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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-7 in the reply filed on December 22, 2025 is acknowledged. Group II, Claims 8-14 have been withdrawn as being directed to a non-elected invention.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 6-7 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 6 recites: “The integrated system of claim 1, further comprising a recovery unit for separating an intermediate olefin stream from the catalytic olefin reactor into at least one olefin product stream.” This limitation is considered indefinite because it is unclear if applicant is referring to the same intermediate olefin stream of claim 1 or if it is a different intermedia olefin stream.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 6 as reciting: “The integrated system of claim 1, further comprising a recovery unit for separating the intermediate olefin stream from the catalytic olefin reactor into at least one olefin product stream.”
Claim 7 is rejected because it depends on rejected claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chewter et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2011/0112314, hereinafter Chewter).
In regards to Claim 1, Chewter discloses an integrated system for carbon capture and olefins production, where the integrated system comprises:
a carbon capture unit configured to extract a CO2 stream from a flue gas source feed (see paragraphs [0059]-[0060] and [0137]-[0138]; Chewter discloses that a suitable feed containing carbon dioxide may be one obtained from a carbon-dioxide comprising flue gas stream, in particular a flue gas obtained from the integrated process according to the invention or an oxygen purification unit or synthesis gas production process. The carbon dioxide may be a source comprising the flue gas obtained from an oxidative de-coking of an ethane cracking furnace, typically one of the ethane cracking furnaces used for producing olefins in step (a). This is considered equivalent to a carbon capture unit configured to extract a CO2 stream from a flue gas source feed, as claimed by the applicant.);
a CO2 reactor (#11) downstream of the carbon capture configured to react CO2 from the CO2 stream with hydrogen to produce a methanol product stream (see figure 1 and paragraphs [0052]-[0053], [0058]-[0059] and [0138]; Chewter discloses that the oxygenate feed is methanol produced by reacting hydrogen with carbon dioxide. The feed containing carbon dioxide may be any feed containing carbon dioxide, such as carbon dioxide from a source comprising carbon dioxide obtained from a carbon dioxide comprising flue gas stream, in particular a flue gas obtained from the integrated process according to the invention or an oxygen purification unit or synthesis gas production process. The carbon dioxide may be a source comprising the flue gas obtained from an oxidative de-coking of an ethane cracking furnace, typically one of the ethane cracking furnaces used for producing olefins in step (a). Chewter further discloses the feed containing carbon dioxide is provided via conduit #9 to oxygenate synthesis system #11, i.e. CO2 reactor, comprising an oxygenate synthesis zone for synthesizing oxygenates from hydrogen and carbon dioxide.); and
a catalytic olefin reactor (#15) downstream of the CO2 reactor (#11) configured to receive the methanol product stream and a hydrocarbon feed (olefinic co-feed) and catalytically react methanol from the methanol product stream to give an intermediate olefin stream (see figure 1 and paragraphs [0119] and [0138]; Chewter discloses the oxygenate feedstock provided to step (b) of the first process for producing olefins comprises methanol obtained by providing hydrogen and carbon dioxide to the oxygenate synthesis zone. From oxygenate synthesis system #11, an oxygenate feedstock comprising methanol is retrieved via conduit #13. The oxygenate feedstock is provided to oxygenate-to-olefins conversion system #15, comprising an OTO zone for converting oxygenates comprising methanol to lower olefins, e.g. ethylene and propylene. An olefinic co-feed (not shown), i.e. hydrocarbon feed, is provided to oxygenate-to-olefins conversion system #15 together with the oxygenate feedstock. From oxygenate-to-olefins conversion system #13, an OTO zone effluent is retrieved via conduit #17.).
In regards to Claim 2, Chewter discloses wherein the hydrocarbon feed is mixed with the methanol product stream before it enters the catalytic olefin reactor (see paragraph [0138]; Chewter discloses wherein an olefinic co-feed is provided to oxygenate-to-olefins conversion system together with the oxygenate feedstock. This is considered equivalent to wherein the hydrocarbon feed is mixed with the methanol product stream before it enters the catalytic olefin reactor, as claimed by the applicant.).
In regards to Claim 3, Chewter discloses wherein the hydrocarbon feed comprises C4-C12 paraffinic, olefinic fluid hydrocarbon feed stock streams, or any combination thereof (see paragraph [0138]; Chewter discloses an olefinic co-feed is provided to oxygenate-to-olefins conversion system together with the oxygenate feedstock.).
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.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chewter in view of Mandal et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2014/0357912, hereinafter Mandal).
In regards to Claim 4, Chewter discloses the integrated system as recited in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the catalytic olefin reactor comprises integrated gas oil and light olefin cracking zones having a petrochemical product stream comprising ethylene and/or propylene.
However, Mandal teaches a thermo-neutral catalytic conversion process and catalyst system for catalytic conversion of low value hydrocarbon feedstock to improve the yield of light olefins, particularly propylene and ethylene by allowing sequential multizone cracking reaction in a single riser which is divided in high, intermediate and low severity zones for sequential cracking of a wide range of feedstock from C4 to residue. Near thermo-neutrality of this process is realized in the overall reaction section by any or both of the following options: (i) Sequential processing of endothermic cracking reaction of C4 to residue, combining with exothermic methanol cracking (ii) Combining low coke making feedstock e.g. C4 to naphtha with high coke making feed stock like residue, slurry oil and the like and then burn off the coke thus produced in separate regenerator to satisfy the heat balance requirement (see paragraph [0023]). The catalyst system comprises a pre-heated cracking reactor having a riser, charged with a solid acidic FCC catalyst, said riser being provided with at least three temperature zones, feeding a first hydrocarbon feed having C4 hydrocarbons and other paraffinic streams to the first zone, feeding a second hydrocarbon feed having olefinic naphtha stream to the second zone, and a third hydrocarbon feed comprising heavy hydrocarbons to the third zone. Cracking the first, second and third hydrocarbons feeds sequentially, with the help of heat generated by introducing an oxygenate feed to the third zone and converting the oxygenate feed to a gaseous state, thereby obtaining light olefins with comparatively higher yield (see paragraphs [0026]-[0027]). The third feed comprises heavy hydrocarbons that include gas oil and the oxygenate feed comprises methanol (see paragraphs [0029]-[0030]). The light olefins comprising propylene and ethylene are obtained in accordance with this disclosure in an amount higher than 20wt.% and 6wt.%, respectively (see paragraph [0037]).
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the integrated system as disclosed by Chewter by substituting a known catalytic olefin reactor for another known catalytic olefin reactor comprising an integrated gas oil and light olefin cracking zones having a petrochemical product stream comprising ethylene and/or propylene, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Mandal teaches a thermo-neutral catalytic conversion process and catalyst system for catalytic conversion of low value hydrocarbon feedstock to improve the yield of light olefins, particularly propylene and ethylene by allowing sequential multizone cracking reaction in a single riser which is divided in high, intermediate and low severity zones for sequential cracking of a wide range of feedstock from C4 to residue, wherein the catalyst system comprises a pre-heated cracking reactor having a riser, charged with a solid acidic FCC catalyst, said riser being provided with at least three temperature zones, feeding a first hydrocarbon feed having C4 hydrocarbons and other paraffinic streams to the first zone, feeding a second hydrocarbon feed having olefinic naphtha stream to the second zone, and a third hydrocarbon feed comprising heavy hydrocarbons to the third zone, whereby cracking the first, second and third hydrocarbons feeds sequentially, with the help of heat generated by introducing an oxygenate feed to the third zone and converting the oxygenate feed to a gaseous state, thereby obtaining light olefins with comparatively higher yield, and the third feed comprises heavy hydrocarbons that include gas oil and the oxygenate feed comprises methanol, thereby obtaining a petrochemical product stream comprising propylene and ethylene in compatible higher yields of higher than 20wt.% and 6wt.%, respectively (see paragraph [0037]).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chewter in view of Eng et al. (US Pat. No. 7,491,315, hereinafter Eng).
In regards to Claim 5, Chewter discloses the integrated system as recited in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the catalytic olefin reactor comprises a fluid catalytic cracker comprising a first riser reactor to maximize gasoline range molecules recycled to a second riser reactor to maximize ethylene and propylene yields.
However, Eng teaches a dual riser fluidized catalytic cracking (FCC) units to process light hydrocarbons in both risers to favor olefins and/or aromatics, i.e. gasoline range molecules, production (see column 3, lines 27-29). By segregating feeds to the risers, each feed can be processed at conditions that optimize olefin production (see column 3, lines 32-33). A dual riser FCC process includes cracking a first light hydrocarbon feed in a first riser under first-riser FCC conditions to form a first effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof, and cracking a second light hydrocarbon feed in a second riser under second-riser FCC conditions to form a second effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof. The process further includes recovering catalyst and separating gas from the first and second FCC effluents in a common separation device. The recovered catalyst is regenerated from the first and second risers by combustion of coke in a regenerator to obtain hot, regenerated catalyst, and the hot regenerated catalyst can be recirculated to the first and second rises to sustain a continuous operating mode (see column 3, lines 48-65). The first and second light hydrocarbon feeds can be a hydrocarbon feedstock with four or more carbon atoms, such as paraffinic, olefinic, cycloparaffinic, naphthenic and aromatic hydrocarbons, and hydrocarbon oxygenates, such as methanol (see column 3, line 66 to column 4, line 18).
Eng further teaches in an embodiment, the dual riser process includes conditioning the gas separated from the first and second effluents to form a conditioned stream. The conditioned stream can be separated into at least a tail gas stream, an intermediate stream and a heavy stream. The heavy stream can include C6 and higher hydrocarbons, i.e. gasoline range molecules. The heavy stream can be recycled to the second riser to further produce ethylene and/or propylene (see column 5, lines 14-35).
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the integrated system as disclosed by Chewter by further substituting a known catalytic olefin reactor for another known catalytic olefin reactor comprising a fluid catalytic cracker comprising a first riser reactor to maximize gasoline range molecules recycled to a second riser reactor to maximize ethylene and propylene yields, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success as Eng teaches a dual riser fluidized catalytic cracking (FCC) units to process light hydrocarbons in both risers to favor olefins and/or aromatics, i.e. gasoline range molecules, production, wherein a dual riser FCC process includes cracking a first light hydrocarbon feed in a first riser under first-riser FCC conditions to form a first effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof, and cracking a second light hydrocarbon feed in a second riser under second-riser FCC conditions to form a second effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof, wherein the first and second light hydrocarbon feeds can be a hydrocarbon feedstock with four or more carbon atoms and hydrocarbon oxygenates, such as methanol, whereby after cracking, the dual riser process includes conditioning the gas separated from the first and second effluents to form a conditioned stream, which can be separated into at least a tail gas stream, an intermediate stream and a heavy stream, and the heavy stream can include C6 and higher hydrocarbons, i.e. gasoline range molecules, which can be recycled to the second riser to further produce ethylene and/or propylene (see column 5, lines 14-35).
In regards to Claim 6, Chewter discloses the integrated system as recited in claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising a recovery unit for separating the intermediate olefin from the catalytic olefin reactor into at least one olefin product stream.
However, Eng teaches a dual riser fluidized catalytic cracking (FCC) units to process light hydrocarbons in both risers to favor olefins and/or aromatics, i.e. gasoline range molecules, production (see column 3, lines 27-29). By segregating feeds to the risers, each feed can be processed at conditions that optimize olefin production (see column 3, lines 32-33). A dual riser FCC process includes cracking a first light hydrocarbon feed in a first riser under first-riser FCC conditions to form a first effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof, and cracking a second light hydrocarbon feed in a second riser under second-riser FCC conditions to form a second effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof. The process further includes recovering catalyst and separating gas from the first and second FCC effluents in a common separation device, i.e. recovery unit (see column 3, lines 48-60). The first and second light hydrocarbon feeds can be a hydrocarbon feedstock with four or more carbon atoms, such as paraffinic, olefinic, cycloparaffinic, naphthenic and aromatic hydrocarbons, and hydrocarbon oxygenates, such as methanol (see column 3, line 66 to column 4, line 18). The dual riser FCC units is considered equivalent to the catalytic olefinic reactor, as claimed by the applicant.
Eng further teaches in an embodiment, the dual riser process includes conditioning the gas separated from the first and second effluents to form a conditioned stream. The conditioned stream can be separated into at least a tail gas stream, an intermediate stream and a heavy stream. For example, the tail gas stream can include an ethylene product stream, a propylene product stream, a light stream comprising ethane, propane, or a combination thereof, i.e. at least one olefin product stream (see column 5, lines 14-25).
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the integrated system as disclosed by Chewter by further comprising a recovery unit for separating the intermediate olefin stream from the catalytic olefin reactor into at least one olefin product stream, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Eng teaches a dual riser fluidized catalytic cracking (FCC) units to process light hydrocarbons in both risers to favor olefins and/or aromatics, i.e. gasoline range molecules, production, wherein a dual riser FCC process includes cracking a first light hydrocarbon feed in a first riser under first-riser FCC conditions to form a first effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof, and cracking a second light hydrocarbon feed in a second riser under second-riser FCC conditions to form a second effluent enriched in ethylene, propylene or a combination thereof, wherein the first and second light hydrocarbon feeds can be a hydrocarbon feedstock with four or more carbon atoms and hydrocarbon oxygenates, such as methanol, whereby after cracking, the dual riser process includes conditioning the gas separated from the first and second effluents to form a conditioned stream, which can be separated into at least a tail gas stream, an intermediate stream and a heavy stream, and the tail gas stream can include an ethylene product stream, a propylene product stream, a light stream comprising ethane, propane, or a combination thereof, i.e. at least one olefin product stream (see column 5, lines 14-35).
In regards to Claim 7, Chewter, in view of Eng, discloses the integrated system as recited in claim 6. Eng further teaches further comprising at least one pyrolysis furnace adapted to feed at least one olefin to the recovery unit (see column 9, lines 16-26; Eng teaches that the present dual riser, dual light hydrocarbon feed process can be integrated with one or more steam pyrolysis units, i.e. pyrolysis furnace. Integration of the catalytic and pyrolytic cracking units allow for flexibility in processing a variety of feedstocks. The integration allows thermal and catalytic cracking units to be used in a complementary fashion in a new or retrofitted petrochemical complex. The petrochemical complex can be designed to use the lowest value feed streams available. Integration allows for production of an overall product slate with maximum value through routing of various by-products to the appropriate cracking technology.).
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the integrated system as disclosed by Chewter by further comprising at least one pyrolysis furnace adapted to feed at least one olefin to the recovery unit, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Eng teaches that the present dual riser, dual light hydrocarbon feed process can be integrated with one or more steam pyrolysis units, i.e. pyrolysis furnace, wherein integration of the catalytic and pyrolytic cracking units allow for flexibility in processing a variety of feedstocks, whereby the integration allows thermal and catalytic cracking units to be used in a complementary fashion in a new or retrofitted petrochemical complex and the petrochemical complex can be designed to use the lowest value feed streams available, and integration allows for production of an overall product slate with maximum value through routing of various by-products to the appropriate cracking technology (see column 9, lines 16-26).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JELITZA M PEREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-6:00pm.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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.
/JELITZA M PEREZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774