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 .
Office Action Summary
This is the initial office action for application 18/629957 filed 04/09/2024.
Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the hot gas filter comprising beads must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a hot gas filter comprising beads as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3 and 10 teach limitations that include at least one selected from a group. It is unclear if applicant is suggesting that the beads and waste plastic are meant to only consist of the elements claimed or if they may have other elements as long as the elements in the groups are present.
The claims have been interpreted as being open to comprising other elements beyond the groups.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-6, 8-9, and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FREDANI (USPGPUB 2014/0083835).
FREDANI teaches production of hydrocarbons from pyrolysis of tyres.
Regarding claims 1 and 13, FREDANI further teaches in paragraph 1 that the field comprises plastic.
FREDANI teaches in paragraphs 87-88 fragmenting tyres to pieces and drying those pieces in an oven. (pretreating waste plastics with a pretreatment device)
The pieces that are dried in paragraph 89 are taught to be subjected to pyrolysis to form pyrolysis vapors in a reaction vessel. (pyrolyzing the pretreated waste plastic in a pyrolysis reactor to form pyrolysis vapors)
FREDANI teaches in paragraph 89 a reaction vessel wherein pyrolysis vapors pass through a fractionation system that comprises 4 mm glass beads. FREIDANI teaches in paragraphs 89-90 that the pyrolysis vapors are sent to a condenser to be formed into pyrolysis oil.
FREDANI further teaches in paragraph 72 that the fractionation system results in a pyrolysis oil with a transparent or straw yellow color when compared to a dark coloured and turbid oil without a fractionation system. (producing in a lightening process a pyrolysis oil by introducing the pyrolysis into a hot filter)
The glass beads are taught to allow separation of that component which had a boiling temperature higher than that of the vapours. The higher boiling compounds drop back into the reaction vessel through a pyrex glass joint. (liquid condensed in the hot filter is reintroduced in to the pyrolysis reactor through a connection pipe)
The pyrolysis oils are taught in paragraph 17 to be used as fuel or suppled to an oil refinery. (reforming the pyrolysis oil with a reforming device)
Regarding claims 2 and 14, FREDANI teaches in paragraph 89 a reaction vessel wherein pyrolysis vapors pass through a fractionation system that comprises 4 mm glass beads.
Regarding claim 3, FREDANI teaches glass beads and SiO2 is a common component that is known to be present in glass.
Regarding claim 4, FREDANI teaches a fractionation column on top of where pyrolysis occurs in a reaction vessel. The fractionation column would be expected to comprise a temperature gradient cooling the further away from the pyrolysis in the reaction vessel.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, FREDANI teaches in paragraph 89 a heater that comprises a MW oven chamber. FEREDANI teaches in paragraph 81 that the MW oven chamber may comprise 4 microwave generators. (at least two heaters)
Regarding claim 8, FREDANI teaches in paragraph 50 that the pyrolysis oils produced may be mixed with commercial fuels.
Regarding claim 9, FREDANI teaches in paragraph 50 that that the pyrolysis oils may also be used directed as fuel for motor vehicles or blended.
One of ordinary skill in the art would expect that a mixture with the pyrolysis oil as the primary component or less such as 90 wt% or less would be possible given that the pyrolysis oil may be used on its own or blended.
"[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)
Regarding claim 11, FREDANI further teaches in paragraph 100 that the pyrolysis oils may further be subjected to distillation to identify fractions comparable to petroleum products.
Regarding claim 12, FREDANI teaches in paragraph 76 that the specific fractions of the pyrolysis oils may be mixed for a variety of purposes.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FREDANI (USPGPUB 2014/0083835) as applied to claims 1-5, 8-9, and 11-15 above, and further in view of ARANDA ALMANSA (USPGPUB 2021/0155563).
The above discussion of FREDANI is incorporated herein by reference.
ARANDA ALMANSA teach a process with pyrolysis reactors.
The process is taught in paragraphs 2-3 to be directed toward treating pyrolysis gases.
ARANDA ALMANSA teaches in paragraph 116 a setup with 2 or more reactors such that the first reactor is in use while the second reactor may be regenerated.
It would be well within one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process that FREDANI teaches with 2 or more reactors in batch mode such that one reactor may be in use while other reactors may be regenerated.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FREDANI (USPGPUB 20140083835) as applied to claims 1-5, 8-9, and 11-15 above, and further in view of the abstract of POINT (WO-0118152-A1).
The above discussion of FREDANI is incorporated herein by reference.
FREDANI teaches that plastics may be used.
POINT teaches known plastics that may be used to produce pyrolysis oils include polyethylene, and others.
It would be obvious to use known plastics that may be used to produce pyrolysis oils in the process that FREDANI teaches to produce pyrolysis oils.
Conclusion
REISNER (EP3805340A1) teaches on page 3 a system and a process for generating a hydrocarbon and hydrogen-containing gas mixture from a plastic.
WU (WO 2014090992A2) teaches a filter and process for product liquid products from pyrolysis products.
KIM (WO 2019004560A1) teaches in the abstract an apparatus and method for recycling a plastic mixture comprising polyvinyl chloride.
The process comprises pyrolysis through an auger reactor and a fluidized bed reactor followed by filtering by means of a high temperature filter that is filled with calcium oxide.
STOBBE (WO 9506510) teaches improvements to filters which include teaching how to back flush a filter and how to handle a temperature gradient.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MING CHEUNG PO whose telephone number is (571)270-5552. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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.
/MING CHEUNG PO/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/ELLEN M MCAVOY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771