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, claims 1-23 in the reply filed on 5/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 24-28 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected apparatus, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/11/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code. See the references spanning Pages 74-97. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP § 608.01.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 5 has two commas “,,” after “(Nylon 11)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 6 lists polypropylene twice. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the acronym DMF should be defined at first use. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the acronyms NMP, TEA, TEEDA, and DMF should be defined at first use. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: the acronyms TEA, TPA, NMP, TEEDA, and TEA should be defined at first use. 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.
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 4-6, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 18 are 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.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the one or more polyesters comprise… polyurethane (PU)”. Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). Polyurethanes are not commonly understood to be species a polyester. A redefinition of the term “polyurethane” is not found in either the claims or in the specification. It is unclear whether claim 4 is meant to encompass polyurethanes in the ordinary sense (those polymers with repeat units connected by urethane -NH-C(O)-O- functionalities) or if a particular sub-type of polyurethanes (e.g. polyester-urethanes) are intended.
Regarding claim 5, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Further regarding claim 5, claim 5 is worded in the format “wherein the one or more polyamides comprise Nylons… ,, semi-aromatic polyamides.” The lack of “or” or “and” prior to the semi-aromatic polyamide listing renders the scope of the claim unclear as to whether Nylons and semi-aromatic polyamides are required to be in combination, are singly required, or both in the alternative.
Claim 6 recites “low density high density polyethylene (HDPE)”. The term “low density high density polyethylene” is not a term of the art and it is unclear what substance is intended. The acronym “HDPE” is ordinarily associated with high density polyethylene.
Claim 12 refers to “the one of more tertiary amine catalysts”. It is unclear whether this is referring to the amine catalysts of step (a), step (b), or both.
Claim 13 refers to “the one of more tertiary amine catalysts”. It is unclear whether this is referring to the amine catalysts of step (a), step (b), or both.
Claim 15 refers to “the one of more tertiary amine catalysts for solvolysis”. It is unclear whether this is referring to the amine catalysts of step (a), step (b), or both.
Claim 16 recites “supported ruthenium (Ru/C) catalyst”. It is unclear whether carbon (see Ru/C) is being required as a support or not.
Claim 18 recites “further comprises recycling the catalysts and solvents”. It is unclear which catalysts / solvents of claim 1 are being referred to. It is also generally unclear what the intended scope of the claim is with respect to recycling the materials (e.g. are they re-used in the same process?).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 7, 8, 10, 11, 17, and 19-23 are allowed.
The closest prior art found is Saleh (U.S. Pat. 5,326,791), who describes methods of reactively separating hydrolysable polymers from non-hydrolyzable polymers (Abstract) whereby polyester, polyamide, polycarbonate, and polyolefins are subjected to hydrolysis conditions to afford monomers from hydrolyzing polyester/polyamide/polycarbonate and a solid phase containing polyolefin, which is subsequently separated (Col. 3, Lines 4-16). Saleh fails to describe a sequential solvolysis protocol where polyester is solvolyzed first, polyester monomers are removed, and then polyamide is solvolyzed second. Further, Saleh fails to describe a subsequent step of hydrogenolysis of the resulting polyolefin. Accordingly, Saleh fails to describe the method claimed and is not seen to provide sufficient motivation to arrive at the subject matter claimed.
Debruin (US 2023/0110481 A1) describes chemical recycling facilities for mixed plastic waste streams (Abstract) whereby mixed polyester/polyolefin waste streams are separated and undergo depolymerization processes such as solvolysis and pyrolysis (Figure 1). However, Debruin fails to describe the sequential solvolysis/hydrogenolysis protocol claimed.
Liguori (Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 2021, 17, 589-621) provides a review of known depolymerization of plastics protocols. Solvolysis and hydrogenolysis are both known methods of depolymerizing plastic materials to monomers, inclusive of polyester, polyamides, and polyolefins (Figure 1 and Table 7). However, Liguori fails to describe the sequential solvolysis/hydrogenolysis protocol claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN E RIETH whose telephone number is (571)272-6274. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-4PM Mountain Standard Time.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at (571)272-1234. 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.
/STEPHEN E RIETH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights