DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. The restriction requirement dated October 14, 2025 is withdrawn. The full scope of the claims was searched and examined.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statements (dated July 24, 2025 and July 13, 2025 and August 7, 2024 and May 23, 2023) were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. The statements were considered. Signed copies of form 1449 are enclosed herewith.
Status of Claims
5. Claims 1-5 and 7 are pending. Claim 1 is independent.
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.
6. Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150291504 (published October 15, 2015) as applied to claims 1-5 and 7 above, and further in view of KR 101368047 (published February 27, 2014) and Korolkov et al. (published June 12, 2019). The present claims have an effective filing date of November 4, 2021 and priority claim to foreign application dated November 26, 2020.
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art
US 20150291504 teaches the transesterification reaction of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) and ethanol (EtOH) in the presence of a catalyst, wherein the reaction is performed in a continuous stirred tank reactor. The catalyst is continuously fed wherein the catalyst and ethanol are mixed in a pre-reactor and the catalyst is sodium methoxide in an alcohol based solvent at 1.32% weight. Claims 1, 4, 5, 7. Paragraph [0122].
KR 101368047 teaches the filtration of a reaction product of transesterification using a 1 to 6 micron pore size filter to product high purity product and recycle the catalyst. Paragraph [0028]. Claim 2.
Korolkov et al. teach separation and purification technology aspect which employ polyethylene filters which are robust systems used in various filtration procedures in a broad range of applications including analytical, microfiltration, pharmaceutical, chemical, microelectronics, nanostructure industries. Page 2. Claim 3.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue
The difference between the present claims and US 20150291504 is the requirement of the claims for a filtering step for the composite product. The secondary reference teaches the filtration step in a transesterification reaction, using the claimed pore size filter, and additionally the disclosure that the filtration step is important for purity and useful in recycling catalyst.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art - considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness
The person of ordinary skill has the motivation to include the added step of filtration to the teaching of US 20150291504 in order to achieve a product as claimed, that additionally would have a higher purity and cost incentive due to recycling of catalyst. One of ordinary skill has a reasonable expectation of success in achieving the modified process to arrive at the present claims. The filters as claimed are available in the state of the art including the claimed filters such as polyethylene. For these reasons, it has been determined that the present claims are prima facie obvious over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUN JAE YOO whose telephone number is (571)272-9074. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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.
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.
/SUN JAE YOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1621