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 of claims 1-5, 12-15 in the reply filed on August 3rd, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 6-11 have been withdrawn without traverse.
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 2 and 13 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.
The term “type” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “type” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what is classified as boehmite type aluminas.
The term “low” in claim 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “low” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The term low.
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, 3-5, 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun et al. (US 2018/0229223 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sun et al. teaches slurrying clay (corresponding to a solid suspension) (paragraph [0038], [0047]), an inorganic oxide which is selected from different alumina forms which includes boehmite (corresponding to a solid suspension) (paragraph [0042]), a molecular sieve which includes SAPO and Y-type zeolites (paragraph [0026]). The molecular sieve (zeolite) can be modified with an organic complexing agent which includes formic acid and acetic acid (corresponding to a monovalent acid) (paragraph [0022]). Pseudo-boehmite can be used as a binder (corresponding to adding monovalent acid to the solid suspension and to a zeolite) (paragraph [0042]). The binder is selected from binders commonly used in cracking catalysts and is one or more of silica sol, aluminum sol, modified aluminum sol, modified silica sol (corresponding to inorganic oxide hydrosol) (paragraph [0043]). The method of making comprises mixing and slurrying the modified molecular sieve, clay, inorganic oxide, the binder, and spray drying the catalyst (corresponding to steps (d) and (e)) (paragraph [0044]). The components may be mixed and slurried in a variety of ways, each component may separately form a material slurry and then be mixed and slurried; or 2 to 3 kinds of components may be mixed and then be slurried then the remaining materials are prepared into 2 or 1 material slurry, mixed and slurried, prepared into a mixed slurry containing a plurality of components (paragraph [0044]). The catalyst may further comprise the steps of calcining, washing, filtering, and drying after spray drying. After spray drying, calcination is preferable. During the calcination, a high temperature treatment is performed on the precipitate of Group IIIB elements, and the minority of Group IIIB elements are ion exchanged with cations such as sodium on the molecular sieve, and migrate by exchange to the molecular sieve, which can make the molecular sieve charge balance and improve the molecular sieve activity and stabilize the crystal structure of the molecular sieve (corresponding to step (f)) (paragraph [0033]). The spray drying, calcining, washing, filtering, and drying (corresponding to step (g)) pertain to the prior art, which are not particularly limited in the present invention (paragraph [0051]). In comparative example 7, kaolin, pseudo-boehmite, boehmite, and water were mixed and slurried (corresponding to step a), hydrochloric acid was added and stirred (corresponding to step b), a molecular sieve was added and stirred (corresponding to step c), aluminum sol was added and stirred (corresponding to step d), then the catalyst was spray dried, molded (corresponding to step e), calcinated, washed (corresponding to step f), and dried (corresponding to step g) (paragraph [0108]).
Regarding claim 3, ZSM-5 (paragraphs [0026], [0061], [0073], [0101]), Y-type (paragraphs [0026], [0033], [0061], [0064], [0071], [0094], [0097], [0099], [0113]), SAPO (paragraph [0026]), beta zeolite (paragraph [0026]) is used.
Regarding claim 4, the precipitating agent is one or more of oxalic acid, ammonium carbonate, ammonium oxalate, ammonium bicarbonate, carbon dioxide, aqueous ammonia, phosphoric acid, diammonium hydrogen phosphate, ammonium dihydrogen phosphate, ammonium phosphate, and urea (paragraph [0021]). In example 5, 798 g of zeolite, 155 g of urea, and 85 g of lanthanum nitrate were added in deionized water (paragraph [0078]). This results in a wt% of 15% of urea.
Regarding claim 5, method one of synthesizing the molecular sieve is mixing the metal ions of Group IIIB with the organic complexing agent (acetic acid or formic acid, corresponding to monovalent acid) and/or the dispersant, followed by adding the precipitating agent (corresponding to porogen) (paragraph [0028]; claim 14).
Regarding claim 12, the amount of precipitating agent is well known to those skilled in the art, as one or more of the compounds that are capable of providing or generating hydroxide ions, carbonate ions, bicarbonate ions, phosphate ions, hydrogen phosphate ions, phosphate ions, hydrogen phosphate ions, dihydrogen phosphate ions, and oxalate ions (paragraph [0020]). The precipitating agent is one or more of ammonium carbonate or ammonium bicarbonate (paragraphs [0021], [0026]; claims 7-8).
Regarding claim 13, urea can be used as a precipitating agent (paragraphs [0021], [0078], [0125], [0136]; claim 8).
Regarding claim 14, method one of synthesizing the molecular sieve is mixing the metal ions of Group IIIB with the organic complexing agent (corresponding to monovalent acid) and/or the dispersant, followed by adding the precipitating agent (corresponding to porogen) and stirring to form a precipitate containing Group IIIB element, and then spray drying and optionally calcinating (paragraph [0028]; claims 2 and 14).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 2018/0229223 A1) as applied to claims 1, 3-5, 11-14 above, and further in view of Sabahi et al. (US 2020/0338536 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Sun et al. teaches clay (paragraphs [0038], [0039], [0047], [0050]), and alumina are used (paragraph [0042]). The alumina is selected from forms of alumina and/or hydrated alumina such as one or more of gamma-alumina, eta-alumina, theta-alumina, boehmite, gibbsite, bayreite, and pseudo-boehmite (paragraph [0042]). Sun et al. does not teach microcrystalline boehmite or non-peptized quasi-crystalline alumina.
However, Sabahi et al. teaches a Freidel Crafts Catalyst with quasi-crystalline and microcrystalline boehmite (abstract, paragraph [0009]). Sababhi et al. teaches “boehmite” as alumina hydrates, and quasi-crystalline boehmites as pseudo-boehmites (paragraphs [0055]-[0056]). The quasi-crystalline boehmite has higher surface areas, larger pores and pore volumes, and lower specific densities than the microcrystalline boehmites (paragraph [0057]). The catalyst is made with a zeolite, rare-earth exchanged Y zeolite, small to medium pore size zeolites, quasi-crystalline boehmite, microcrystalline boehmite, silica from acidic colloidal silica, a rare earth oxide, and clay (paragraph [0069]). The resulting catalyst has an increase in mesoporosity over previous catalysts, which resulted in more selective cracking with larger molecules that leads to less coke (paragraph [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facia obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Sun et al. with Sabahi et al. and to use the quasi-crystalline boehmite and microcrystalline boehmite as the alumina source in the catalyst composition as taught by Sun et al. for the purpose as described by Sabahi et al. to optimize the mesoporosity of the catalyst.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 2018/0229223 A1) as applied to claims 1, 3-5, 11-14 above, and further in view of Kano et al. (US 2011/0077148 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Sun et al. teaches the molecular sieve can be dried, and the drying pertains to the prior art, which are not particularly limited in the present invention (paragraph [0051]). Sun et al. does not specifically teach drying the catalyst using a drying column under hot air flow (flash dryer).
However, Kano et al. teaches drying a slurry at 250 °C using a flash dryer to obtain a catalyst precursor (paragraph [0062]).
Therefore, it would have been prima facia obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teaching of Sun et al. with Kano et al. and to have used the drying column with the method for producing the catalyst as taught by Sun et al. An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Soled et al. (US 7,513,989 B1) contains a similar method for synthesizing a hydrocracking catalyst.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANNAH E KETCHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0742. 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.
/H.E.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1742
/JEFFREY M WOLLSCHLAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights