DETAILED ACTION
This communication responds to the application and amended claim set filed April 26, 2023. Claims 1-15 are currently pending.
Claims 1-15 are REJECTED under 35 USC 112, but otherwise contain allowable subject matter.
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
This application is the national stage entry of PCT/CN2021/126397, filed October 26, 2021, which claims priority to CN 2020-11157626.5, CN 2020-11157613.8, CN 2020-11156589.6, and CN 2020-11157579.4, all filed October 26, 2020. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 5, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 1, 2, and 5, the formulae (1), (I), (I’), (I’’), and (I’’’) are difficult to read. Specifically, some subscripts are illegible. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. (See MPEP § 2173.05(d).)
Claims 2-7 and 13-15 depend from claim 1 and do not correct claim 1’s deficiencies. Therefore, they are indefinite for the reason claim 1 is indefinite.
Regarding claims 2 and 5, z is not defined.
Claims 3 and 4 depend from claim 2 and do not correct claim 2’s deficiencies. Therefore, they are indefinite for the reason claim 2 is indefinite. Similarly, claims 6 and 7 are indefinite for the reason claim 5 is indefinite.
Regarding claims 3, 4, 6, and 7, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. (See MPEP § 2173.05(d).)
Regarding claim 8, the word “the” in the preamble makes the claim confusing and therefore indefinite. It is not clear whether the word should instead be “a” (“A method for preparing a carrier for polyolefin catalysts, …”) or if claim 8 is intended to recite a method for preparing the carrier according to claim 1.
Claims 9-12 depend from claim 8 and do not correct claim 8’s deficiencies. Therefore, they are indefinite for the reason claim 8 is indefinite.
Regarding claims 9, 10, and 12, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. (See MPEP § 2173.05(d).)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 1-15 contain allowable subject matter in view of the closest prior art reference, Ling et al. (CN 111072797A (ref. to US 2021/0371552)). Ling teaches a carrier for olefin polymerization catalysts comprising a magnesium-containing compound and sulfur. (Abs.) The magnesium-containing compound corresponds to formula (1), as can be seen below:
PNG
media_image1.png
130
126
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(para. [0028].)
The difference between Ling and the present claims is that Ling does not teach or fairly suggest a carrier comprising the recited Lewis bases. While sulfur can act as a Lewis base (e.g., when heated in the presence of hydrogen to from H2S), there is no recognition in Ling that (1) sulfur is acting as a Lewis base when complexed with the carrier shown above or (2) there would be any reason to incorporate any Lewis base – to say nothing of the recited Lewis bases – into the carrier of Ling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CATHERINE S BRANCH whose telephone number is (571)270-3539. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday.
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, Joseph Del Sole can be reached at 571-272-1130. 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.
CATHERINE S. BRANCH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1763
/CATHERINE S BRANCH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763