DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-9 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Sung in view of Richard et al. (US 2012/0171407 A1) and Alvarez-Galvan et al. (“Hydrogen production for fuel cell by oxidative reforming of diesel surrogate: Influence of ceria and/or lanthana over the activity of Pt/Al2O3 catalysts”).
With regard to Claims 1 and 6, Sung teaches a supported noble metal catalyst (Abstract). The phrase “hydrogenation/dehydrogenation” in the preamble is construed as an intended use and is not accorded patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.02.
Sung teaches the catalyst comprising a carrier comprising an inorganic oxide, wherein the carrier is a shaped extrudate (Pages 16-17, Example 2: Preparation of Catalyst Sample 3; The milled slurry was coated onto a 1"Dx3"L ceramic honeycomb core; Page 10, Ceramic materials used to construct the substrate may include any suitable refractory material, e.g., cordierite, mullite, cordierite-α alumina, silicon nitride, zircon mullite, spodumene, alumina-silica magnesia, zircon silicate, sillimanite, magnesium silicates, zircon, petalite, α alumina, aluminosilicates and the like). Such honeycomb monoliths meet the structural limitation requiring a shaped extrudate.
Sung teaches a noble metal component, wherein a content of the noble metal component is from 0.01 to 2 wt. %, measured as elemental metal, and a sulfur-containing component, wherein a content of the sulfur-containing component is from 0.01 to 2 wt. %, measured as elemental sulfur (Page 16-17, Example 2: Preparation of Catalyst Sample 3; A high surface area silica-alumina support from a commercial supplier having a BET surface area of about 160 to 200 M2/g and a pore volume of 0.8 to 0.9 cc/g, was impregnated with ammonium sulfate (NH4)2SO4 solution using standard incipient wetness procedure, with a targeted sulfur concentration of 1.4 wt.%... The above dried powder was next impregnated with Pt-amine solution using standard incipient wetness procedure, with a targeted Pt concentration at 1.1 wt.%).
Sung is silent to the shaped extrudate having a lobed or twisted form, instead teaching a cylindrical form (Fig. 1; Page 11, Referring to FIG. 1, the exemplary substrate 2 has a cylindrical shape and a cylindrical outer surface 4).
Richard teaches a multi-lobed porous catalyst carrier (Abstract), comprising alumina (Paragraph 0037). Sung notes that the honeycomb structure is porous (Page 7, The honeycomb substrate is sufficiently porous to permit the passage of the gas stream being treated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for Sung to teach the shaped extrudate having a lobed form, as taught in Richard. The teaching or suggested motivation in doing so being improvements in selectivity and durability of the catalyst, durability of the carrier, and pressure drop within the reactor (Paragraph 0023 of Richard).
However, Sung is further silent to the carrier comprising a non-noble metal dopant present in an amount of from 0.01 to 10 wt.% of catalyst, measured as oxide.
Alvarez-Galvan discloses a lanthana-alumina supported platinum catalyst wherein the lanthana dopant is present in an amount of 2.7 wt.% of catalyst, measured as oxide (Table 1; Pt/A-L, 2.7 wt% La2O3). Alvarez-Galvan notes that lanthana improves the thermal stability of alumina (Page 2503, Lanthana appeared to be one of the best additives for inhibiting the sintering of high surface area Al2O3…The main role of La is to stabilize Al2O3, decreasing the rate of surface diffusion that hinders sintering and loss of surface area).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for Sung to teach the catalyst comprising a carrier comprising a non-noble metal dopant, wherein the non-noble metal dopant is present in an amount of from 0.01 to 10 wt.% of catalyst, measured as oxide, as taught in Alvarez-Galvan, as lanthana improves the thermal stability of alumina.
With regard to Claims 3-5, Sung teaches the catalyst wherein the inorganic oxide is alpha-alumina (Page 10, Ceramic materials used to construct the substrate may include any suitable refractory material, e.g., cordierite, mullite, cordierite-α alumina, silicon nitride, zircon mullite, spodumene, alumina-silica magnesia, zircon silicate, sillimanite, magnesium silicates, zircon, petalite, α alumina, aluminosilicates and the like).
With regard to Claim 7, Sung teaches the catalyst wherein the noble metal is platinum (Page 8, Catalyst Composition, The DOC catalyst composition includes a platinum (Pt) component and a sulfur (S)-containing component impregnated on a refractory metal oxide support; Page 16-17, Example 2: Preparation of Catalyst Sample 3; The above dried powder was next impregnated with Pt-amine solution using standard incipient wetness procedure, with a targeted Pt concentration at 1.1 wt.%).
With regard to Claim 8, Sung teaches the catalyst wherein molar ratio of noble metal to sulfur is in a range of from 1:1 to 1:5, and wherein the sulfur-containing component is calculated as elemental sulfur (Claim 2, wherein the Pt component and the sulfur-containing component are present in a Pt:S molar ratio in a range of about 1:1 to about 1:5, and wherein the sulfur-containing component is calculated as sulfur dioxide (SO2)).
As set forth in MPEP 2144.05.I, in the case where the claimed range "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art", a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regard to Claim 9, Sung teaches the catalyst wherein a source of the sulfur-containing component is ammonium sulfate (Page 16-17, Example 2: Preparation of Catalyst Sample 3; A high surface area silica-alumina support from a commercial supplier having a BET surface area of about 160 to 200 M2/g and a pore volume of 0.8 to 0.9 cc/g, was impregnated with ammonium sulfate (NH4)2SO4 solution using standard incipient wetness procedure, with a targeted sulfur concentration of 1.4 wt.%).
With regard to Claim 18, Richard teaches the shaped extrudate having a length-to-diameter aspect ratio of 1:1 (Paragraph 0029, The overall diameter D of the catalyst is preferably between 2 and 50 millimeters; most preferably between about 4 and 20 millimeters. The range for H is about 2 to 50 millimeters; preferably about 4 to 20 millimeters; preferably the ratio of H to D is about 1 to 1).
Richard alternatively teaches the shaped extrudate having a length-to-diameter aspect ratio of 0.5 to 3:1 (Paragraph 0029, the ratio of H to D is between 0.5 and 3).
As set forth in MPEP 2144.05.I, in the case where the claimed range "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art", a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regard to Claim 19, Sung teaches the catalyst wherein the noble metal component and sulfur-containing component are impregnated onto the shaped extrudate (Pages 16-17, Example 2: Preparation of Catalyst Sample 3; The milled slurry was coated onto a 1"Dx3"L ceramic honeycomb core… The entire ceramic core was submerged into the slurry until no air bubbles remained in the substrate channels).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-8, filed August 28, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 3-5, 7-9, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Sung et al. (WO 2018/025208 A1) in view of Bambrick et al. (US 4673664 A) and over Sung in view of Richard et al. (US 2012/0171407 A1), and of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Sung in view of Bambrick and Alvarez-Galvan et al. (“Hydrogen production for fuel cell by oxidative reforming of diesel surrogate: Influence of ceria and/or lanthana over the activity of Pt/Al2O3 catalysts”) and over Sung in view of Richard and Alvarez-Galvan, have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendment wherein the shaped extrudate is prepared from a base material comprising the inorganic oxide and the non-noble metal dopant. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made of claims 1, 3-9, and 18-19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Sung in view of Richard and Alvarez-Galvan.
On page 6 of Applicant’s arguments, Applicant argues that “Sung is directed to an exhaust-gas oxidation catalyst article, not to a supported noble metal hydrogenation/dehydrogenation catalyst having a shaped- extrudate carrier as presently claimed”. The Examiner contends that the limitation of “hydrogenation/dehydrogenation” is construed as an intended use and is not accorded patentable weight. As set forth in 2111.02.II, “If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction.” Shoes by Firebug LLC v. Stride Rite Children’s Grp., LLC, 962 F.3d 1362, 2020 USPQ2d 10701 (Fed. Cir. 2020). Thus, the Examiner asserts that the intended use recited in the preamble of Claim 1 does not impart specific structure to the claimed product. The disclosure as filed does not link the intended use to any specific structure that is not taught by the prior art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED SMARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7302. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5, F 7:30-4.
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 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.
/A.Y.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/RICHARD M RUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights