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 § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USP6150577 cols. 1-6; in view of USPub2022/0041940 see abstract and paragraphs [0001]-[0068].
Claim 1 is directed to a continuous process for converting waste plastic into recycle for polyethylene polymerization comprising: (a) selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene; (b) preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic with the blend comprising about 20 wt. % or less of the selected waste plastic; (c) passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the waste plastic in the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit; (d) recovering a liquid petroleum gas C3-C4 olefin/paraffin mixture from the hydrocracking unit; and (e) passing the C3-C4 mixture to a steam cracker to make ethylene.
USP6150577 discloses selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and polypropylene in col. 1-2, which meets the limitation of selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene. Note USP6150577 further teaches preparing a mixture of petroleum range hydrocarbons and waste plastic derived hydrocarbons in col. 3-4 , which corresponds to the limitation of preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic comparing about 20wt% or less of the selected waste plastic. Moreover, USP6150577 also discloses heating the mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogenous blended stream in col. 3-4 which meets the limitation of passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the wase plastic. Lastly, USP6150577 discloses introducing this heated blend into a
hydrocracking or hydroprocessing unit in cols.3-5 which meets the limitation of passing the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit.
USPub2022/0041940 discloses pyrolyzing waste plastic into a pyrolysis effluent, fractionating the effluent to obtain refiner range fractions including naphtha and LPG/C3C4 mixtures, and routing those fractions to petrochemical units such as steam crackers to produce ethylene and other light olefins usable in polymerization processes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the refinery based plastic upgrading of USP6150577 with the fractionation and steam cracking teachings of USPub2022/0041940to produce ethylene suitable for polyethylene recycle, as routing naphtha and LPG to stream crackers is conventional and explicitly taught in the secondary reference.
Claim 2 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein a naphtha stream is also recovered from the hydrocracking unit, and at least a portion is passed to the steam cracker as feed to make ethylene.
USP6150577 discloses that hydrocracking produces multiple fractions including naphtha range hydrocarbons. See col. abstract, and col. 15.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route a naphtha stream to a steam cracker because naphtha is a conventional ethylene feedstock.
Claim 3 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the blend of (b) is a hot homogeneous blend of waste plastic and petroleum oil.
USP6150577 discloses heating the petroleum plastic mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogeneous stream. See cols 3 and 4 and Examples.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that operators may heat or cool the stream above or below the melting point as part of normal temperature management in refinery processes since heating inherently forms a hot homogeneous bend.
Claim 4 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the blend of (b) is a stable blend of waste plastic and petroleum oil.
USP6150577 discloses forming a stable blended hydrocarbon stream by heating above the melting point of the plastic. heating the petroleum plastic mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogeneous stream. See cols 3 and 4 and Examples.
Claim 5 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the ethylene is polymerized to polyethylene.
USP6150577 discloses the use of polyethylene as plastic feed but does not teach the polymerization of ethylene. USPub20210189250 teaches a process for converting the waste plastics along with the petroleum feedstock in a catalytic cracking unit , in particular a fluid catalytic cracking unit employed in petroleum refineries . The reference also provides a method and hardware system to enable waste plastic to fuel conversion along with hydrocarbon catalytic cracking . specifically the process aims to convert any type of waste plastic including polystyrene , polypropylene , polyethylene , metal containing polyethylene - polypropylene multilayer plastics and other metal containing plastics along with the petroleum derived feedstock such as vacuum gas oil , reduced crude oil , vacuum residue etc. in catalytic cracking units. See abstract.
Specifically, USPub2022/0041940 discloses pyrolyzing waste plastic into a pyrolysis effluent, fractionating the effluent to obtain refiner range fractions including naphtha and LPG/C3C4 mixtures, and routing those fractions to petrochemical units such as steam crackers to produce ethylene and other light olefins usable in polymerization processes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to polymerize ethylene produced in the combined process of USP 6150577 and USPub2022/0041940, because USPub’040 expressly teaches that ethylene obtained from plastic derived naphtha or LPG via steam cracking is suitable for polymerization using known polymerization methods. As explained in the above claim 1, the combination yields ethylene from up graded waste plastic feed, and. USPub’040 further teaches that such ethylene can be polymerized to polyethylene using known polymerization methods.
Claim 6 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the waste plastics selected in (a) comprise plastics from classification group 2, 4, and/or 5.
USP6150577 discloses polyethylene and polypropylene waste plastics. See col. 1 and 3, Example 1 and claim 12 and 25.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that these plastics correspond to common recycling classifications for groups 2, 4 and 5.
Claim 7 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein a gasoline is recovered from the refinery hydrocracking unit and is sent to a gasoline blending pool.
USP6150577 discloses recovery of gasoline range hydrocarbons during hydrocracking. See col. 1 line 38-39 and 51 and col. 4 lines 15-24. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route gasoline to a blending pool because this is a known refinery practice.
Claim 8 is directed to the process of claim 2, wherein a portion of the naphtha stream recovered from the hydrocracking unit is further processed in the refinery to clean gasoline, diesel, or jet fuel.
USP6150577 discloses that recovered naphtha may be further refined into transportation fuels including gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. See col. 1 line 38-39 and 51 and col. 4 lines 15-24.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further process naphtha in the refinery.
Claim 9 is directed to the process of claim 8, wherein jet fuel is recovered from the further processing in the refinery.
USP6150577 discloses that hydrocracking yields middle distillates including jet fuel. See col. 4 lines 15-24.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that further upgrading could yield jet fuel.
Claim 10 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the volume flow of the blend to the refinery hydrocracking unit in (c) comprises up to 100 vol. % of the total hydrocarbon flow to the hydrocracking unit.
USP6150577 discloses sending the entire plastic petroleum blend stream to the hydrocracking reactor. See col. 15 lines 25-61. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to
Claim 11 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the volume flow of the blend to the refinery hydrocracking unit in (c) comprises up to 50 vol. % of the total hydrocarbon flow to the hydrocracking unit.
USP6150577 discloses blends comprising about 20wt% plastic. See cols. 3-4 and examples.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the blend may represent various percentages of the total feed including 50vol%. Generally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ particular amounts and/or parameters as known in the art, since it is well-established that merely selecting proportions and ranges is not patentable absent a showing of criticality. In re Becket, 33 U.S.P.Q. 33 (C.C.P.A. 1937). In re Russell, 439 F.2d 1228, 169 U.S.P.Q. 426 (C.C.P.A. 1971). One would have been motivated to
employ particular amounts and/or parameters as known in the art, since, the primary reference discusses the generally use of such and generally, it is prima facie obvious to determine workable or optimal values within a prior art disclosure through the application of routine experimentation. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); and In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325 (CA Fed 2003).
Claim 12 is directed to the process of claim 11, wherein the blend flow comprises up to 25 vol. % of the total flow to the hydrocracking unit.
USP6150577 discloses blending petroleum hydrocarbons wit waste plastic derived hydrocarbons. See cols. 3 and 4.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that additional refinery or petrochemical streams may be included to adjust volumetric flow. Generally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ particular amounts and/or parameters as known in the art, since it is well-established that merely selecting proportions and ranges is not patentable absent a showing of criticality. In re Becket, 33 U.S.P.Q. 33 (C.C.P.A. 1937). In re Russell, 439 F.2d 1228, 169 U.S.P.Q. 426 (C.C.P.A. 1971).One would have been motivated to employ particular amounts and/or parameters as known in the art, since, the primary reference discusses the generally use of such and generally, it is prima facie obvious to determine workable or optimal values within a prior art disclosure through the application of routine experimentation. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); and In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325 (CA Fed 2003).
Claim 13 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the blend of petroleum and selected waste plastic in (b) is prepared by heating the waste plastic above the melting point of the plastic and mixing with the petroleum, and then cooling the blend to a temperature below the melting point of the waste plastic.
USP6150577 discloses heating the petroleum plastic mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogeneous stream. See cols 3 and 4 and Examples.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that operators may cool the stream below the malign point as part of norm temperature management in refinery processes. Generally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ particular amounts and/or parameters as known in the art, since it is well-established that merely selecting proportions and ranges is not patentable absent a showing of criticality. In re Becket, 33 U.S.P.Q. 33 (C.C.P.A. 1937). In re Russell, 439 F.2d 1228, 169 U.S.P.Q. 426 (C.C.P.A. 1971).One would have been motivated to employ particular amounts and/or parameters as known in the art, since, the primary reference discusses the generally use of such and generally, it is prima facie obvious to determine workable or optimal values within a prior art disclosure through the application of routine experimentation. See In re Aller,
105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); and In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325 (CA Fed 2003).
Claim 14 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the petroleum in the blend comprises atmospheric gas oil, vacuum gas oil (VGO), atmospheric residue, a petroleum derived oil, a petroleum based material, and/or heavy stock recovered from refinery operations.
USP6150577 discloses blending petroleum hydrocarbons with waste plastic derived hydrocarbons. See col. 3 line 48; col. 15 lines 23.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the petroleum portion may include atmospheric gas oil, vacuum gas oil, atmospheric residue or heavy refinery stocks because these are standard hydrocracking feed components.
Claim 15 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein the petroleum in the blend comprises light cycle oil (LCO), heavy cycle oil (HCO), FCC naphtha, gasoline, diesel, toluene, and/or aromatic solvent derived from petroleum.
USP6150577 discloses blending petroleum range hydrocarbons with waste plastic derived hydrocarbons. See col. 4 lines 16-25; col. 5 lines 62.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that petroleum range hydrocarbons such as light cycle oil, heavy cycle oil, FCC naphtha, gasoline , diesel, toluene and aromatic solvents are suitable blend components because these are conventional refinery streams.
Claim 16 is directed to the process of claim 1, wherein a heavy fraction is recovered from the hydrocracking unit and passed to an isomerization/dewaxing unit.
USP6150577 discloses the recovery of heavier hydrocarbon fractions from hydrocracking suitable for use in fuel applications including heavier distillate fuel streams. See abstract and col. 1 lines 38-40, specifically col. 4 line 23 and col. 15 lines 21-26 and 59.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that heavier hydrocracking fractions may be processed or blended into marine oil because marine fuels are conventionally derived from heavier refinery distillate fractions.
Claim 17 is directed to the process of claim 16, wherein a base oil is recovered from the isomerization/dewaxing unit.
Since isomerization and dewaxing units routinely yield base-oil fractions as part of standard upgrading processes, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary
skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recover the base oil fraction because base oil separation is a normal outcome of dewaxing processes.
Claim 18 is directed to the process of claim 17, where the recovered base oil is passed to a hydro finishing unit.
Hydrofinishing is a standard refinery operation for improving the quality of base oils. 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 method of hydrofining the recovered base oil to obtain a hydrofinished base oil.
Claim 19 is directed to a process of claim 16, wherein a naphtha fraction is recovered from the isomerization/dewaxing unit, and at least a portion of the naphtha fraction is passed to the steam cracker to make ethylene.
Since isomerization and dewaxing processes naturally generate naphtha range byproducts, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route such naphtha to a steam cracker because naphtha isa conventional ethylene feedstock
Claim 20 is directed to a process for converting waste plastic into chemicals useful in preparing polyethylene, comprising: (a) selecting waste plastics containing
polyethylene and/or polypropylene; (b) preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected plastic, with the blend comprising about 20 wt. % or less of the selected plastic; and (c) passing the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit.
USP6150577 discloses selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and polypropylene in col. 1-2, which meets the limitation of selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene. Note USP6150577 further teaches preparing a mixture of petroleum range hydrocarbons and waste plastic derived hydrocarbons in col. 3-4 , which corresponds to the limitation of preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic comparing about 20wt% or less of the selected waste plastic. Moreover, USP6150577 also discloses heating the mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogeneous blended stream in col. 3-4 which meets the limitation of passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the waste plastic. Lastly, USP6150577 discloses introducing this heated blend into a hydrocracking or hydroprocessing unit in cols.3-5 which meets the limitation of passing the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit. Accordingly, USP6150577 meets all the limitations of selecting waste plastics containing polyethylene and/or polypropylene (a0, preparing a petroleum/plastic blend containing about 20wet% or less plastic (b), and passing the blend above the melting point of the plastic to a refinery hydrocracking unit, c). See abstract, col. 1 lines 50-65 and col 2 lines 1-10.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of USP6150577 because the reference describe refinery-compatible upgrading of plastic-derived hydrocarbons, and using hydro processed intermediates as polymerization feedstocks is a known practice in refinery and petrochemical processes.
Claim 21 is directed to a continuous process for converting waste plastic into recycle for preparation of base oil comprising: (a) selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene; (b) preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic with the blend comprising about 20 wt. % or less of the selected waste plastic; (c) passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the plastic in
the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit; (d) recovering a heavy fraction from the hydrocracking unit and passing the heavy fraction to a refinery isomerization/dewaxing unit; and (e) recovering base oil from the isomerization dewaxing unit.
USP6150577 discloses selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and polypropylene in col. 1-2, which meets the limitation of selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene. Note USP6150577 further teaches preparing a mixture of petroleum range hydrocarbons and waste plastic derived hydrocarbons in col. 3-4 , which corresponds to the limitation of preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic comparing about 20wt% or less of the selected waste plastic. Moreover, USP6150577 also discloses heating the mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogenous blended stream in col. 3-4 which meets the limitation of passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the wase plastic. Lastly, USP6150577 discloses introducing this heated blend into a hydrocracking or hydroprocessing unit in cols.3-5 which meets the limitation of passing the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit. Accordingly, USP6150577 meets the limitations of selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene, preparing petroleum/plastic blend containing about 20wt% or less plastic, passing the blend above the melting point of the waste plastic to a refinery hydrocracking unit, and recovering a heaving fraction and passing that heavy fraction to an isomerization or dewaxing treatment to produce a lubricating base oil. See col. 1 lines 50-65 and col. 3 lines 1-45 and col. 4 lines 1-25.
USPub2022/0041940 teaches a process for converting the waste plastics along with the petroleum feedstock in a catalytic cracking unit , in particular a fluid catalytic cracking unit employed in petroleum refineries. USPub2022/0041940 also provides a method and hardware system to enable waste plastic to fuel conversion along with hydrocarbon catalytic cracking . specifically the process aims to convert any type of waste plastic including polystyrene , polypropylene , polyethylene , metal containing polyethylene - polypropylene multilayer plastics and other metal containing plastics along with the petroleum derived feedstock such as vacuum gas oil , reduced crude oil , vacuum residue etc. in catalytic cracking units. See abstract and paragraphs [0002], [0023],[0046].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of USP6150577 and USPub2022/0041940 because both references describe refinery process of plastic derived feeds, and directing hydrocracked heavy fractions to isomerization or dewaxing to obtain base oil is a standard refinery process.
Claim 22 is directed to the process of claim 21, wherein the base oil recovered in (e) is passed to a hydro finishing unit, from which is recovered a hydro finished base oil.
Hydro finishing is a known final step in producing base oils and is a crucial catalytic refining process in oil production that uses hydrogen, heat, and pressure to remove impurities (sulfur, nitrogen, oxygen, aromatics) from base oils, resulting in clearer, more stable, and higher-quality lubricants with better color, odor, and oxidation resistance, essentially giving oils a final "polish" for high-performance applications like engine oils. While related to hydrotreating and hydrocracking, hydrofinishing is a milder, finishing step focused on purification rather than deep molecular restructuring, using catalysts like cobalt-molybdenum on alumina. Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention pass the recovered base oil fraction to a hydro finishing unit to obtain a hydro finished base oil.
Claim 23 is directed to a continuous process for converting waste plastic into recycle for preparation of lower carbon footprint fuels and base oil comprising: (a) selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene; (b) preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic with the blend comprising about 20 wt. % or less of the selected waste plastic; (c) passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the plastic in the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit; (d) recovering a heavy fraction from the hydrocracking unit and passing the heavy fraction to a refinery isomerization/dewaxing unit; and (e) recovering base oil from the isomerization dewaxing unit.
USP6150577 discloses selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and polypropylene in col. 1-2, which meets the limitation of selecting waste plastics comprising polyethylene and/or polypropylene. Note USP6150577 further teaches preparing a mixture of petroleum range hydrocarbons and waste plastic derived
hydrocarbons in col. 3-4 , which corresponds to the limitation of preparing a blend of petroleum and the selected waste plastic comparing about 20wt% or less of the selected waste plastic. Moreover, USP6150577 also discloses heating the mixture above the melting point of the plastic to form a homogenous blended stream in col. 3-4 which meets the limitation of passing the blend at a temperature above the melting point of the wase plastic. Lastly, USP6150577 discloses introducing this heated blend into a hydrocracking or hydroprocessing unit in cols.3-5 which meets the limitation of passing the blend to a refinery hydrocracking unit.
USPub2022/0041940 teaches fractionation of pyrolysis oils to produce naphtha, distillate and heavier hydrocarbons that can be routed to a refinery to make fuels such as gasoline, diesel and jet fuel.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of USP6150577 and USPub2022/0041940 because both the references describe processing waste-plastic -derived hydrocarbons through refinery processing steps to yield transportation fuels and base-oil fractions, and routing hydrocracked streams to dewaxing or isomerization is a standard refinery operating approach.
Claim 24 is directed to the process of claim 23, wherein the lower carbon footprint fuels includes gasoline, jet fuel, diesel, and/or marine oil.
USP6150577 discloses the recovery of heavier hydrocarbon fractions from hydrocracking suitable for use in fuel applications including heavier distillate fuel streams. See abstract and col. 1 lines 38-40, specifically col. 4 line 23 and col. 15 lines 21-26 and 59.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that heavier hydrocracking fractions may be processed or blended into marine oil because marine fuels are conventionally derived from heavier refinery distillate fractions.
In conclusion, in view of the above, there appears to be no significant difference between the reference(s) and that which is claimed by applicant(s). Any differences not
specifically mentioned appear to be conventional. Consequently, the claimed invention cannot be deemed as unobvious and accordingly is unpatentable.
Obviousness-type Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11518943.
Claim 18 recites a process for converting waste plastics comprising selection polyethylene and/or polypropylene waste plastics, pyrolyzing the waste plastics to produce a pyrolyzed effluent , separating the pyrolyzed effluent into fractions including a naphtha/diesel fraction and a C3-C4 fraction, recovering a portion of the C3-C4 fraction from the crude unit, and passing the recovered C3-C4 fraction to a steam cracker for ethylene production.
The present claims recite a process for converting waste plastics comprising selecting polyethylene and/or propylene waste plastics, preparing a blend with petroleum, processing the blend at elevated temperature to produce a C3-C4 fraction, and passing the C3-C4 fraction to a steam cracker to produce ethylene. although the application claims include additional steps such as blending the plastics with petroleum, heating the blend, hydrocracking the blend, recovering heavy fractions, or passing heavy fractions to isomerization or dewaxing units, these steps represent routine refinery operations and are obvious variations or additions that do not render the application claims patentably distinct from claim 18.
The claimed subject matter differs from the referenced claim only in the manner that the waste-plastic derived stream is prepared by hydrocracking rather than pyrolysis, which constitutes an obvious variation in how the C3-C4 fraction is generated and does not render the claims patentably distinct. Both the present claims and the claim 18 of the related patent produce a C3-C4 fraction that is introduced into a steam cracker for ethylene production. Both rely on the same essential inventive concept deriving a C3-C4 fraction from waste plastics and feeding that fraction to a steam cracker to produce ethylene. The additional process steps in the application do not create a patentable distinction because they do not modify the core inventive concept.
As a future response to the rejection above, applicants are advised to not withhold a response, such as, a terminal disclaimer (TD), to the pending ODP rejection. It is noted that the filing of a TD cannot be held in abeyance since that filing “is necessary for further consideration of the rejection of the claims” as set forth in MPEP 804 (I) (B) (1) quoted below:
“As filing a terminal disclaimer, or filing a showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from the reference application’s claims, is necessary for further consideration of the rejection of the claims, such a filing should not be held in abeyance. Only objections or requirements as to form not necessary for further consideration of the claims may be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated.”
Information Disclosure Statement
Note that any future and/or present information disclosure statements must comply with 37 CFR § 1.98(b), which requires a list of the publications to include: the author (if any), title, relevant pages of the publication, date and place of publication to be submitted for consideration by the Office.
Improper Claim Dependency
Prior to allowance, any dependent claims should be rechecked for proper dependency if independent claims are cancelled.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRESSA M BOYKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1069. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-5:30.
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, Heidi Kelley can be reached at 571 270-1831. 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.
/Terressa Boykin/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765