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 1-13, in the reply filed on 05/29/2026 is acknowledged.
2. Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/29/2026.
Status of Application
3. This application has Provisional of 63384337, which was filed on 11/18/2022.
Claims 1-20 were originally presented in this application for examination.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in this application for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2024 has been made of record. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
An initialed copy of the IDS accompanies this O.A.
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.
6. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
A. On page 3, [0014], “(Pr6O11)” should change to --(Pr6O11)--.
B. On page 9, [0053], “(Pr6O11)” should change to --(Pr6O11)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
7. Claims 4, 7, & 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
A. In claim 4, line 1, “homogenously” should change to --homogeneously--.
B. In claim 7, line 2, “(Pr6O11)” should change to --(Pr6O11)--.
C. In claim 13, line 2, “homogenously” should change to --homogeneously--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
8. 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 11, & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taylor et al. (US 3,328,477), hereinafter “Taylor et al. ‘477”.
The claimed invention relates to a catalyst for dry reforming of methane, comprising:
a catalyst composition comprising a nickel-copper mixture and a promoter, the promoter comprising barium (as recited in the instant claim 1).
Taylor et al. ‘477 discloses a catalyst which contains 40 to 60 wt.% Ni interspersed with 60 to 40 wt.% Al2O3 and with 1 to 10 wt.% of a promoting metal of the group consisting of Ba, Sr, Cs, La, Y, Cu, Fe, and K (see col. 8, claim 5).
In Example 1, col. 4, lines 30-46, Taylor et al. ‘477 discloses a high activity barium promoted Ni-Al2O3. The reference further discloses that it is possible to make a mixture of Ni-Cu coprecipitated Ni-alumina and the amount of the promoter added is an amount preferably making the catalyst contains about 0.1 to 6 wt.% of promoter metal. For example, 6 wt.% Ba is much more effective than 3 wt.%.
Regarding claim 1, Taylor et al. ‘477 appears to teach the claimed catalyst comprising nickel-copper (Ni-Cu) and a promoter comprising barium (Ba) (see col. 8, claim 5 & Example 1, col. 4, lines 30-46).
Regarding claim 3, the claimed barium atomic concentration at an amount of “between about 0.1 and about 20%” is met by the reference because the reference discloses barium in a range of “1 to 10 wt.%” (see col. 8, claim 5), which is 1.01 atm.% to 9.69 atm.% when Ni is contained at 40 wt.% and is 0.68 atm.% to 6.67 atm.% when Ni is contained at 60 wt.%.
*Calculations:
(1 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba)/(1 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba) + (40 wt.% Ni/58.71 atomic weight Ni) x 100 = 1.01 atm.%
(1 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba)/(1 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba) + (60 wt.% Ni/58.71 atomic weight Ni) x 100 = 0.68 atm.%
(10 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba)/(10 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba) + (40 wt.% Ni/58.71 atomic weight Ni) x 100 = 9.69 atm.%
(10 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba)/(10 wt.% Ba/137.34 atomic weight Ba) + (60 wt.% Ni/58.71 atomic weight Ni) x 100 = 6.67 atm.%
Regarding claim 4, it is considered the barium promoter in the disclosed catalyst is also homogeneously distributed in the nickel-copper mixture as well because the catalyst was prepared by coprecipitation.
Regarding claim 11, Taylor et al. ‘477 teaches an alumina support (see col. 8, claim 5; Example 1, col. 4, lines 30-46).
Regarding claim 13, it is inherent and expected that the disclosed catalyst composition is also homogeneously distributed on the alumina support as well in view of the same catalyst components and support material disclosed and claimed.
Claims 1, 3-4, 11, & 13 are unpatentable as being anticipated over Taylor et al. ‘477.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
A. Claim(s) 2 & 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor et al. (US 3,328,477), hereinafter “Taylor et al. ‘477”, as applied to claims 1, 3-4, 11, & 13 above, and further in view of Kumar et al. (US 2015/0307352 A1), hereinafter “Kumar et al.”
Taylor et al. ‘477 discloses a catalyst as set forth in the precedent paragraph, except for the following.
Regarding claim 2, Taylor et al. ‘477 does not disclose the claimed nickel atomic concentration of “between about 20% to about 85%”.
Examiner considers finding of an optimum amount of nickel that is effective to achieve an active and useful catalyst is prima facie obvious to a person skilled in the art (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) because metal content is a results-effective variable, see In re Boesch.
Regarding claims 5-7 & 9-10, the disclosed catalyst does not contain “cobalt”, “at least one oxide additive”, which “comprises zirconium oxide (ZrO2), cerium oxide (CeO2), praseodymium oxide (Pr6O11), a solid solution thereof, or a combination thereof”, “at least one oxide additive is doped with aliovalent cations” and “the promoter further comprises magnesium”, respectively.
Kumar et al. discloses a similar catalyst comprising nickel and/or cobalt supported on a support that includes a mixed oxide containing metals, such as aluminum, zirconium, lanthanum, magnesium, cerium, calcium, and yttrium (see Abstract; page 10 – page 11, claims 1-22).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to a person having the ordinary skill in the art (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) to add the metal oxides as taught in Kumar et al. into the catalyst of Taylor et al. ‘477 to result in a catalyst having promoted activities and improved in mechanical strength/structure because those elements or compounds are known and useful as shown in Kumar et al.
Regarding claim 8, Kumar et al. teaches the mixed oxide support comprising up to about 30 wt.% zirconium (see page 10, claim 21). Consider combining Kumar et al. with Taylor et al. ‘477, the claimed additive volume percentage of “about 5% to about 60%” can easily be derived from Kumar et al. without technical skill required since it involves only routine experimentation of a person within an ordinary skill in the art to do so. See also In re Boesch.
Claims 2 & 5-10 are unpatentable as being obvious over Taylor et al. ‘477 combined with Kumar et al.
B. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor et al. (US 3,328,477), hereinafter “Taylor et al. ‘477”, as applied to claims 1, 3-4, 11, & 13 above, and further in view of Andrews (US 2,118,001), hereinafter “Andrews ‘001”.
Taylor et al. ‘477 discloses a catalyst as set forth in the precedent paragraph, however does not teach “the support comprises activated alumina or a soft fibrous insulation”.
Andrews ‘001 discloses a catalyst for hydrogenation organic compounds (carbonyl compounds), the catalyst comprising activated alumina on which a mixture of copper oxide, barium oxide and chromium oxide have been deposited (see page 2, claim 3).
It would have been obvious to use the “activated alumina” as taught by Andrews ‘001 in the catalyst of Taylor et al. ‘001 as a support material because it is a useful catalyst support material for making a similar catalyst.
Claim 12 is unpatentable as being obvious over Taylor et al. ‘477 combined with Andrews ‘001.
Citations
10. 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 3,524,72 (relates to a catalyst composition comprising activated alumina, nickel, barium, neodymium, lanthanum, and praseodymium).
US 3,423,194 (relates to a catalyst comprising an alumina support impregnated with nickel, aluminum, and metal promoter compounds (barium oxide)).
US 4,714,694 (relates to a catalyst material comprises an aluminum-stabilized ceria which optionally combined with an activated alumina and platinum group metal catalytic components, etc.)
US 7,056,488 B2 (relates to a particulate catalyst comprising a catalytic component comprises an alloy, which contains Co or Ni, a promoter (Mg, Ca, Ba, Sr, Li, Na and K), and a porous support (zirconia, stabilized zirconia, zirconia stabilized alumina, etc.)
US 8,575,063 B2 (relates to nickel-based reforming catalysts comprising nickel supported on alumina and further comprises transition metal elements, rare-earth metal elements, alkali and alkaline-earth metal elements).
US 9,168,510 B2 (relates to a catalyst for reforming hydrocarbons including nickel or nickel oxide dispersed on a metal oxide support, and a co-catalyst of magnesium oxide (MgO)).
US 9,168,511 B2 (relates to a catalyst for hydrogen production comprising aluminum oxide and magnesium oxide, and further comprises boron and nickel).
US 9,174,199 B2 (relates to a catalyst for reforming methanol comprising a catalytic component (Pd), a second element, at least one promoter element presented as an oxide (Mg, Ba, etc.), and a solid support selected from alumina, silica, CeO2, etc.)
US 9,731,278 B2 (relates to a catalyst for methanation reaction producing methane comprising Zr, one or more tetragonal zirconia-stabilizing element selected from Y, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Gd, Dy, Ca and Mg at 1-20 atomic %, and at least one of the iron group elements (nickel and one or both of Co and Fe) at 25-80 atomic %).
US 9,789,470 B2 (relates to a supported nickel catalyst comprising potassium B-alumina).
US 2014/0315711 A1 and US 2015/0307352 A1 (relate to a catalyst comprises nickel and/or cobalt supported on a support that includes a mixed oxide containing metals, such as aluminum, zirconium, aluminum, lanthanum, magnesium, cerium, calcium, and yttrium).
US 2020/0061588 A1 (relates to a solid mixed oxide material for catalyzing a methane dry reforming reaction, comprising a first crystalline phase mixed oxide material comprises 3.5-25.0% wt. nickel and a second crystalline phase mixed oxide material comprises Ni and one or more elements selected from Fe, Co, Cu, Ti and Zr, and at least one element selected from the rare-earth elements, such as La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Sc, Y and Eu).
Conclusion
11. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-13 are rejected. Claims 14-20 are withdrawn. No claims are allowed.
Contacts
12. 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/
August 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights