DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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(s) 1-20 are pending and are rejected.
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 01/04/2026.
Claims 1, 9, 17, 18, and 20 are amended and are being fully considered by the examiner.
In response to applicant’s amendments to claims 18 and 20, all the claim objections as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
35 U.S.C. 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 9 and 17:
Claim recites:
dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product; and
automatically causing routing of the preblended product…., wherein the routing is based at least on the dynamically updated virtual representation.
The specification doesn’t disclose, the above described limitations. There is no description of how this dynamic update of virtual representation is performed based on quality data, where quality data corresponds to preblended product. Further, there is no description of using the dynamically updated virtual representation to automatically route the preblended product.
These limitations are broad, and claim requires “dynamically updating” the virtual representation of the processing plant and then “automatically causing routing” of the preblended product based on that dynamically updated virtual representation of the processing plant. While specification disclose, causing routing based on specification satisfaction indicator, it fails to provide specific computer and the algorithm (e.g., the necessary steps and/or flowcharts) that perform the claimed function in sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor possessed the claimed subject matter at the time of filing.
Implementing automated real time routing based on updated dynamic virtual representation is not a predictable art, and requires specific computer and the algorithm (e.g., the necessary steps and/or flowcharts) that perform the claimed function depending on specific plant configuration which were not described in the specification in sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor possessed the claimed subject matter at the time of filing.
Further, the specification only provides functional descriptions of the system without specific computer and the algorithm (e.g., the necessary steps and/or flowcharts) that perform the claimed function for dynamic update of virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product and routing of the preblended product based on that dynamically updated virtual representation. Without specific computer and the algorithm (e.g., the necessary steps and/or flowcharts) that perform the claimed function, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have to engage in undue, extensive experimentation to create a working system that dynamically updates virtual representation of the processing plant as recited in the claim, and that routes preblended product based on that updated virtual representation of the processing plant.
The scope of the claim is broad, covering any automated routing based on any dynamic model update. The claim is not enabled because one of the ordinary skilled in the art, upon reading the specification, would not know how to dynamically update the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product and how to cause routing of the preblended product based on that dynamically updated virtual representation of the processing plant without excessive, undue experimentation to determine the necessary, but undisclosed, algorithms and models.
Other independent claims 9 and 17 are rejected for the same reasons since they include similar limitations.
Appropriate correction is required.
Dependent claims:
Based on their dependencies in claim 1, claims 2-8 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for the same reasons as described above.
Based on their dependencies in claim 9, claims 10-16 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for the same reasons as described above.
Based on their dependencies in claim 17, claims 18-20 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for the same reasons as described above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Independent claims
Claims 1, 9 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action.
Reasons for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 9 and 17 are indicated to have allowable subject matter. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter:
35 USC § 103 rejections withdrawn:
In response to applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 9 and 17, all the 35 USC § 103 rejections as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments are persuasive:
REJECTION UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 103
Budiman and Bunio, either alone or in combination, fail to describe the feature(s) of…dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product; and automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on the specification satisfaction indicator, wherein the routing is based at least on the dynamically updated virtual representation" as recited by amended independent claim 1 (emphasis added).
Budiman does not disclose…nor does it describe dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on quality data corresponding to a preblended product. Furthermore, Budiman does not teach automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on a specification satisfaction indicator, where such routing is based on the dynamically updated virtual representation.
Bunio does not disclose…nor does it describe dynamically updating such a virtual representation based on quality data corresponding to a preblended product. Furthermore, Bunio does not teach automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on a specification satisfaction indicator, where the routing is based on the dynamically updated virtual representation.
(pages: 10-12)
Applicant’s arguments filled on 01/04/2026 as discussed above are persuasive. In response to applicant’s arguments and amendments to claims 1, 9 and 17, all the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections as set forth in the previous office action has been withdrawn.
Claims 1-8:
Regarding Claim 1:
Regarding the previously presented claim, BUDIMAN et al. (US20110130857A1 publication of US patent US8447423B2 listed on IDS filed on 07/19/2023) and Bunio et al. (US20170275535A1) disclose all the elements of previously presented claim as described in the previous office action mailed on 10/21/2025.
Regarding the amended claim, Webb et al. (US20210255610A1) describes, generating overall dynamic model using dynamic models of each process units and using a material routing network between units; monitors changes in process units that affects throughput on intermediate product quality and changes in routing flows in order to optimize the plant by controlling key variables, [¶22: generating a holistic dynamic model using dynamic models for the individual process units and a routing network (flowsheet) showing material flows between units. The disclosed methodology captures changes occurring both inside a process unit (e.g. effects of throughput on intermediate product quality) and changes in the routing flows (es. changing the fractions of material sent to two units running in parallel), to optimize the plant while controlling the key variables.], but doesn’t explicitly disclose, dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product; and automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on the specification satisfaction indicator, wherein the routing is based at least on the dynamically updated virtual representation, where the virtual representation of a processing plant is generated that includes an aggregation of a plurality of stage components of the processing plant into a single virtual stage component (in combination with other elements of the claim).
Regarding the amended claim, INGLETON et al. (US20250155085A1, priority to provisional application no. 63311910 filled on 02/18/2022) describes, a prediction engine calculates changes in quality of stored hydrogen as a function of dispensing or replenishing hydrogen (quality based routing) from particular vessels or a plurality of vessels [¶31: prediction engine for calculating changes in quantity or quality of stored hydrogen as a function of dispensing or replenishing hydrogen from particular vessels or a plurality of vessels. It may also comprise a tank quality engine for determining the integrity of a storage vessel based on sensor data collected from impurities and from said vessel.], but doesn’t explicitly disclose, dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product; and automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on the specification satisfaction indicator, wherein the routing is based at least on the dynamically updated virtual representation, where the virtual representation of a processing plant is generated that includes an aggregation of a plurality of stage components of the processing plant into a single virtual stage component (in combination with other elements of the claim).
However, regarding the amended claim, none of the BUDIMAN et al. (US20110130857A1) and Bunio et al. (US20170275535A1), Webb et al. (US20210255610A1), INGLETON et al. (US20250155085A1), or any of the other prior arts listed in all the previous correspondence taken either alone or in obvious combination disclose, A computer-implemented method, specifically including:
generating a virtual representation of a processing plant, wherein the virtual representation includes an aggregation of a plurality of stage components of the processing plant into a single virtual stage component;
dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product; and
automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on the specification satisfaction indicator, wherein the routing is based at least on the dynamically updated virtual representation.
(in combination with other elements of the claim)
having all the claimed features of applicant’s instant invention, including:
A computer-implemented method for plantwide optimization with multistage pre-blending comprising:
generating a virtual representation of a processing plant, wherein the virtual representation includes an aggregation of a plurality of stage components of the processing plant into a single virtual stage component;
generating at least one optimized operational parameter utilizing at least one single- stage optimization process based at least in part on the virtual representation of the processing plant;
causing production, via at least a first stage component of the plurality of components of the processing plant, of a preblended product with minimized deviation from the at least one optimized operational parameter;
generating specification satisfaction indicator by determining whether quality data corresponding to the preblended product satisfies specification requirements data;
dynamically updating the virtual representation of the processing plant based on the quality data corresponding the preblended product; and
automatically causing routing of the preblended product based at least in part on the specification satisfaction indicator, wherein the routing is based at least on the dynamically updated virtual representation.
Claims 2-8 are indicated to have allowable subject matter based on their dependencies on claim 1.
Claims 9-16:
Regarding Claim 9:
The apparatus of claim 9 includes similar limitations as the computer-implemented method of claim 1. Therefore, the apparatus of claim 9 is indicated to have allowable subject matter for the same reasons as described above in claim 1.
Claims 10-16 are indicated to have allowable subject matter based on their dependencies on claim 9.
Claims 17-20:
Regarding Claim 17:
The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17 includes similar limitations as the computer-implemented method of claim 1. Therefore, the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 17 is indicated to have allowable subject matter for the same reasons as described above in claim 1.
Claims 18-20 are indicated to have allowable subject matter based on their dependencies on claim 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed in the PTO-892 Notice of Reference Cited document mailed on 10/21/2025.
Kocis et al. (US20120083914A1) - Modeling tool for planning the operation of refineries:
(¶16): A method for determining the operation of a production facility…uses a computer-based mathematical model of the production facility…includes a representation of two or more non-tank production entities and one or more tank production entities (i.e. tank entities) that are associated with (e.g. connected to, directly or indirectly.
Varvarezos et al. (US20120296690A1) - Rundown blending optimization apparatus and method:
(¶7): A computer modeling apparatus includes an input module enabling user specification of inventory information including at least one rundown component, and user specification of refinery product commitments… Sequencing refinery operations into a schedule that matches refinery commitments with inventory and unit rundown operations, wherein the refinery operations include refinery operations events,… Refinery operations events can include blending, transferring, receiving,… Inventory information can include tank levels and properties for at least one stored component.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MOHAMMED SHAFAYET whose telephone number is (571)272-8239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/M.S./
Patent Examiner,
Art Unit 2116
/KENNETH M LO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights