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 18/667043 filed 05/17/2024.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 05/08/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
The non-patent literature document, the International Search Report for PCT/US2025/013331, appears to be incomplete and missing page(s).
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) 1-3, and 7-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QUIGNARD (WO2012140335A1) in view of the machine translation of QUIGNARD.
QUIGNARD teaches a biomass hydroconversion method comprising a step of hydroconversion of the feedstock in at least one reactor containing a bubbling-bed supported catalyst and another reactor with a dispersed catalyst.
Regarding claim 1, QUIGNARD teaches on page 8 the feedstock is sent to a slurry reactor to hydroconvert with a slurry catalyst in the presence of hydrogen with an upward flow of liquid, gas, and catalyst. The feedstock is taught on pages 2 and 5 to include fats and vegetable and animal oils. The catalyst is taught on page 3 to be dispersed and evacuated along with the slurry effluent. The slurry effluent is then separated into gases, a residual fraction containing at least a portion of the solid particles of the dispersed catalyst and a liquid fraction or fractions. (a slurry reactor configured to convert, under slurry hydroconversion conditions, a slurry reactor content flowing upwards and comprising a feedstock comprising one or more of fats, oils and greases, a slurry hydroconversion catalyst and a hydrogen stream to a slurry hydroconversion effluent comprising a slurry phase effluent comprising catalyst particles and liquid product and a vapor phase effluent comprising a hydroconversion product)
The reactor is taught in page 8 to comprise an internal recirculation pump. An internal recirculation pump is recognized by the specification as a separation unit that at least partially separates one or more chemical constituents in a mixture form one another. Furthermore, QUIGNARD teach in page 9 another embodiment with an internal separation zone and a separate liquid recycling pump improving dispersion of the catalyst and its circulation in the reactor. (a separation unit internal to the slurry reactor, the separation unit being configured to separate at least a portion of the vapor phase effluent from the slurry hydroconversion effluent to produce a mixture of vapor and the slurry hydroconversion effluent having a reduced vapor phase content;
wherein the separation unit is configured to use a pump to recirculate the mixture of vapor and the slurry hydroconversion effluent having a reduced vapor phase content flowing downwards in the slurry reactor to be combined with the slurry reactor content)
The internal separator is taught on page 9 to improve dispersion of the slurry catalyst and its circulation under conditions that fall within the scope taught in QUIGNARD. The management of the different thermal levels in the slurry reactor is also taught on page 9 to be ensured. The catalyst is further taught on page 8 to be as uniformly distributed as possible. (wherein the slurry reactor is further configured to provide backmixing to fluidize the slurry hydroconversion catalyst to maintain a substantially homogeneous slurry reactor content, and a substantially isothermal temperature profile in the slurry reactor)
The conversion of the feed into the slurry reactor is taught on page 8 to be between 50 to 100%. (wherein at least about 60% of the feedstock is converted into the vapor phase effluent)
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 12, QUIGNARD teaches on page 8 the feedstock is sent to a slurry reactor to hydroconvert with a slurry catalyst in the presence of hydrogen with an upward flow of liquid, gas, and catalyst. The feedstock is taught on pages 2 and 5 to include fats and vegetable and animal oils. The catalyst is taught on page 3 to be dispersed and evacuated along with the slurry effluent. The slurry effluent is then separated into gases, a residual fraction containing at least a portion of the solid particles of the dispersed catalyst and a liquid fraction or fractions. (converting, under slurry hydroconversion conditions, a slurry reactor content flowing upwards and comprising a feedstock comprising one or more of fats, oils and greases, a slurry hydroconversion catalyst and a hydrogen stream to a slurry hydroconversion effluent comprising a slurry phase effluent comprising catalyst particles and liquid product and a vapor phase effluent comprising a hydroconversion product)
The reactor is taught in page 8 to comprise an internal recirculation pump. An internal recirculation pump is recognized by the specification as a separation unit that at least partially separates one or more chemical constituents in a mixture form one another. Furthermore, QUIGNARD teach in page 9 another embodiment with an internal separation zone and a separate liquid recycling pump improving dispersion of the catalyst and its circulation in the reactor. (separating, in a separation unit internal to the slurry reactor, at least a portion of the vapor phase effluent from the slurry hydroconversion effluent to produce a mixture of vapor and the slurry hydroconversion effluent having a reduced vapor phase content;
Recirculating, utilizing a pump operatively connected to the slurry reactor, the mixture of vapor and the slurry hydroconversion effluent having a reduced vapor phase content flowing downwards in the slurry reactor to be combined with the slurry reactor content)
The internal separator is taught on page 9 to improve dispersion of the slurry catalyst and its circulation under conditions that fall within the scope taught in QUIGNARD. The management of the different thermal levels in the slurry reactor is also taught on page 9 to be ensured. The catalyst is further taught on page 8 to be as uniformly distributed as possible. (wherein the slurry reactor is further configured to provide backmixing to fluidize the slurry hydroconversion catalyst to maintain a substantially homogeneous slurry reactor content, and a substantially isothermal temperature profile in the slurry reactor)
The conversion of the feed into the slurry reactor is taught on page 8 to be between 50 to 100%. (wherein at least about 60% of the feedstock is converted into the vapor phase effluent)
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claims 2-3 and 13-14, the conversion of the feed into the slurry reactor is taught on page 8 to be between 50 to 100%. (wherein at least about 80% and 90% of the feedstock is converted into the vapor phase effluent)
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 15, QUIGNARD teaches on page 8 the feedstock is sent to a slurry reactor to hydroconvert with a slurry catalyst in the presence of hydrogen with an upward flow of liquid, gas, and catalyst.
Regarding claims 7 and 16, QUIGNARD teaches on page 8 the feedstock is sent to a slurry reactor to hydroconvert with a slurry catalyst in the presence of hydrogen with an upward flow of gas. A recirculating internal pump is taught on page 8 and would be expected to recirculate at least a portion of the upward flow of gas.
Regarding claims 8 and 17, QUIGNARD teach on page 9 that the effluent leaving the slurry reactor may be subjected to another step of separation using known technology. The separation is detailed on page 10 that thoroughly separates the effluent in to gases, a residual fraction containing at least a portion of the solid particles of the dispersed catalyst and one or more liquid fractions.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, QUIGNARD teach on page 8 that the feedstock flows from the bottom to the top and the effluent exits from the top of slurry reactor.
Regarding claim 10 and 19, the feedstock is taught on pages 2 and 5 to include fats and vegetable and animal oils.
Regarding claim 11 and 20, the slurry catalyst is taught on page 8 and include sulfurized catalyst containing at least one member selected from a group consisting of Mo, Fe, Ni, W, Co, V and Ru. The catalysts are further to be sulfided ex-situ or in-situ.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QUIGNARD (WO2012140335A1) in view of the machine translation of QUIGNARD as applied to claims 1-3, and 7-20 above, and further in view of KENDRICK et al. (USPGPUB 2002/0173598).
The above discussion of QUIGNARD is incorporated herein by reference.
QUIGNARD teaches on pages 8 and 9 embodiments with an internal recirculation pump and an internal separator with a recycling pump. The recycling pump is taught in the figures to be external to the reactor. QUIGNARD teaches on page 9 that the slurry hydroconversion reactor can have in the same way an internal separation zone and a separate recycling pump.
KENDRICK et al. teach in paragraph 64 a slurry loop reactor with a circulator. The circulator comprises a pump and a motor with the motor increasing the pressure in the circulating slurry in the loop reactor.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add motors with the pumps in the slurry reactors in QUIGNARD.
The motors would help with drive the pressure in the circulating slurry.
Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over QUIGNARD (WO2012140335A1) in view of the machine translation of QUIGNARD as applied to claims 1-3, and 7-20 above, and further in view of CHAKRABARTY (US 5935418)
The above discussion of QUIGNARD is incorporated herein by reference.
QUIGNARD teach on page 8 the conditions in the slurry reactor includes the presence of hydrogen and teaches on page 9 that hydrogen is supplied to the reactors through lines.
CHAKRABARTY teaches slurry hydroprocessing with a slurry reactor.
CHAKRABARTY teaches in lines 45-51 of column 2 a gas sparger located at the bottom of the reactor for introducing primary or supplemental hydrogen. Supplemental hydrogen may also be introduced through a line.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace or add a gas sparger to introduce supplemental hydrogen into the reactor that is taught in QUIGNARD as a gas sparger is recognized in the art as an equivalent for to a line for introducing hydrogen into a slurry reactor.
Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
SONG et al. (USPGPUB 2012/0315202) teaches an apparatus and method for hydroconversion using a slurry reactor with a sparger.
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