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 .
The previous prior art rejection under Andou et al (US 20040162439) in view of Titanium Alloy guide (RTI international metal Inc. website), herein RTI and Andou in view of RTI and further in view of Ishikawa et al (CN 1630675) maintained and therefore it is proper to make this rejection FINAL.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-10 and 12-14 and new claim 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andou et al (US 20040162439) in view of Titanium Alloy guide (RTI international metal Inc. website), herein RTI.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andou in view of RTI
as applied to claims 1-4, 7-10 and 12-14 above, and further in view of Ishikawa et al (CN 1630675).
In reference to new claim 18, Andou teaches that a gas phase portion of the reactor can be made from a titanium alloy (see 0032).
The rejection can be found in the NON-FINAL office action mailed 7/10/2026 and is herein incorporated by reference
Allowable Subject Matter
New claims 15-17 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 closest prior art found is represented by Andou.
The reference teaches a gas phase portion of the reactor can be made from a titanium alloy. However, the reference fails to teach that a central shaft, stirring blades and baffles are made from Titanium/Palladium alloy.
New search does not result in a reference covering the subject matter of new claims 15-17.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Andou fails to teach that Andou does not teach that inner part of the reactor made from titanium alloy.
This is incorrect. The reference teaches a gas phase portion of the reactor can be made from a titanium alloy. Such part is considered as an inner part of the reactor.
Applicant submits that Andou fails to teach titanium/palladium alloy. In addition, even though Andou discloses titanium alloys with high corrosion resistance, the reference fails to teach Ti/Pd alloy.
However, the advantage of using such alloy is disclosed by RTI (see Non-final Office Action issued on 7/10/2026).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY LISTVOYB whose telephone number is (571)272-6105. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm EST M-F.
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, Heidi Riviere Kelley can be reached at (571) 270-1831. 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.
GL
/GREGORY LISTVOYB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1765
