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 .
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) 1, 4-8, 10-14, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Rear (US 2003/0191199) in view of De Klerk (US 10,011,789).
The claims are drawn to a process for producing a hydrogen carbon product boiling in the gasoline boiling range, the process comprising the steps of:
PNG
media_image1.png
550
674
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
240
648
media_image2.png
Greyscale
O’Rear teaches a process and plant for producing a hydrocarbon product boiling in the gasoline boiling range, wherein the process comprises first, converting a feed comprising CO2 and H2 into synthesis gas (CO and H2), by conducting a reverse water gas shift process; introducing the synthesis gas into a Fischer-Tropsch reactor to produce a Fischer-Tropsch product and CO2; at least a portion of the CO2 from the Fischer-Tropsch reactor is fed to at least one stream being fed to the synthesis gas formation reactor. Additionally, naphtha is obtained from the Fischer-Tropsch process and fed to a naphtha reformer, thereby generating hydrogen by-product and C6 to C10 product. A portion of the hydrogen by-product is fed into the feed stream, converting at least a portion of the CO2 into addition CO that is converted into hydrocarbons in the Fischer-Tropsch reactor (abstract).
The naphtha reforming process (aromatization) may be a conventional process using a catalyst comprising at least one of platinum, alumina, a halogen, rhenium, iridium, or mixtures thereof. Or, the naphtha reforming process may be a non-acidic zeolitic reforming process, such as the AROMAX® process, which typically uses a non-acidic zeolite, such as an L-type zeolite (0030-0031). The AROMAX® process is typically conducted at temperatures above 555°F (above 290°C) and pressures below 800 psi (below 55 bar).
Hydrogen produced in the naphtha reforming process often contains C2+ hydrocarbons, so it is preferable to process the hydrogen in a pre-reformer ahead of the main naphtha reformer, in order to convert C2+ hydrocarbons into synthesis gas, methane, and water, in order to avoid coking that may occur in the reforming reactor. Steam methane reforming processes utilizing a pre-reformer typically includes an adiabatic pre-reforming reactor containing a highly active nickel catalyst, to reform heavier hydrocarbons in the feedstock (0038-0040).
The hydrogen by-product generated during naphtha reforming can also be used for processes such as hydrotreating a portion of the C5+ product to remove olefins, oxygenates (hydrodeoxygenation), and other trace heteroatoms (0042). It is preferable to use hydrogen from naphtha reforming, but it may also be desirable to use hydrogen from other sources. Therefore, the hydrogen generated during naphtha reforming may be supplemented with hydrogen from alternative sources.
The primary difference between the present invention and O’Rear is that the latter teaches a non-acidic zeolite for the naphtha reforming process, while the instant process uses an acidic zeolite having the MFI structure, specifically, Ni-ZSM-5.
However, De Klerk teaches a Fischer-Tropsch process, wherein during the naphtha aromatizing step, a metal-promoted H-ZSM-5 zeolite is used. De Klerk teaches that the metal can be nickel, or zinc, when using ZSM-5 (col. 4, lines 1-55).
In view of the combined reference teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the L-type zeolite taught in the naphtha reforming process used by O’Rear, with a ZSM-5 zeolite taught by De Klerk, specifically when reforming heavier hydrocarbons, as De Klerk teaches aromatizing of C2 to C8 hydrocarbons using the ZSM-5 type of zeolite.
Claims 3 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: claim 15 is drawn to a plant for producing a hydrocarbon product boiling in the gasoline boiling range. O’Rear teaches a similar plant, comprising a synthesis gas producing section, comprising a reverse water gas shift unit, a Fischer-Topsch reactor with hydroprocessing section, and an aromatization reactor. However, O’Rear does not teach or suggest a plant having a water (steam) electrolysis unit as part of the synthesis gas producing section, as required by the instant claim.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIKARL A WITHERSPOON whose telephone number is (571)272-0649. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-9pm IFP.
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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at 571-270-5241. 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.
/SIKARL A WITHERSPOON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692