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 .
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed April 30, 2026 in which claim 1 was amended.
The Quayle action is withdrawn in view of the prior art rejection that follows. The Socci reference has been reconsidered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Socci et al (The catalytic cracking of sterically challenging plastic feedstocks over high acid density Al-SBA-15 catalysts- appears on PTO-1449) in view of Cazalilla (Characterization and acidic properties of Al-SBA-15 materials prepared by post-synthesis alumination of a low-cost ordered mesoporous silica -appears on PTO-892).
Socci teaches a method for depolymerizing polyethylene with SBA-15 silica doped with aluminium. Specifically Socci describes the synthesis of AI-SBA-15 silica catalyst doped with aluminium having a surface area of 412-485 m2/g, a porosity of less than 1.0 and an average pore diameter size of 6.0-9.5 nm (3.0-4.75 nm as the radius), which are all within the range disclosed within the claims of the present application (see page 220, from left column, first paragraph to the right column fourth paragraph, and Table 2 at page 221). Socci teaches the polyethylene is mixed with the catalyst and heated under nitrogen atmosphere at temperatures of 50- 600 °C (page 220, right column, fifth paragraph). Socci uses a 3:1 ratio of polymer:catalyst (see page 2220 section 2.51). This ratio suggest the 1-20 wt% of the catalyst of the claims. Fig 13 shows the product distribution of C1-C22 products and that some of the products are present at greater than 65%. There does not appear to be any aromatics present or C28 fractions. With respect to the Branch Index, since Socci meets the claim limitations it would be reasonable to expect that the Branch Index would be lower than 0.15, absent evidence to the contrary.
Cazalilla is cited to teach that the parameters of the Al-SBA-15 catalyst may vary based upon the amount of Al present in the catalyst (see Table 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
348
826
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select a silica based material that is doped with Al because Socci teaches that it is known to use such catalyst and Cazalilla teaches that the properties of the silica based product varies based upon the amount of Al present. The skilled artisan having the prior art before her/him would select the Al-SBA-15 catalyst that would perform the best in the depolymerization of the plastics.
With respect to the surface area ranging from 100 to 300 m2/g, the prior art does not teach this limitation. However, Socci in view of Cazalilla teaches that the properties of the catalyst may be optimized such that a catalyst having a surface are ranging from 100 to 300 m2/g may be obtained.
Socci does not specifically teach that the polymers used in his process is a mixture of polyethylene and polypropylene. However, no unobviousness is seen in this difference because he teaches that the catalysts are used to depolymerize polyolefin molecules, which would include a mixture of the polyolefins.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CEPHIA D TOOMER whose telephone number is (571)272-1126. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Prem Singh can be reached at 571-272-6368. 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.
/CEPHIA D TOOMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771 18293298/20260524
Prosecution Insights