Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/702,744

SCM-38 molecular sieve, preparation method thereof, and use thereof

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 18, 2024
Priority
Oct 20, 2021 — CN 202111222065.7 +2 more
Examiner
HAILEY, PATRICIA L
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Shanghai Research Institute Of Petrochemical Technology Sinopec
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
1135 granted / 1288 resolved
+28.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1309
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
46.2%
+6.2% vs TC avg
§102
15.1%
-24.9% vs TC avg
§112
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1288 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Applicants’ Preliminary Amendment, filed on April 18, 2024, has been made of record and entered. In the amendment, the Title of the Application has been amended, claims 4, and 7-15 have been amended to eliminate multiple claim dependency. No claims have been canceled or added; claims 1-15 are presently pending in this application. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Applicants’ Priority Documents were filed on April 18, 2024. Claim Objections Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 12, 14, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7 of claim 1, the quotation marks (“”) around "P2O5·Al2O3·SiO2" should be removed. In claim 2, at the end of the table therein, “5-50.” should be amended to recite “5-50”, and the period (“.”) should be added outside of the table. In claim 4, the quotation marks (“”) around "Al2O3:xP2O5" should be removed. In lines 5-10 of claim 7, the molar ratios recited therein should be amended by adding spaces between each material, e.g., “(0-0.5)SiO2:(0.8-5)Al2O3:1P2O5:(0.01-0.9)” should be amended to recite “(0-0.5) SiO2:(0.8-5) Al2O3:1P2O5:(0.01-0.9)”. In (a) lines 1 and 2 of claim 12, (b) line 2 of claim 14, and (c) line 3 of claim 15, “ molecular sieve according to claim 1”, should be amended to recite “containing the SCM-38 molecular sieve according to claim 1” to ensure claim continuity. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-15 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 1-15 are indefinite because claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 11 recite range-within-range limitations, and also recite the limitations “more preferably” (claims 1 and 7) and “preferably” (claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 11) . The term "preferably" renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention or not, and the resulting claims do not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. Regarding the range-within-range limitations, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Claim 1 recites, for the molar ratio Al2O3:P2O5, a broader molar ratio of (0.8-1.5):1, and narrower ranges of (0.8-1.4) and (0.9-1.3), and for the molar ratio of SiO2:P2O5, a broader molar ratio of (0-0.1):1 is recited, along with the narrower ranges of (0-0.09):1 and (0-0.07):1. Claim 4 recites the broader range of “0.7 ≤ x ≤ 2.5”, and the narrower range of “0.8 ≤ x ≤ 2”. Claim 7 recites: the broader molar ratio ranges for “(0-0.5)SiO2:(0.8-5)Al2O3:1P2O5:(0.01-0.9)” and the narrower molar ranges of “(0-0.3)SiO2:(0.85-2)Al2O3:1P2O5:(0.003.-0.85)” and “(0-0.1)SiO2:(0.86-1.5)Al2O3:1P2O5:(0.05.-0.8)”; and the broader limitation “quaternary ammonium compound 1:(0.9-5) quaternary ammonium compound 2:(0.1-5)HF:(10-500)H2O” and the narrower limitations “quaternary ammonium compound 1:(0.95-3) quaternary ammonium compound 2:(0.3-3)HF:(20-300)H2O” and “quaternary ammonium compound 1:(1-2) quaternary ammonium compound 2:(0.5-1.8)HF:(50-130)H2O”. Claim 10 recites, in the crystallization conditions recited therein, broader and narrower (a) crystallization temperature ranges and (b) crystallization times for both the first and second stages. Claims 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, and 12-15, which depend directly or indirectly from claims 1 and 4, do not cure the aforementioned deficiencies of claims 1, 4, 6,7, 10, and 11, and are thus included in this rejection. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not teach or suggest Applicants’ claimed (a) SCM-38 molecular sieve, (b) process of preparing said SCM-38 molecular sieve, (c) molecular sieve composition comprising said SCM-38 molecular sieve and a binder, (d) catalyst for producing dimethyl ether from methanol containing said SCM-38 molecular sieve, and (d) method producing dimethyl ether from methanol via conversion of methanol to dimethyl ether in the presence of a catalyst containing said SCM-38 molecular sieve, wherein the SCM-38 molecular sieve exhibits the following diffraction peak feature in its XRD spectrum: X-ray diffraction peaks appear at 2θ diffraction angles of: 7.20±0.1, 10.81±0.1, 11.60±0.1, 14.32±0.1, 21.39±0.1, 1.83±0.1, 27.31±0.1, 28.72±0.1, wherein the most intense peak appears at 2θ of 7.20±0.1, and wherein the SCM-38 molecular sieve has a schematic chemical composition represented by P2O5·Al2O3·SiO2, wherein based on the molar ratio, Al2O3:P2O5 =(0.8-1.5):1. Exemplary prior art includes: Zhao et al. (CN 115991490), which teaches a eutectic phosphoaluminate material comprising an SCM-38 molecular sieve and a CHA molecular sieve. However, this reference, which has common inventors with the instant application, was published on April 21, 2023, which is after the effective filing dates of the instant application, i.e., the national stage entry (October 20, 2022) and foreign priority dates (October 20, 2021) of the instant application. Zhao et al. (CN 115991491), which teaches a eutectic phosphoaluminate material. However, this reference also has common inventors with the instant application, and was published on April 21, 2023, which is after the effective filing dates of the instant application, i.e., the national stage entry (October 20, 2022) and foreign priority dates (October 20, 2021) of the instant application. Qiao et al. (CN 112645352, cited by Applicants; English translation provided by the Examiner) teaches an SCM-31 molecular sieve, with formula Al2O3-xSiO2-yP2O5, where 0 ≤ x ≤ 0.25 and 0.75 ≤ y ≤ 1.25. However, the SCM-31 molecular sieve disclosed in this reference does not exhibit the X-ray diffraction peaks appearing at the diffraction angles recited in Applicants’ claim 1; see, for example, Table 1 of Qiao et al. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICIA L HAILEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1369. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. 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, Ching-Yiu (Coris) Fung, can be reached at 571-270-5713. 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. /Patricia L. Hailey/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1732 September 15, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 18, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12744271
CYLINDRICAL SECONDARY BATTERY
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12723144
Preparation method for Ag and g-C3N4 co-modified ZnO nanocomposite material using polymer network gel method
2y 12m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12719062
NOBLE METAL SINGLE ATOM OR CLUSTER-POROUS MOLYBDENUM CARBIDE/CARBON NANOCOMPOSITE USING DYNAMIC ARRANGEMENT OF NOBLE METAL ATOMS, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME, CATALYST FOR HYDROGEN EVOLUTION REACTION OR HYDROGEN OXIDATION REACTION COMPRISING SAME, AND ELECTRODE COMPRISING THE CATALYST
3y 6m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12712213
BATTERY PACK
3y 5m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12712191
SOLID OXIDE CELL STACK
3y 2m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+10.1%)
2y 4m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1288 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month