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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election without traverse of Group I claims in the reply filed on 6/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 20-25 are cancelled as being drawn to a nonelected Group II claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/23/2026.
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ou et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0320119 (hereinafter referred to as Ou) in view of Xu et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0324276 (hereinafter referred to as Xu).
Regarding claims 1-19, Ou discloses a process for upgrading tar-containing effluent from a steam cracker furnace that comprises: a) contacting a steam cracker tar-containing effluent with steam and for a time, sufficient to convert at least a portion of the steam cracker tar to a mixture comprising lower boiling molecules and the steam cracker tar-containing effluent; and b) separating the mixture from step a) into i) at least one tar-lean product; and ii) a tar-rich product having a final boiling above the final boiling point of the at least one tar-lean product.
Step a) includes at least one of: 1) contacting said steam cracker tar-containing effluent with steam added to the effluent in a transfer line downstream of a steam cracker furnace comprising a quench inlet, with the steam added through or downstream of the quench inlet; 2) contacting the steam cracker tar-containing effluent with steam under heat soaking conditions in a heat soaking vessel to which the steam is added; and 3) contacting the steam cracker tar-containing effluent with steam under visbreaking conditions in a visbreaker. The steam treated tar can be separated into higher value gas oil, fuel oil and tar streams (see Abstract).
In paragraphs 0013-0014, Ou discloses a process for upgrading tar-containing effluent from a steam cracker furnace comprising: a) feeding a hydrocarbon feedstock having a final boiling point above 260°C to a steam cracking furnace containing a radiant section outlet producing a steam cracker tar-containing effluent; b) adding steam to at least a portion of said steam cracker tar-containing effluent of said radiant section outlet, while the tar-containing effluent is at a temperature of from 300°C to 850°C to form a steam-effluent mixture; and c) separating the steam-effluent mixture into i) at least one tar-lean product containing a first tar; and ii) a tar-rich product containing a second tar, the tar-rich product having a final boiling point above the final boiling point of the at least one tar-lean product. The steam is added in step b), at or between the radiant section furnace outlet and a primary fractionator.
Ou further discloses in paragraph 0021, the process comprises at least one of i) adding at least a portion of the steam cracker gas oil fraction, such as from a primary fractionator, to the high boiling stream to provide a fluxed tar stream and ii) directing at least a portion of the fluxed tar stream to a partial oxidation reactor for combusting.
Ou discloses all the limitations discussed above but does not explicitly disclose (III) recovering a steam cracker gas oil ("SCGO") side stream from the steam cracker primary fractionator; wherein: the make-up liquid stream comprises a first hydrocarbon portion and a second hydrocarbon portion, the first hydrocarbon portion is distributed into the SCGO side stream, and the second hydrocarbon portion is distributed into the SCT stream as recited in claim 1.
Xu discloses a method for decreasing reactor fouling in a steam cracking process is provided. The method includes steam cracking a hydrocarbon feed to obtain a quench oil composition comprising a concentration of donatable hydrogen of 0.5 wt. % or more based on a total weight percent of the quench oil composition; exposing a steam cracker effluent flowing from a pyrolysis furnace to the quench oil composition to form a mixture; and fractionating the mixture in a separation apparatus to obtain a steam cracker tar (see Abstract).
In paragraph 0052, Xu discloses at least a portion of the quench oil composition (e.g., one or more of hydroprocessed tar, TLP, and mid-cut) is used as a quench oil composition at a quench location that is downstream of a pyrolysis furnace and/or transfer line exchanger(s) and upstream of a separation apparatus (e.g., primary fractionator). In addition, the quench oil composition can be mixed with one or more effluents flowing from the separation apparatus (e.g., primary fractionator) such as those effluents flowing through a “steam cracker tar” SCT line. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the process steps of Xu in the process of Ou as it is a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL V VASISTH whose telephone number is (571)270-3716. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:30 and 7:00-10:00p.
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 Singh can be reached at 5712726381. 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.
/VISHAL V VASISTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights