines 21-22 on p. 17 of the specification as filed indicate that no reflux occurs at 0%.
Withdrawn Claim Rejections
The Applicant canceled claims 17 and 41, therefore, the 35 USC 112(d) rejection of record on p. 6 is now moot.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection of record of claim(s) 1, 5-8, and 10 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 105646435A, published on 6/8/2016, of record in the IDS filed on 3/13/2023; a machine generated English translation is also provided with the instant OA) in view of Ebrahimi (“Heterogeneously catalyzed synthesis of performic acid in a microstructure reactor” Chemical Engineering Journal, 179, 2002, p. 312-317, of record in the IDS filed on 3/13/2023) on p. 6-13 of the OA dated 1/30/2026, the Applicant’s amendments and arguments (see p. 25-43) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Applicant argues that a person of ordinary skill would not have predicted that the distillation system of Zhou could be applied to the process of Ebrahimi, for specifically producing performic acid (PFA), with a reasonable expectation of success based on the knowledge available to the person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Therefore, all of the 35 USC 103 rejections of record are withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 49 is rejected. Claims 1, 5-10, 15, 19, 25, 29-34, 39, 43, 50, 52, 57, 62-65, 68, and 69 are allowed. Claims 14, 20, 38, 44, 51, 53-56, 58-61, 66, and 67 are objected to but otherwise free from the prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art to the claimed invention are the references of record. For the reasons discussed above, the instantly claimed process are distinguished from the art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY C BONAPARTE whose telephone number is (571)272-7307. The examiner can normally be reached 11-7.
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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at 571-270-5241. 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.
/AMY C BONAPARTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692