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 § 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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 contains the phrase “alkaline earth metal ion-exchanged zeolitic framework”. This phrase is indefinite because it is unclear if the “ion-exchanged” limitation can apply only to the zeolitic framework, or that the alkaline earth metals must be placed on the zeolitic frame work via ion-exchange. It is possible and known in the art that a zeolitic frame work made be made/subjected to an ion exchange while other metals may be attached in other methods.
The specification does not define this phrase, but the examples all include the alkaline metal being attached via ion-exchange. For the purpose of this office action it is assumed that the alkaline earth metals must undergo the ion-exchange. The interpretation of this claim limitation should be clearly stated for the record in the response to this office action.
This rejection applies to all dependent claims.
Claims 16 and 18 lack antecedent basis for words “alkanes” and “alkenes”. Claim 1 only contains the limitation of olefins, which are a specific form of alkene.
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) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Corma et al (US 2011/0282123 A1).
Corma teaches an alkene oligomerization process. See abstract.
The feed is from 105 to 100% alkenes with 3 to 7 carbon. See p 12 the rest being alkanes.
In a case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1946), and MPEP 2144.05.
The process to produce diesel grade hydrocarbon fractions, see p 10.
The catalyst is a zeolitic framework (p 16) that may be MTT, MTW, MFI, MEL, FER structure. See p 16. The pore structure is micropore, see abstract and p 4 and p 11 and p 18. As the pore size overlaps the range of 4.5-6 angstroms. This is a 1D or 2D structure with 10 member rings, see p 11. The silica: alumina ratio is from 25:1 to 150:1, see p 19.
The zeolite is subjected to ionic exchange, see p 20. The metals used include all Group IIA metals. This small group includes all Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba. 1 to 99% of the exchangeable cites may be taken by the group IIA metals. Given the amount of alumina present and that the Group IIA metal may be as little as 1% of available exchange cites the total amount of alkaline earth to aluminum ratio would include the range of 0.05 to 0.2.
Binders may also be present, see p 25.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK C CAMPANELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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 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.
/FRANCIS C CAMPANELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/PREM C SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1771