DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This Office action is based on the 18/272,886 application filed 18 July 2023, which is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 21-23, 25-26, 28-35, 38-42, 51, and 55 are pending and have been fully considered.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant is reminded that “[u]nder a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms.” Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1315, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1327. In the instant case, the specification does not appear to serve as a glossary for the term hydrophobic. However, hydrophobic appears to be a term of art meaning “a Contact Angle hydrophobicity value (herein referred to as "Contact Angle") of greater than 90 degrees” as disclosed in, e.g., Hrubesh et al (US 6,005,012). Otherwise, hydrophobic may be considered a relative term that the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree for, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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 21-23, 25-26, 28-35, 38-42, 51, and 55 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 21 recites “[a] method of making a [1.] porous ceramic [2.] honeycomb filter body, the method comprising…” However, the claim does not appear to actually make a porous ceramic honeycomb filter body. Instead, the method deposits “filtration material comprising filtration particles onto [1.] porous filter walls of a filter structure, wherein the filter structure comprises a matrix of the filter walls configured as a cellular [2.] honeycomb structure comprised of cells…” The filter structure and filter body appear to be the same. Thus, the filter body/structure is not being made by the steps of instant claim 1; it (i.e., the filter body/structure) is obtained and has a filtration material comprising filtration particles deposited thereon. Consequently, if claim 21 is directed to making said filter body, the body of the claim should recite limitations necessary for its production. Otherwise, the claim should clearly disclose what the invention is. In the absence of a clear description of the invention, the metes and bounds of said invention cannot be determined.
Claim 21 further recites “…wherein the filter structure comprises
a matrix of the filter walls configured as a cellular honeycomb structure comprised of cells
wherein surfaces of the filter walls define channels comprising
inlet channels and
outlet channels extending from an inlet end to an outlet end of the filter structure…wherein the second surfaces define the outlet channels.” First, with respect to the preceding, the Examiner notes that a surface is a two-dimensional structure, while a channel is a three-dimensional structure. Thus, it is not clear how a two-dimensional structure may define a three-dimensional structure unless two or more two-dimensional structures define said three-dimensional structure. Likewise, it is not clear how many and which surfaces of the filter walls define the said channels. Second, it is not clear if the phrase “extending from an inlet…” modifies outlet channels only or the combination of inlet channels and outlet channels. The same issue applies to claim 55 (e.g., “…wherein surfaces of the filter walls define channels comprising…”). Consequently, for the reasons stated, the metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be determined. However, for purposes of continued examination, the Examiner has interpreted the filter structure with a filtration material deposited thereupon as a wall-flow filter or filtration device comprising a further filtration material. Note that the instant specification itself discloses “FIG. 17 schematically depicts a wall-flow particulate filter according to embodiments disclosed and described herein” [paragraph 0026 of the published application] and “[r]eferring now to FIGS. 16 and 17, a honeycomb body in the form of a particulate filter 300 is schematically depicted. The particulate filter 300 may be used as a wall-flow filter to filter particulate matter from an exhaust gas stream, such as an exhaust gas stream emitted from a gasoline engine, in which case the particulate filter 300 is a gasoline particulate filter” [paragraph 0121 of the same].
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.
Claim(s) 55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al (WO 2021/262966).
Note: the discussion that follows references the equivalent publication of WO 2021/262966, US 2023/0191326).
Xue et al discloses “the present SCR catalyst comprising [1.] a transition metal ion-exchanged zeolite, is disposed on [2.] a substrate to form a SCR catalyst article. Catalytic articles comprising the substrates are generally employed as part of an exhaust gas treatment system (e.g., catalyst articles including, but not limited to, articles including the SCR catalyst disclosed herein). Accordingly, in some embodiments, the process as disclosed herein further comprises: (ii) contacting a substrate with the slurry comprising the metal ion-exchanged zeolite to form a coating on the substrate, wherein the substrate comprises an inlet end, an outlet end, an axial length extending from the inlet end to the outlet end, and a plurality of passages defined by internal walls of the substrate extending therethrough; (iii) drying the coated substrate; (iv) calcining the coated substrate obtained in (iii); and (v) optionally, repeating (ii) through (iv) one or more times” [paragraphs 0081-0085] and “FIGS. 1A and 1B illustrate an exemplary substrate 2 in the form of a flow-through substrate coated with a catalyst composition as described herein. Referring to FIG. 1A, the exemplary substrate 2 has a cylindrical shape and a cylindrical outer surface 4, an upstream end face 6 and a corresponding downstream end face 8, which is identical to end face 6. Substrate 2 has a plurality of fine, parallel gas flow passages 10 formed therein. As seen in FIG. 1B, flow passages 10 are formed by walls 12 and extend through carrier 2 from upstream end face 6 to downstream end face 8, the passages 10 being unobstructed so as to permit the flow of a fluid, e.g., a gas stream, longitudinally through carrier 2 via gas flow passages 10 thereof. As more easily seen in FIG. 1B, walls 12 are so dimensioned and configured that gas flow passages 10 have a substantially regular polygonal shape. As shown, the catalyst composition can be applied in multiple, distinct layers if desired. In the illustrated embodiment, the catalyst composition consists of both a discrete bottom layer 14 adhered to the walls 12 of the carrier member and a second discrete top layer 16 coated over the bottom layer 14. In some embodiments, one or more (e.g., two, three, or four or more) catalyst composition layers may be used. Further coating configurations are disclosed herein below” [paragraph 0095] and “[c]eramic substrates may be made of any suitable refractory material, e.g., cordierite, cordierite-α-alumina, aluminum titanate, silicon titanate, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, zircon mullite, spodumene, alumina-silica-magnesia, zircon silicate, sillimanite, a magnesium silicate, zircon, petalite, a-alumina, an aluminosilicate and the like” [paragraph 0089] and “FIG. 2, showing alternating plugged and open passages (cells). Blocked or plugged ends 100 alternate with open passages 101, with each opposing end open and blocked, respectively. The filter has an inlet end 102 and outlet end 103. The arrows crossing porous cell walls 104 represent exhaust gas flow entering the open cell ends, diffusion through the porous cell walls 104 and exiting the open outlet cell ends. Plugged ends 100 prevent gas flow and encourage diffusion through the cell walls. Each cell wall will have an inlet side 104a and outlet side 104b. The passages are enclosed by the cell walls” [paragraph 0098]. The flow-through substrate corresponds to the aforementioned wall-flow filter. Indeed, see paragraph 0099 of the reference: “[t]he wall-flow filter article substrate may have a volume of, for instance, from about 50 cm3…” The “(ii) contacting a substrate with the slurry comprising the metal ion-exchanged zeolite to form a coating on the substrate” corresponds to the first depositing step; the “calcining the coated substrate obtained in (iii)” corresponds to the heat treating; and “repeating (ii)…” corresponds to the second depositing step.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-23, 25-26, 28-35, 38-42, and 51 may be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not appear to anticipate or render obvious heat treating at a temperature less than or equal to 500o C. For example, Xue et al repeatedly performs calcination at 550o C [see, e.g., paragraphs 0156, 0158, and 0162].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN A MCCAIG whose telephone number is (571)270-5548. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8 to 4:30 Mountain 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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at 571-272-5954. 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.
/BRIAN A MCCAIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
21 February 2026