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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group I claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 11/05/2025 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that no search burden exists. Applicants’ arguments are not found persuasive as indicated in the previous office action mailed on 09/08/2025, there would be a serious search and examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply: (a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; (b) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses, or employing different search queries); (c) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention; (d) the inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph; (e) different search queries are required to account for the differing active steps of the method groups, which are not present in the composition claims, thus causing a serious and examination burden (i.e. specific steps involved in these processes, etc.).
Therefore there would be a serious search and examination burden if restriction were not required.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ramakrishna et al. (US 2019/0284115 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ramakrishna et al. teach a metal-zeolite phase composition comprising zeolite phase of ZSM-5 with pore size 2 nanometers in diameter and mesopores representing pores of 2 to 50 nm, and metals including sodium (main group metal), nickel (transition metal), and cesium (Lanthanide metal) dispersing throughout on the zeolite via impregnated (Abstract, [0055], [0063], and [0135]).
Ramakrishna et al. do not describe agglomerations of metal present.
Regarding claims 2-3, the metal-zeolite phase composition taught by Ramakrishna et al. comprises dealuminated zeolite phase ZSM-5 ([0135]).
Regarding claims 4-6, the metal-zeolite phase composition taught by Ramakrishna et al. comprises metals including sodium (main group metal), Nickel (transition metal), and cesium (lanthanide metal) ([0055]-[0063]).
Regarding claims 7-9, as discussed above, they are not examined due to the fact that they are dependent on unexamined optional limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claims 10-13, A product-by-process limitation of “.the metal-zeolite composition is produced by a process…” of claims 10-13 are noted. It is considered while the product of the reference is made by a different process, the product made and disclosed is the same as being claimed. see "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." (In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964,966). Once the Examiner provides a rationale tending to show that the claimed product appears to be the same or similar to that of the prior art, although produced by a different process, the burden shifts to applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious different between the claimed product and the prior art product (In re Marosi, 710 F.2d 798, 802,218 USPQ 289, 292 (Fed. Cir. 1983). See MPEP 2113.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUN QIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10:00am-4:00pm.
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, Sally A Merkling can be reached at 571-272-6297. 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.
YUN . QIAN
Examiner
Art Unit 1732
/YUN QIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738