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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/12/2023, 07/12/2023, 04/15/2024, 09/10/2024, and 05/27/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 8-12, 14 in the reply filed on 11/03/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation a total alkali content of 0.32-0.46 mmol/g, and the claim also recites preferably 0.32-0.42 mmol/g, more preferably 0.324-0.397 mmol/g, particularly preferably 0.384-0.397 mmol/g which is the narrower statement of the range.
In the present instance, claim 2 recites the broad recitation the metal element M is a combination of at least two selected from the group consisting of Group IIA metal elements, Group VIB metal elements other than Cr and Group IVA metal elements, and the claim also recites preferably a combination of at least one Group IIA metal element, at least one Group VIB metal element other than Cr and at least one Group IVA metal element which is the narrower statement of the limitation.
In the present instance, claim 3 recites the broad recitation the Group IIA metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Mg, and the claim also recites preferably Sr which is the narrower statement of the limitation.
In the present instance, claim 3 recites the broad recitation the Group VIB metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Cr or Mo, and the claim also recites preferably W which is the narrower statement of the limitation.
In the present instance, claim 5 recites the broad recitation the catalyst has a K20 content of 2.3-6 wt%, and the claim also recites preferably 2.3-5.5 wt% which is the narrower statement of the range.
In the present instance, claim 6 recites the broad recitation the catalyst has a Fe2O3 content of 66-80 wt%, and the claim also recites preferably 67.5-79 wt% which is the narrower statement of the range.
In the present instance, claim 6 recites the broad recitation a K20 content of 2.3-6 wt%, and the claim also recites preferably 2.3-5.5 wt% which is the narrower statement of the range.
In the present instance, claim 6 recites the broad recitation a content of the oxide of the metal element M of 2-16 wt%, based on the total amount of the catalyst, and the claim also recites preferably, the catalyst has a WO3 content of 0.5-5 wt%, a SrO content of 0.5-5 wt%, and a content of the Group IVA metal oxide of 0.5-5 wt%, based on the total amount of the catalyst which is the narrower statement of the limitation.
In the present instance, claim 7 recites the broad recitation the catalyst further comprises 0.5-8 wt%, and the claim also recites preferably 1-7 wt%, more preferably 2-6 wt% which is the narrower statement of the range.
In the present instance, claim 7 recites the broad recitation of a ferrite, and the claim also recites the ferrite is preferably ZNFe2O4 ; preferably, the catalyst further comprises 0.05-0.5 wt% of a Group IVB metal oxide, preferably HfO2, and/or 0.5-1.5 wt% of a Group VA metal oxide, preferably Sb2O5, based on the total amount of the catalyst which is the narrower statement of the limitation.
The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
The term “strong alkali content” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “strong alkali content” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear at what point the alkali content is “strong” and exactly how “strong alkali content” differs from “total alkali content”.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Song et al (CN 109569639 A, machine translation used for citations, cited in IDS 04/12/2023).
Song discloses a dehydrogenation catalyst for preparing styrene ([0010]) which comprises the following components in weight percentage: 65-80% Fe2O3 ([0011]), 6-11% K2O ([0012]), 7-10% CeO2 ([0013]), 0.5-5% WO3 ([0014]), 0.5-5% CaO ([0015]), 0.5-5% BeO ([0016]), at least one selected from HfO2, ZrO2 or TiO2 with a content of 0.5 to 5% ([0017] meeting limitation “An Iron-potassium-cerium-based composite oxide catalyst, comprising, in addition to metal elements Fe, K and Ce, a metal element M that is at least one selected from the group consisting of Group IIA metal elements, Group VIB metal elements other than Cr, and Group IVA metal elements”).
While Song does not explicitly disclose the catalyst total alkali content and strong alkali content, the composition disclosed by Song overlaps with the composition disclosed by the instant specification.
Song’s disclosure
65-80% Fe2O3 ([0011])
6-11% K2O ([0012])
7-10% CeO2 ([0013])
0.5-5% WO3 ([0014])
0.5-5% CaO ([0015]), 0.5-5% BeO ([0016])
at least one selected from HfO2, ZrO2 or TiO2 with a content of 0.5 to 5% ([0017])
Instant application
66-80 wt.% of Fe2O3 (Pg. 6 line 18)
2.3-6 wt.% of K20 (Pg. 6 line 22)
6-12 wt.% of CeO2 (Pg. 6 line 26)
0.5-5 wt.% of WO3 (Pg. 7 line 29)
The Group IIA metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Mg (Pg. 6 line1-2)
0.05-0.5 wt% of HfO2 (Pg. 9 line 26)
Song’s method of making
Components and pore-forming agent mixed uniformly ([0024])
Water is added and kneaded ([0024])
Extrusion, drying and calcination ([0024])
Drying at 30-70 °C for 2-4 hours, then drying at 80-150 °C for 0.5-4 hours ([0027])
Calcination at 300-650 °C for 2-4 hours, then at 900-1000 °C for 2-4 hours ([0029])
Applicant’s method of making
Mixing components with a pore-forming agent (Pg. 12 lines 20-25)
Mixing with a solvent (Pg. 12 line 26) Stirred with a kneader (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Extruded, dried, calcined (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Dried at 55 °C for 2 hours, heated to 135 °C and dried for 3 hours (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Calcined at 455 °C for 3 hours, then heated to 930 °C for 3 hours (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Therefore, since the composition of the catalyst disclosed by Song and the catalyst claimed are very similar, the total alkali content and strong alkali content claimed would necessarily be present in the catalyst disclosed by Song.
Regarding claim 2, Song discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including a dehydrogenation catalyst for preparing styrene ([0010]) which comprises the following components in weight percentage: 65-80% Fe2O3 ([0011]), 6-11% K2O ([0012]), 7-10% CeO2 ([0013]), 0.5-5% WO3 ([0014] Group VIB metal other than Cr), 0.5-5% CaO ([0015] Group IIA metal element), 0.5-5% BeO ([0016] Group IIA metal element).
Regarding claim 3, Song discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including a dehydrogenation catalyst for preparing styrene ([0010]) which comprises the following components in weight percentage: 65-80% Fe2O3 ([0011]), 6-11% K2O ([0012]), 7-10% CeO2 ([0013]), 0.5-5% WO3 ([0014] the Group VIB metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Cr or Mo, but is preferably W), 0.5-5% CaO ([0015] the Group IIA metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Mg), 0.5-5% BeO ([0016] the Group IIA metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Mg).
Song further discloses no binder is added during the catalyst preparation process ([0023]).
Regarding claim 4, Song discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above. While Song does not explicitly disclose “one of the following characteristics: after 1500 hours of reaction under conditions including a pressure of -45 kPa, a mass space velocity of ethylbenzene of 0.75 h-1, a temperature of 600 °C, and a weight ratio of water to ethylbenzene of 0.9, the retention rate of the crushing strength of the catalyst is 80% or higher;
after 1500 hours of reaction under conditions including a pressure of -45 kPa, a mass space velocity of ethylbenzene of 0.75 h-1, a temperature of 600 °C, and a weight ratio of water to ethylbenzene of 0.9, the retention rate of the total alkali content of the catalyst is 82% or higher, and the retention rate of the strong alkali content of the catalyst is 80% or higher;
the catalyst has a reduction completion temperature of 730 °C or higher according to the H2-TPR test”,
the composition disclosed by Song overlaps with the composition disclosed by the instant specification and the methods of making the catalysts are so similar, the limitations of claim 4 would necessarily be characteristics of the catalyst disclosed by Song.
Song’s disclosure
65-80% Fe2O3 ([0011])
6-11% K2O ([0012])
7-10% CeO2 ([0013])
0.5-5% WO3 ([0014])
0.5-5% CaO ([0015]), 0.5-5% BeO ([0016])
at least one selected from HfO2, ZrO2 or TiO2 with a content of 0.5 to 5% ([0017])
Instant application
66-80 wt.% of Fe2O3 (Pg. 6 line 18)
2.3-6 wt.% of K20 (Pg. 6 line 22)
6-12 wt.% of CeO2 (Pg. 6 line 26)
0.5-5 wt.% of WO3 (Pg. 7 line 29)
The Group IIA metal element comprised in the catalyst is not Mg (Pg. 6 line1-2)
0.05-0.5 wt% of HfO2 (Pg. 9 line 26)
Song’s method of making
Components and pore-forming agent mixed uniformly ([0024])
Water is added and kneaded ([0024])
Extrusion, drying and calcination ([0024])
Drying at 30-70 °C for 2-4 hours, then drying at 80-150 °C for 0.5-4 hours ([0027])
Calcination at 300-650 °C for 2-4 hours, then at 900-1000 °C for 2-4 hours ([0029])
Applicant’s method of making
Mixing components with a pore-forming agent (Pg. 12 lines 20-25)
Mixing with a solvent (Pg. 12 line 26) Stirred with a kneader (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Extruded, dried, calcined (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Dried at 55 °C for 2 hours, heated to 135 °C and dried for 3 hours (Pg. 19 Example 1)
Calcined at 455 °C for 3 hours, then heated to 930 °C for 3 hours (Pg. 19 Example 1)
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al (CN 109569639 A, machine translation used for citations, cited in IDS 04/12/2023).
Regarding claim 5, Song discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including a dehydrogenation catalyst for preparing styrene ([0010]) which comprises the following components in weight percentage: 6-11% K2O ([0012]).
As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In the instant case, the range taught by Song (6-11%) overlaps with the claimed range (2.3-6 wt%). Therefore, the range in Song renders obvious the claimed range.
Regarding claim 6, Song discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including a dehydrogenation catalyst for preparing styrene ([0010]) which comprises the following components in weight percentage: 65-80% Fe2O3 ([0011]), 6-11% K2O ([0012]), 7-10% CeO2 ([0013]), 0.5-5% WO3 ([0014]), 0.5-5% CaO ([0015]), 0.5-5% BeO ([0016]), at least one selected from HfO2, ZrO2 or TiO2 with a content of 0.5 to 5% ([0017]
As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In the instant case, the range taught by Song (65-80% Fe2O3) overlaps with the claimed range (66-80 wt%). Therefore, the range in Song renders obvious the claimed range.
In the instant case, the range taught by Song (6-11% K2O) overlaps with the claimed range (2.3-6 wt%). Therefore, the range in Song renders obvious the claimed range.
In the instant case, the range taught by Song (7-10% CeO2) overlaps with the claimed range (6-12 wt%). Therefore, the range in Song renders obvious the claimed range.
In the instant case, the range taught by Song (0.5-5% WO3, 0.5-5% CaO, 0.5-5% BeO) overlaps with the claimed range (a content of the oxide of the metal element M of 2-16 wt%). Therefore, the range in Song renders obvious the claimed range.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al (CN 109569639 A, machine translation used for citations, cited in IDS 04/12/2023) in view of Song et al (CN 103028419 A, machine translation used for citations, cited in IDS 04/12/2023, hereinafter “Song ‘419”).
Regarding claim 7, Song discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including a dehydrogenation catalyst for preparing styrene ([0010]) which comprises the following components in weight percentage: at least one selected from HfO2, ZrO2 or TiO2 with a content of 0.5 to 5% ([0017] meeting limitation “the catalyst further comprises 0.05-0.5 wt% of a Group IVB metal oxide, preferably HfO2”).
Song does not disclose “wherein the catalyst further comprises 0.5-8 wt% of a ferrite”.
Song ‘419 discloses a catalyst for the dehydrogenation of ethylbenzene under low water ratio conditions ([0009]) comprising the following components by weight percentage ([0010]): 69-81% Fe2O3 ([0011]); 4-9% K2O ([0012]); 6-11% CeO2 ([0013]); 1-5% WO3 ([0014]); 0.5-5% MgO ([0015]). Of the iron oxide used, 2 to 10% by weight comes from zinc ferrite ([0018]). By adding zinc ferrite to the iron-potassium-cerium-tungsten-magnesium catalytic system, effectively improves the reduction resistance of the active phase KFeO2 and the potassium storage phase KFe11O17, significantly slowing down the loss rate of potassium during the catalytic dehydrogenation of ethylbenzene, and significantly improving the stability of the low-potassium catalyst under low water ratio conditions ([0029]).
2 to 10% of 69-81% is equivalent to 1.4-8.1% by weight.
As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In the instant case, the range taught by Song ‘419 (1.4-8.1% by weight) overlaps with the claimed range (0.5-8 wt%). Therefore, the range in Song ‘419 renders obvious the claimed range.
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the catalyst to further comprise 0.5-8 wt% of a ferrite in the composition of Song in order to improve the reduction resistance of the active phase KFeO2 and the potassium storage phase KFe11O17, significantly slow down the loss rate of potassium during the catalytic dehydrogenation of ethylbenzene, and significantly improve the stability of the low-potassium catalyst under low water ratio conditions as taught by Song ‘419.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE L QUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00.
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 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.
/N.L.Q./Examiner, Art Unit 1738
/MICHAEL FORREST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1738