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
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I invention (claims 80-88) in the reply filed on 01/28/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8e withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/28/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 86 is objected to because of the following informalities: at the end of sentence a period is missing. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
1. Claims 80-88 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Bohringer et al. (US2016/0296911) in view of Takahashi (WO2019/131270) (For applicant’s convenience, English equivalent US2020/384444 has been used for citations).
Bohringer et al. teaches a process of producing a catalyst system for hydrogenation comprising at least one catalytically active component, wherein at least one catalytically active component is fixed on a catalyst carrier, wherein the catalytically active component comprises at least one metal selected from the group of Cu, Ag, Au, Zn, Hg, Sn, Ce, Ti, Zr, V, Nb, Cr, Mo, W, Mn, Fe, Bi, Ru, Os, Co, Rh, Re, Ir, Ni, Pd and Pt (preferably Pd, Pt and Ru), wherein said method comprises the following steps in the hereinbelow defined sequence (a) to (d): (a) providing a spherical activated carbon as a catalyst carrier, wherein the activated carbon has a Gurvich total pore volume in the range from 0.5 cm3/g to 4 cm3/g, wherein preferably 50% to 95%, of the total pore volume, in particular of the Gurvich total pore volume, of the catalyst system and/or of the activated carbon is formed by pores having pore diameters of 50 nm (para [0069]-[0072], [0158],[0224], claim 15, 20), wherein 10% to 85% of the Gurvich total pore volume of the activated carbon is formed by pores having pore diameters in the range from 2 nm to 50 nm, and wherein the activated carbon has a specific BET surface area in the range from 800 m2/g to 3500 m2/g; then (b) surface-oxidizing the spherical activated carbon provided in step (a), wherein the surface oxidation of the activated carbon leads to a formation of oxygen-containing functional groups on the surface of the activated carbon, wherein the surface oxidized activated carbon having 1.5 wt.% to 25 wt.% of oxygen containing functional groups and having hydrophilic surface (para. [0095], [0096]); then (c) providing the surface-oxidized activated carbon of step (b) with at least one catalytically active component to obtain a catalyst system by fixing the catalytically active component on the catalyst carrier; then (d) reducing the catalyst system obtained in step (c) in the form of the activated carbon endowed with the catalytically active component under temperature of in the range from 0° C to 750° C, more preferably 100° C to 500° C (para. [0138]), and wherein the obtained catalytic active component having a crystallite size most preferably from 2 nm to 20 nm (para. [0145]).
As for the claimed ratio Q of the total pore volume to specific BET surface area, Bohringer et al. already teaches a pore volume overlapping or within the claimed total pore volume, and a specific BET surface area overlapping or within the claimed specific BET surface area range, therefore, an Q ratio overlapping or within the claimed Q ratio is expected. As for the claimed oxygen content, Bohringer et al. teaches an oxygen content overlapping or within the claimed oxygen content thus renders a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP §2144. 05 I). Bohringer et al. also teaches the oxygen functional group content on the oxidized activated carbon is adjustable (para. [0096]). As for the instantly claimed oxidized carbon hydrophilicity: determined as water-vapor adsorption behavior, such that 30% to 100% of the maximum water-vapor saturation loading of the oxidized activated carbon being reached at partial pressure p/p0 of 0.6, Bohringer et al. (para. [0092]-[0096]) already teaches a same or substantially the same oxidation process/step using same or substantially the same oxidizing agent under same or substantially the same temperature obtaining same or substantially the same oxidized activated carbon having same or substantially the same oxygen content as that of instant application of obtaining the oxidized activated carbon (see the published application US2023/0372920 para. [0213]-[0217]), therefore, such same or substantially the same oxidized activated carbon as shown by Bohringer et al. would have same or substantially the same hydrophilicity, i.e. determined as water-vapor adsorption behavior, such that 30% to 100% of the maximum water-vapor saturation loading of the oxidized activated carbon being reached at partial pressure p/p0 of 0.6, as that of instantly claimed.
Regarding claim 80, Bohringer et al. does not expressly teach the dispersion degree of the catalytically active component.
Takahashi teaches palladium supported onto oxidated activated carbon carrier having a dispersion degree of 16% to 29% (table 2, para. [0117]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to adopt such well-known dispersion degree as shown by Takahashi to modify the catalyst of Bohringer et al. because adopting such well-known technique of catalytic active component dispersion degree to modify a well-known oxidized activated carbon supported hydrogenation catalyst for improvement would have predictable results (see MPEP §2143 KSR).
Regarding claim 81-84 and 88, such limitations are met as discussed above.
Regarding claim 85, Bohringer et al. teaches catalytic active precursor in step (b) being supported onto oxidized activated carbon carrier, and then converted to catalytical active component in step (d) (para. [00690-[0072], [0138]-[0139], [0145], exemplary embodiments, claim 15, 29).
Regarding claim 86, Bohringer et al. also teaches providing the surface-oxidized activated carbon with the catalytically active component comprises fixing the surface-oxidized activated carbon with the catalytically active component, wherein the fixing is affected by at least one of immersing, wetting, impregnating, spraying and spray-dispensing the surface-oxidized activated carbon in or with the catalytically active component used in the form of a solution or dispersion (claim 25, para. [0124]-[0126]).
Regarding claim 87, Bohringer et al. already teaches an overlapping reducing temperature as that of instantly claimed as discussed above. Bohringer et al. also teaches reducing temperature can be 1 hour. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to adopt such well-known reducing time as shown by Bohringer et al. to reduce the catalytic active precursor for help obtaining a desired catalyst active component loaded oxidized activated carbon catalyst for intended application, e.g. hydrogenation because adopting such well-known technique of reducing time to modify a well-known oxidized activated carbon supported catalyst for improvement would have predictable results (see MPEP §2143 KSR).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUN LI whose telephone number is (571)270-5858. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Ching-Yiu (Coris) Fung can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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.
/JUN LI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732
Prosecution Insights