DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending, of which claims 18-20 have been withdrawn.
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
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 4/2/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-2, 4-7, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20140371501 (“Luo”).
Regarding claim 1, Luo teaches a method for activating a used dehydrogenation catalyst (see e.g. paragraph [0011]). The method includes providing used dehydration catalyst particles that comprise gallium and platinum on a support (Id.) A platinum additive is then provided, the platinum additive having a concentration of 0.1% platinum, which is within the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0021]). The catalyst particles thus obtained are then calcined in an oxygen containing atmosphere at 450-1000 °C, which includes the entirety of the claimed temperature range (see e.g. paragraph [0016]). Luo notes that the dehydrogenation activity of the catalyst particles with replenished platinum is higher than that of the spent catalyst prior to treatment (see e.g. paragraph [0019]).
Regarding claim 2, Luo teaches that the temperature is preferably between 600-800 °C, which overlaps significantly with the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0016]).
Regarding claim 4, Luo teaches that the catalyst particles are deactivated catalyst (see e.g. paragraph [0014]).
Regarding claim 5, Luo teaches that the calcination is done in air, which has an oxygen content within the claimed range (see e.g. paragraph [0016]).
Regarding claim 6, Examiner notes that the term “catalyst regenerator” is not defined or discussed in the specification. As such, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “catalyst regenerator” is therefore any device or system in which a catalyst can be regenerated. As Luo teaches regenerating the catalyst, the system used by Luo is considered a “catalyst regenerator”.
Regarding claim 7, Luo teaches that the regeneration process involves re-heating the catalyst particles, and as such, the process simultaneously reheats and regenerates the catalyst particles (see e.g. paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 9, Luo teaches that the support for the catalyst particles can be alumina based (see e.g. paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 11, Luo teaches that the regenerator can use a fluidized bed (see e.g. paragraph [0018]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-17 are allowed.
Claims 3, 8, and 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Independent claim 12 and dependent claim 10 each recite that the additive particles are provided on a support. In contrast, Luo teaches using a platinum solution in order to replenish the platinum lost from the catalyst during use (see e.g. paragraph [0011]). Luo does not teach or fairly suggest that the platinum particles can be provided already on a support, rather than as a platinum salt in solution form. Claims 13-17 depend from claim 12 and are allowed for the same reasons.
Claim 3 recites that the method uses fresh catalyst. Luo teaches that the method adds platinum to a used dehydrogenation catalyst (see e.g. paragraph [0011]). Luo does not teach or suggest that the same method can be used to add platinum to fresh supported catalyst that does not already have a residual amount of platinum.
Claim 8 recites that the additive particles are subsequently removed from the catalyst particles. In contrast, Luo teaches that after mixing the spent catalyst and support, the mixture is immediately dried and then calcined (see e.g. paragraph [0016]). The solvent is removed by drying, but the method of Luo leaves all of the platinum originally in solution with the catalyst particles (Id.). Further, Luo teaches that the amount of platinum in solution is calculated in order to target an amount of platinum on the catalyst after regeneration (see e.g. paragraph [0014]). As such, it would not have been obvious to use a higher amount of platinum in the impregnation solution only to remove the added platinum particles at a later stage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC S SHERMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 ET.
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.
/E.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights