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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Election/Restrictions
1. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-14, in the reply filed on 07/08/2026 is acknowledged.
2. Claim 15 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 07/08/2026.
Status of Application
3. This application was filed on 01/23/2024.
Claims 1-15 were originally presented in this application for examination.
Claims 1-15 are currently pending in this application for examination.
Priority
4. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
The foreign document KR10-2023-0132281, filed on 10/05/2023 has been received and placed in this application.
Specification
5. The examiner has not checked the specification to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors (grammatical, typographical, and idiomatic). Cooperation of the applicant(s) is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant(s) may become aware of in the specification, in the claims and in any further amendment(s) that applicant(s) may file.
Applicant(s) is also requested to complete the status of the copending applications referred to in the specification by their Attorney Docket Number or Application Serial Number, if any.
The status of the parent application(s) and/or any other application(s) cross-referenced to this application, if any, should be updated in a timely manner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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(s) 1-3 & 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 11,014,994 B2), hereinafter “Zhang et al. ‘994”.
The claimed invention relates to a method for preparing a polyethylene polymerization catalyst, the method comprising:
a first mixed solution preparation step of mixing a magnesium compound, a first hydrocarbon compound, and alcohol to prepare a first mixed solution;
a viscosity adjustment step of adding a second hydrocarbon compound to the first mixed solution to adjust a viscosity of the first mixed solution;
a second mixed solution preparation step of adding a first internal electron donor to the first mixed solution having an adjusted viscosity to prepare a second mixed solution; and
a recrystallization step of adding a transition metal compound to the second mixed solution to perform recrystallization (as recited in instant claim 1).
Zhang et al. ‘994 discloses a method for preparing the olefin coordination polymerization catalyst, comprising:
a) dispersing the magnesium compound in an organic solvent, adding the C2-C15 alcohol, and stirring at 90 to 150oC for 1-5 hours;
b) cooling the mixture of a) to 30-80oC, adding the electron donor, and reacting for 1-5 hours; and
c) cooling the mixture of b) to -20-30oC, contacting the mixture of b) with the transition metal halide, reacting at -20-30oC for 0.5-5 hours, then warming to 50-120oC, reacting for 0.5-5 hours, after the completion of the reaction, washing, filtering, and vacuum drying, to obtain a primary catalyst (see col. 22, claim 9).
The organic solvent is at least one of a C5-C15 saturated hydrocarbons, a C5-C10 alicyclic hydrocarbon, and a C6-C15 aromatic hydrocarbon (see col. 23, claim 10).
Regarding claims 1, 2, & 10, Zhang et al. ‘994 teaches the claimed method for preparing a polyethylene polymerization catalyst comprising a first mixed solution preparation, a second mixed solution preparation, and recrystallization step comprising a transition metal compound (see col. 22- col. 23, claims 9-10).
However, Zhang et al. ‘994 does not teach the claimed limitation on “a viscosity adjustment step of adding a second hydrocarbon compound to the first mixed solution to adjust a viscosity of the first mixed solution”.
It is considered obvious for a person skilled in the art (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) to add a second hydrocarbon compound (or organic solvent) to adjust the viscosity of the first mixed solution to achieve a mixture having desired viscosity values in Zhang et al. ‘994 because it can easily be derived without inventive skill required since it involves only routine experimentation to do so.
Regarding claim 3, Zhang et al. ‘994 teaches the claimed washing step (see col. 22, claim 9, step c)).
Regarding claim 8, Zhang et al. ‘994 teaches C2-C15 alcohol, which includes the claimed alcohol compounds (see col. 22, claim 9).
Regarding claim 9, Zhang et al. ‘994 discloses the organic solvent is at least one of a C5-C15 saturated hydrocarbons, a C5-C10 alicyclic hydrocarbon, and a C6-C15 aromatic hydrocarbon (see col. 23, claim 10), meeting the claimed first hydrocarbon compound of C9 to C30 hydrocarbon.
Regarding claim 11, the electron donor is a four-arm organoheteroether compound (see col. 21- col. 22, claim 1), which includes the claimed electron donor compounds.
Regarding claim 12, Zhang et al. ‘994 teaches the molar ratio of magnesium compound to the internal electron donor is 1:0.001-10 (see col. 21, claim 1), meeting the claimed molar ratio of 1:0.01 to 1:0.3.
Regarding claim 13, Zhang et al. ‘994 teaches the molar ratio of magnesium compound to the transition metal compound is 1:1-40 (see col. 21, claim 1), meeting the claimed molar ratio of 1:2 to 1:5.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang et al. ‘994 discloses cooling the mixture of b) to -20-30oC, contacting the mixture of b) with the transition metal halide, reacting at -20-30oC for 0.5-5 hours (see col. 23, claim 9), meeting the claimed crystallization step performed at -7 to 7oC.
Claims 1-3 & 8-14 are unpatentable as being obvious over Zhang et al. ‘994.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 4-7 are 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.
Zhang et al. ‘994 discloses the claimed method for preparing a polyethylene polymerization catalyst comprising the steps as set forth above, however the reference does not teach the claim features as further defined in these claims.
There would be no motivation to combine the teachings of the prior art references to arrive to the claimed invention.
Citations
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. All references are cited for related art. See PTO-892 Form prepared.
US 11,530,281 B2 (relates to a method for preparing a polymerization catalyst from magnesium halide, an alcohol compound, an internal electron donor compound, and a solvent, and a transition metal compound, Ti).
Conclusion
9. Claims 1-15 are pending. Claims 1-14 are rejected. Claim 15 is withdrawn. No claims are allowed.
Contacts
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner CAM N. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1357. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (8:30 am – 5:00 pm) at alternative worksite or at cam.nguyen@uspto.gov.
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, Anthony Zimmer, can be reached at 571-270-3591. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Cam N. Nguyen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/CNN/
September 03, 2026
Prosecution Insights