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 .
Response to Amendment
The rejection of claims 9, 11, 21, and 22 under 35 USC § 103 over CN207973691 and CN104030875B is withdrawn by the examiner in view of the amendment filed on 7/29/2026.
A New Non-Final Office Action is follows.
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.
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.
Claims 9 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over CN104030875B in view of CN207973691. CN104030875B discloses a system for treating refinery dry gas including pretreatment to remove acidic components and mercaptans, followed by a cryogenic separation system that sequentially separates hydrogen/C1, C2, C3 and heavier hydrocarbons. Specifically, CN104030875B teaches pretreatment including deacidification, mercaptan removal and dry-gas purification before downstream separation, a demethanizer for separating H₂/C1 from C2+, a deethanizer for separating C2 from C3+, a depropanizer for separating C3 from C4+, and a propylene rectification tower for further recovery of propylene. CN104030875B does not expressly disclose an impurity-removal unit comprising separate gas-phase and liquid-phase impurity-removal units, each including dedicated desulfurization, sweetening and water-washing units, as recited.
CN207973691 teaches treating refinery gas and liquid hydrocarbon streams separately, including respective gas-phase and liquid-phase desulfurization and sweetening systems prior to downstream hydrocarbon recovery. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the refinery gas treatment system of CN104030875B by incorporating the separate gas-phase and liquid-phase impurity-removal units taught by CN207973691 in order to improve removal of sulfur compounds and mercaptans, reduce corrosion and fouling of downstream cryogenic separation equipment, and improve hydrocarbon product purity. Regarding claim 21, CN104030875B further teaches recovering hydrogen-rich gas through downstream gas treatment utilizing PSA and membrane separation, producing hydrogen-rich gas while recycling absorbent or separation media within the recovery process. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the process of CN104030875B to employ an additional gas-separation device as recited to obtain the claimed dry gas product while recovering absorbent, since such gas absorption and regeneration equipment was well known for hydrogen recovery systems. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over CN104030875B in view of CN207973691, further in view of Strack et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,090,977). The combination of CN104030875B and CN207973691 teaches the system of claim 9, including a light hydrocarbon extraction unit, impurity-removal unit, and separation unit for sequentially recovering H₂/C1, C2, C3 and C4 products, as discussed above. The combined references, however, do not expressly disclose that the separation unit further includes a sixth separation device for rectifying the C3 product to obtain separate propane and propylene products, as recited. Strack discloses a conventional C3 splitter (depropylenizer) that receives a C3 hydrocarbon stream and separates it into a propylene overhead product and a propane bottoms product. See, e.g., col. 3, lines. 58-68; col. 5, lines. 6-28; Fig. 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the separation system of CN104030875B, as modified by CN207973691, by incorporating the C3 rectification technique taught by Strack in order to recover separate propane and propylene products having higher purity and commercial value, since such C3 splitters were well known and routinely employed in hydrocarbon recovery systems to separate propane from propylene.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAM M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1452. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Frid.
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 C Singh can be reached at 571-273-6381. 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.
/TAM M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights