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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17 and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected claim group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on May 15,2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-18 in the reply filed on May 15,2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 13 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 claim 13, the claim refers to “material zones A and B and material zones C and D are each identical”, the phrasing does not make it clear if zones A,B,C, and D are all identical to each other or if the zone pairings, A and B are identical and C and D are identical.
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) 1-5,13-14, and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayama (EP 3501650 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hayama discloses a catalyst which comprises of multiple catalytic layers containing bismuth and a one or two platinum group metals (PGMs) (Hayama[0018]), one embodiment includes (Hayama[0073]) a ‘first’ catalytic layer containing bismuth and platinum, where a second layer is disposed on top contains at least one platinum group metal (platinum and palladium) (Hayama[0150]). This results in a catalyst where the bottom layer (zones A and B) contains bismuth and a platinum group metals while the top layer (Zones C and D), contains platinum and palladium.
An example of this is in the composition illustrated in Figure 1 of the prior art, where there are two layers, with the bottom layer is comprising of bismuth and a platinum group metal, and a top layer comprising a PGM but no bismuth (Hayama[0120]), an arbitrary line can be drawn down dividing the two layers into four zones where the bottom layer is divided into zones A and B and the top layer is divided into zones C and D. In another case two arbitrary lines can be drawn in a single layer such as the first catalytic layer, in Figure 3 , where, due to the catalytic layer composing of a PGM and bismuth and their lengths adding up to the total length of the catalyst, fulfills the limitations set by the instant claim. Therefore, this disclosure meets the limitations set in the instant claim requiring a catalyst with a length, L, with zones whose length adds up to the total length of the layer, while zones such as A and B comprises of platinum and bismuth, and zones C and D contains multiple PGMs in the form of platinum and palladium.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Hayama discloses an embodiment where the bottom layer of the catalyst is the second catalytic layer (Hayama[0072]) which contains only platinum and palladium, and does not contain bismuth (Hayama[0071]). This disclosure meets the limitations set in the instant claim requiring zone A (the bottom layer, left zone) to be comprised of platinum and palladium with no bismuth.
Regarding claim 4, Hayama discloses an embodiment of a catalyst where (Hayama[0073]) a ‘first’ catalytic layer is the bottom layer, therefore designating the right side as zone B. The prior art specifies that the catalytic layer is comprised of bismuth oxide (Hayama[0018]), therefore meeting the limitations set in the instant claim requiring zone B to be comprised of a form of bismuth oxide.
Regarding claim 5, Hayama teaches that bottom layer (zones A and B) is supported by a composite oxide in the form of alumina doped with silica (Hayama[0017]), where bismuth oxide is impregnated within the support material (Hayama[0021]). The prior art further states the bismuth would be present between 1 to 1.5% by weight compared to the support material which contains bismuth in an oxide form (Hayama[0032]). Therefore, the prior art meets the limitations set in the instant claim requiring bismuth to be present in an aluminum-silicon support at a weight percentage between 1 to 15%.
Regarding claim 13, Hayama teaches a first catalytic layer that is comprised of bismuth and a PGM (Hayama[0073]). Based on Figure 1 in the prior art, two arbitrary lines can be drawn in a single layer such as the second catalytic layer ((3) in Figure 1) where, all zones contain the same PGMs, therefore fulfilling the limitations set by the instant claim requiring zones A,B,D, and C to be identical to each other. This further applies to Figure 3, where the second catalytic layer is also made up of PGMs and can be divided into four identical sections.
Regarding claim 14, Hayama discloses a catalyst which comprises of multiple catalytic layers containing bismuth and a one or two platinum group metals (PGMs) (Hayama[0018]). Based on figure 6 of the prior art the third catalytic layer ((4) in Figure 6) is made up of PGMs and can be divided into four identical sections using arbitrary lines. With this in mind, the second catalytic zone, (layer 3) is drawn to encompass a portion of zone D while starting from end B of the substrate. Therefore, the prior art fulfills the limitations set in the instant claim requiring a catalyst to comprise of comprises a material zone E which, starting from end b of the carrier substrate, extends over a portion of length L of material zone D and comprises platinum and no palladium, palladium and no platinum, or platinum and palladium
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Hayama teaches an embodiment of a catalyst where the catalytic regions comprise of a hydrocarbon absorbent material (Hayama[0059]). As zone A and zone C are a part of the catalytic region, these zones would contain the same material as well. Since hydrocarbon absorbent materials such as zeolites are considered a storage material, this disclosure meets the limitations set in the instant claims requiring zones A and C to contain zeolite hydrocarbon storage material.
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.
Claim(s) 6-12 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayama (EP 3501650 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Hayama teaches that bottom layer (zones A and B) is supported by alumina doped with silica (Hayama[00183]), where bismuth oxide is impregnated within the support material (Hayama[0021]). While the prior art does not mention that a composite oxide is formed via impregnation, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added in bismuth into the composite oxide support in order to improve oxidative activity (Hayama[0019]).
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 9, Hayama discloses an embodiment of a catalytic layer comprised of bismuth and a platinum group metal, such as platinum and palladium (Hayama[0018]). While the prior art does not specifically mention the absence of palladium or platinum in the individual layers, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize one or two platinum group metals available to yield a catalytic material.
Regarding claims 10 and 12, Hayama teaches an embodiment of a catalyst where the layers comprised of bismuth and a platinum group metal, such as platinum and palladium (Hayama[0018]). In figure 1 of the prior art, the catalyst is illustrated as having two distinct layers, where if one were to take an arbitrary line to split a layer into two zones, then zones A and B (the bottom layer) and zones C and D (the top layer) are identical. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to identify that if one were to split a layer into two zones, then the resulting zones are identical to each other on a compositional level.
Regarding claim 11, Hayama teaches an embodiment of a catalyst where a ‘first’ catalytic layer is the bottom layer (Hayama[0073]), contains bismuth and a platinum group metal (Hayama[0018]). Further the prior art mentions that using platinum-palladium alloys is detrimental to the performance of the catalyst (Hayama[0169]). With zone A comprising of the bottom layer, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to pick platinum as the metal to use in the first catalytic layer with bismuth to ensure an excellent CO oxidation process (Hayama[0056]).
Regarding claim 15, Hayama discloses a catalyst which comprises of a multiple catalytic layers comprised of bismuth and a platinum group metal, such as platinum and palladium (Hayama[0018]), one embodiment includes (Hayama[0073]) a ‘first’ catalytic layer containing bismuth and platinum, where a second layer is disposed on top contains at least one platinum group metal (platinum and palladium) (Hayama[0150]). Furthermore, the prior art teaches that bottom layer (zones A and B) is supported by alumina doped with silica (Hayama[00183]), where bismuth oxide is impregnated within the support material (Hayama[0021]).
This results in a catalyst where the bottom layer (zones A and B) is comprised of bismuth and a PGM supported by aluminosilicate and bismuth, with a top layer (Zones C and D), comprising platinum and palladium.
The prior art further notes that the catalytic layers used would have a platinum to palladium weight ratio of 10:1 to 2:1 (Hayama[0053]). The overlap of the weight ratio in the prior art, leads to a prima facie case. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to balance the weight ratios of platinum and palladium between the ranges of 3:1 to 1:3 and 14:1 to 2:1, in order to improve thermal stability (Hayama[0054]).
Regarding claim 16, Hayama discloses a catalyst which comprises of multiple catalytic layers containing bismuth and a one or two platinum group metals (PGMs) (Hayama[0018]). One embodiment includes (Hayama[0073]) a ‘first’ catalytic layer containing bismuth and platinum, where a second layer is disposed on top contains at least one platinum group metal (platinum and palladium) (Hayama[0150]). Applying this embodiment to Figure 5, two arbitrary lines can be drawn in layer 3, where, due to the catalytic layer composing of a PGM and bismuth the compositional limitations for zones A,B,C, and D are met. An arbitrary line is applied to layer 2, is then designated as zone E, encompassing a portion of zone D while starting from end B of the substrate.
The prior art further notes that the catalytic layers used would have a platinum to palladium weight ratio of 10:1 to 2:1 (Hayama[0053]). The overlap of the weight ratio in the prior art, leads to a prima facie case. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to balance the weight ratios of platinum and palladium between the ranges of 3:1 to 1:3 and 14:1 to 2:1, in order to improve thermal stability (Hayama[0054]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNETTE H PHAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-6:30 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 5712703591. 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.
/ANNETTE PHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights