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, in the reply filed on 21 January 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/21/2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2022-0128528, filed on 07 October 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 14 July 2023 and 24 May 2024 has been reviewed and considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chinese Patent Publication CN108273514A (published 18 January 2018).
In regard to claim 1, CN ‘514A teaches an unsupported metallic catalyst comprising nickel (Ni), molybdenum (Mo), and tungsten (W) (Example 1, paragraph [0026]). The catalyst is described to have both hydrogenation and selective ring opening of cycloalkanes (paragraph [0002]).
In regard to claim 2, the process limitations are noted. However, when the examiner has found the same or substantially similar product as in the applied prior art, the burden of proof is shifted to applicant to establish that their product is patentably distinct and not the examiner to show the same process of making. In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685 and In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324. As the catalyst described by CN ‘514A anticipates the limitations of claim 1, and claim 2 does not further limit the structure of the catalyst, claim 2 is also anticipated by CN ‘514A.
In regard to claim 3, CN ‘514A teaches a catalyst composition containing 0.6 mol Ni (0.50 Ni/(Ni+Mo+W)), 0.3 mol Mo (0.25 Mo/(Ni+Mo+W)), and 0.3 mol W (0.25 W/(Ni+Mo+W)) (Example 1, paragraph [0026]). The disclosed molar ratio of Ni:Mo:W anticipates the instantly claim values.
In regard to claim 4, CN ‘514A teaches the addition of a synthesized acidic ZSM-5 molecular sieve nanocluster to the catalyst (paragraph [0012] and Example 1, paragraph [0026]) which functions as a reaction promoter by ensuring close contact between the active metal sites and acidic sites of the catalyst (paragraph [0012]).
In regard to claim 5, CN ‘514A teaches the addition of an acidic ZSM-5 molecular sieve nanocluster as a promoter in an amount of 5 wt% of the catalyst (Example 1, paragraph [0026]).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN108273514A as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et. al. (Patent Pub. No. US20090114566, published 7 May 2009).
In regard to claim 6, CN ‘514A does not teach that the unsupported metallic catalyst further comprises phosphorus (P). However, Chen et. al. teaches a metallic catalyst composition with generic formula Av[(MP)(OH)x(L)ny]z(MVIBO4) where MP comprises at least 1 Group VIII metal (Fe, Co, Ni, Ru, Re, Pd, Os, Ir, Pt, and combinations thereof, paragraph [0043]) and MVIB comprises at least one Group VIB metal (Cr, Mo, W, and combinations thereof, paragraph [0039]) (paragraphs [0024]-[0028]). Further, Av is at least one of an alkali metal cation, an ammonium, and a phosphonium cation (paragraph [0024]). Chen et. al. further discloses that to the catalyst may comprise additional phosphorus compounds such as ammonium phosphate, phosphoric acid, or organic phosphorus compounds (paragraph [0111]).
The catalyst makeup taught be Chen et. al. is disclosed to effectively upgrade heavy hydrocarbon feedstocks to jet fuel products with a net heat of combustion greater than 125,000 Btu/gal as well as other favorable properties such as low viscosity (paragraph [0123] and Table 1, pp. 11). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time to adapt the catalyst composition of CN ‘514A to include phosphorus as taught by Chen et. al. in order to catalyze the formation of an energy-dense, low viscosity product.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MORDECAI M LEAVITT whose telephone number is (571)272-6637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM.
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, CHRISTINA JOHNSON can be reached at (571) 272-1176. 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.
/MORDECAI M LEAVITT/Examiner, Art Unit 1742 /CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742