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 .
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.
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) 1-2, 7-10, 13, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al (CN 105670688, see translation provided) in view of Riley et al (US 2005/0040080) and Bakshi (US 2008/0073250).
With respect to claim 1, Wu discloses a method for the treatment of a naphtha range hydrocarbon feedstock comprising sulfur-containing compounds, the method comprising:
feeding hydrogen and the naphtha range hydrocarbon feedstock to a first stage reaction zone containing a first hydrotreatment catalyst (see page 6, 5th – 6th paragraph);
in the first stage reaction zone, contacting the hydrogen and the naphtha range hydrocarbon feedstock with the first hydrotreatment catalyst to convert sulfur-containing compounds to hydrogen sulfide, and to hydrogenate diolefins (see page 6, 7th paragraph);
and recovering a first stage effluent (see page 6, 7th paragraph, liquid phase product);
feeding hydrogen and the first stage effluent to a second stage reaction zone containing a second hydrotreatment catalyst (see page 6, 8th paragraph);
in the second stage reaction zone, contacting the hydrogen and the first stage effluent with the second hydrotreatment catalyst to convert sulfur-containing compounds to hydrogen sulfide, and hydrogenate olefins (see page 6, 9th paragraph); and
recovering a second stage effluent (see page 6, 9th paragraph);
partially degassing the second stage effluent to recover an off gas and a partially degassed second stage effluent (see page 6, 10th paragraph);
feeding the partially degassed second stage effluent to a stripper, separating and recovering an overheads fraction comprising the hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and any unreacted hydrogen from a bottoms fraction comprising effluent hydrocarbons (see page 6, 11th paragraph).
Wu does not disclose wherein FCC cat gasoline has nitrogen-containing compounds and aromatics or wherein feeding the effluent hydrocarbons to a naphtha splitter, separating and recovering an olefin lean overheads fraction comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a light cracked naphtha range and an aromatics rich fraction comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a heavy cracked naphtha range;
wherein: less than 2 wt.% aromatics are hydrogenated in the first and second stage reaction zones;
the olefin lean overheads fraction comprises less than 0.2 wt.% olefins and less than 100 mg/kg sulfur;
the aromatics rich fraction comprises less than 50 ppmw olefins, less than 0.5 ppmw sulfur and less than 0.5 ppmw nitrogen.
However, in a related process for upgrading naphtha, Riley discloses wherein typical FCC naphtha comprises nitrogen from about 5 ppm to about 500 ppm (see paragraph 0041) and aromatics from about 60 to 90 wt. % (see paragraph 0042).
Further, in another related process for upgrading gasoline, Bakshi discloses wherein feeding the effluent hydrocarbons to a naphtha splitter, separating and recovering an overheads fraction comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a light cracked naphtha range and an aromatics rich fraction (heavy fraction) comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a heavy cracked naphtha range (see figure 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing to modify the Wu in view of Riley and Bakshi with the claimed feedstock characteristics and downstream naphtha splitter as said limitations are conventional for the art.
The prior combination is silent to wherein: less than 2 wt.% aromatics are hydrogenated in the first and second stage reaction zones;
the olefin lean overheads fraction comprises less than 0.2 wt.% olefins and less than 100 mg/kg sulfur;
the aromatics rich fraction comprises less than 50 ppmw olefins, less than 0.5 ppmw sulfur and less than 0.5 ppmw nitrogen.
However, in the absence of any unexpected results, the process of the prior combination, having the same feedstock, same process and same selective olefin hydrotreatment catalyst would be expected to produce the same product characteristics as claimed.
With respect to claim 2, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Wu does not disclose wherein the first stage reaction zone and the second stage reaction zone are contained in a common reaction vessel.
However, Bakshi discloses stacking hydrotreating catalyst in one single reactor (see figure 7, reactor 16 and paragraph 0019).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify Wu in view of Bakshi with a stacked catalyst reaction vessel, as said reaction vessel are common and conventional for the art.
With respect to claim 7, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Wu further discloses separating the first stage effluent to recover a gas stream comprising hydrogen sulfide, ammonia (implicit, as the prior combination discloses naphtha comprises nitrogen from about 5 ppm to about 500 ppm), and unreacted hydrogen(see page 6, 7th paragraph) ; combining a makeup hydrogen stream (2), a portion of the off gas, and the gas stream to form a combined hydrogen stream (16), compressing the combined hydrogen stream to form a compressed combined hydrogen stream; and feeding the compressed combined hydrogen stream as the hydrogen fed to the second stage reaction zone (see page 6, 7th paragraph and figure 1).
With respect to claim 8, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Riley discloses wherein typical FCC naphtha comprises aromatics from about 60 to 90 wt. % (see paragraph 0042).
With respect to claim 9, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1.
The prior combination does not disclose wherein at least 99.9 wt% of each of the diolefins, olefins, sulfur-containing compounds, and nitrogen-containing compounds are converted in the first and second stage reaction zones, while less than 2 wt% of the aromatics are converted.
However, in the absence of any unexpected results, the process of the prior combination, having the same feedstock, same process and same selective olefin hydrotreatment catalyst would be expected to produce the same product characteristics as claimed.
With respect to claim 10, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1.
The prior combination does not disclose wherein the olefin lean overheads fraction comprises less than 0.1 wt% olefins.
However, in the absence of any unexpected results, the process of the prior combination, having the same feedstock, same process and same selective olefin hydrotreatment catalyst would be expected to produce the same product characteristics as claimed.
With respect to claim 13, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1. Wu further discloses wherein feedstock is from catalytic cracking (see page 6, 1st paragraph).
With respect to claim 18, the prior combination teaches the limitation of claim 1.
Wu further discloses comprising mixing the first stage effluent with one or more of (i) a portion of the partially degassed second stage effluent, (ii) a portion of the bottoms fraction recovered from the stripper, (iii) a portion of the aromatics rich bottom fraction, and (iv) a portion of the olefin lean overheads fraction (see figure 1).
With respect to claim 19, Wu discloses a system for the treatment of a naphtha range hydrocarbon feedstock comprising sulfur-containing compounds, olefins, diolefins, and aromatics, the system comprising:
a first stage reaction zone containing a first hydrotreatment catalyst and configured for contacting hydrogen and a naphtha range hydrocarbon feedstock with the first hydrotreatment catalyst to convert sulfur-containing compounds, and to produce a first stage effluent (see page 6, see paragraph 5-6);
a second stage reaction zone containing a second hydrotreatment catalyst and configured for contacting hydrogen and the first stage effluent with the second hydrotreatment catalyst to convert sulfur-containing compounds to hydrogen sulfide, and to produce a second stage effluent (see page 6, paragraph 7-9);
a degasser for partially degassing the second stage effluent to recover an off gas and a partially degassed second stage effluent (see page 6, paragraph 10);
a stripper configured to receive and separate the partially degassed second stage effluent to produce an overheads fraction comprising the hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and any unreacted hydrogen from a bottoms fraction comprising effluent hydrocarbons (see page 6, paragraph 11).
Wu does not disclose wherein FCC cat gasoline has nitrogen-containing compounds and aromatics or a naphtha splitter configured to receive and separate the effluent hydrocarbons to produce an olefin lean overheads fraction comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a light cracked naphtha range and an aromatics rich fraction comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a heavy cracked naphtha range; wherein the system is configured to:
hydrogenated less than 2 wt% aromatics in the first and second stage reaction zones; produce the olefin lean overheads fraction comprising less than 0.2 wt% olefins and less than 100 mg/kg sulfur; and produce the aromatics rich bottoms fraction comprising less than 50 ppmw olefins, less than 0.5 ppmw sulfur and less than 0.5 ppmw nitrogen.
However, in a related process for upgrading naphtha, Riley discloses wherein typical FCC naphtha comprises nitrogen from about 5 ppm to about 500 ppm (see paragraph 0041) and aromatics from about 60 to 90 wt. % (see paragraph 0042).
Further, in another related process for upgrading gasoline, Bakshi discloses wherein feeding the effluent hydrocarbons to a naphtha splitter, separating and recovering an overheads fraction comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a light cracked naphtha range and an aromatics rich fraction (heavy fraction) comprising hydrocarbons boiling in a heavy cracked naphtha range (see figure 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing to modify Wu in view of Riley and Bakshi with the claimed feedstock characteristics and downstream naphtha splitter as said limitations are conventional for the art.
The prior combination is silent to wherein: less than 2 wt.% aromatics are hydrogenated in the first and second stage reaction zones;
the olefin lean overheads fraction comprises less than 0.2 wt.% olefins and less than 100 mg/kg sulfur;
the aromatics rich fraction comprises less than 50 ppmw olefins, less than 0.5 ppmw sulfur and less than 0.5 ppmw nitrogen.
However, in the absence of any unexpected results, the system of the prior combination, having the same feedstock, same units and same selective olefin hydrotreatment catalyst would be expected to produce the same product characteristics as claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 11-12 and 14-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in in dependent 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:
With respect to claims 3-6, the claims recite recovering a C5 fraction that is not taught or suggested to by the closest prior art Wu (CN 105670688).
With respect to claims 11, the claim recites recoverin a C9+ fraction that is not taught or suggested to by the closest prior art Wu.
With respect to claim 12, the claim recites an aromatic extraction step that is not taught or suggested to by the closest prior art Wu.
With respect to claims 14-17, the claims recite specific indirect and direct heating steps that is not taught or suggested to by the closest prior art Wu.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN C VALENCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-7709. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 6pm.
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 571 272-6381. 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.
/JUAN C VALENCIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/PREM C SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1771