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 .
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because of the informal nature of the drawings. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, “a selective catalytic reduction (SCR), a lean burn engine, an exhaust gas treatment system, a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC), a soot filter, and an ammonia oxidation catalyst (AMOX) ” in claims 15-20, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gounder et al. (Gounder) (Patent/Publication Number US 2017/0107114).
Regarding claim 1, Gounder discloses a zeolite catalyst with paired aluminum atoms (e.g. See Paragraphs [0030-0031]), wherein the paired aluminum atoms are third-nearest neighbors (3NN) in a zeolite structure (as such, Si(2Al) groups, suggesting that Al—O—Si—O—Al linkages are preferentially avoided in favor of Al—(O—Si)2—O—Al groups) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0030] In experiments leading to this disclosure, SSZ-13 zeolites (Si/Al=15, 25) crystallized from gels comprising equimolar amounts of Na+ and TMAda+ contained a detectable fraction of “paired” Al atoms, defined here in function as two Al atoms separated by either one or two Si atoms in a 6-MR since both atomic configurations stabilize exchanged Co2+ and Cu2+ cations with similar energetic preferences according to density functional theory. The maximum concentration of Al atoms beyond which incorporation of additional Al causes unavoidable formation of next-nearest-neighbor Al arrangements (Al—O—Si—O—Al) can be calculated from the topological density of zeolite frameworks, and suggest that SSZ-13 zeolites with Si/Al>7 can be prepared (in theory) to contain exclusively isolated Al atoms. ....) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0029-0031]) and wherein the zeolite catalyst has an aging durability, an improved catalytic activity, or a combination thereof (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027] In this disclosure, we focus on the synthesis of CHA zeolites (SSZ-13), which are used commercially as catalysts in their H-form for methanol-to-olefins (MTO) and after Cu- or Fe-exchange for the selective catalytic reduction of mobile-source NOx pollutants with ammonia. CHA zeolites contain one unique T-site and double 6-membered ring (D6R) building units that interconnect to form 8-MR windows (0.38 nm diameter) that limit transport into larger cages (0.82 nm diameter, 18 T-atoms per cage), and are typically synthesized in the presence of N,N,N-trimethyl-1-adamantylammonium cations (TMAda+) as organic SDAs that become occluded within CHA cages during crystallization. ..... ) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027, 0036]).
Regarding claim 2, Chen further discloses wherein the zeolite catalyst is a CHA zeolite catalyst (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027-0028]).
Regarding claim 3, Chen further discloses wherein the CHA zeolite catalyst is a copper-CHA catalyst (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027] In this disclosure, we focus on the synthesis of CHA zeolites (SSZ-13), which are used commercially as catalysts in their H-form for methanol-to-olefins (MTO) and after Cu- or Fe-exchange for the selective catalytic reduction of mobile-source NOx pollutants with ammonia. ..... ) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027-0030]).
Regarding claim 4, Chen further discloses wherein the zeolite is a small pore zeolite (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027] In this disclosure, we focus on the synthesis of CHA zeolites (SSZ-13), which are used commercially as catalysts in their H-form for methanol-to-olefins (MTO) and after Cu- or Fe-exchange for the selective catalytic reduction of mobile-source NOx pollutants with ammonia. CHA zeolites contain one unique T-site and double 6-membered ring (D6R) building units that interconnect to form 8-MR windows (0.38 nm diameter) that limit transport into larger cages (0.82 nm diameter, 18 T-atoms per cage), and are typically synthesized in the presence of N,N,N-trimethyl-1-adamantylammonium cations (TMAda+) as organic SDAs that become occluded within CHA cages during crystallization. ..... ) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0027-0030]).
Regarding claim 12, Gounder further discloses wherein the improved catalytic activity of the zeolite catalyst for methanol dimerization, with approximately 10% higher conversion relative to a zeolite that does not contain the 3NN sites (e.g. See Paragraphs [0006-0007, 0027-0028]).
Regarding claim 13, Gounder further discloses wherein the zeolite catalyst has a SiO2/Al2Os ratio (SAR) chosen from 8-40, 10-30, and 11-25 (e.g. See Paragraphs [0028, 0030-0031]).
Regarding claim 14, Gounder further discloses wherein the zeolite catalyst further comprises copper (Cu) with a Cu content corresponding to a Cu/AI ratio chosen from of 0.2 to 0.5, 0.25 to 0.45, and 0.3 to 0.4 (e.g. See Paragraphs [0028]).
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 5-7, 10-11, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gounder et al. (Gounder) (Patent/Publication Number US 2017/0107114) in view of Yang et al. (Yang) (Patent/Publication Number US 2015/0367337).
Regarding claims 5-7, Gounder discloses all the claimed limitation as discussed above except that the small pore zeolite types are AEI, AFX, or AFT.
Yang teaches that it is conventional in the art, to use a SCR catalyst comprising the small pore zeolite types are AEI, AFX, or AFT (See Paragraphs [0143-0144]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, to use the a SCR catalyst comprising the small pore zeolite is AEI, AFX, or AFT of Gounder, as taught by Yang for the purpose of absorbing the NOx when the air-fuel ratio of the exhaust gas flowing into the absorbent is lean, and releasing the NOx when the air-fuel ratio of the exhaust gas flowing into the absorbent is rich, so as to reduce the poisoned materials in the purifying catalyst and to reduce amount of nitrogen oxides in the exhaust gas of the lean-burn engine, and further improve the performance of the engine and the efficiency of the emission system, since the use thereof would have been routinely practiced by those with ordinary skill in the art to maintain high purification efficiency of a catalyst system.
Regarding claim 10, Yang further discloses wherein the aging durability is after 800 °C hydrothermal aging, the zeolite catalyst exhibits 10% higher NOx conversion relative to a zeolite that does not contain the 3NN sites (e.g. See Paragraphs [0303] The material of Example 10 (Cu-[Ti]CHA) was washcoated on a flow-through ceramic substrate at a loading of 2.1 g/in3 The typical SCR testing condition includes simulated diesel exhaust gas (500 ppm NO, 500 ppm NH3, 10% O2, 5% H2O, and balance N2) and temperature points from 200° C. to 600° C. Conversion of NO and NH.sub.3 at various temperatures are monitored by FTIR. An aging condition of 750° C. exposure to 10% H2O for 5 hrs. is adopted if desired to evaluate long term hydrothermal durability.) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0009, 0303, 0307, 0309]).
Regarding claim 11, Yang further discloses wherein the age durability is after 850 °C hydrothermal aging, the zeolite catalyst exhibits at least 50% NOx conversion (e.g. See Paragraphs [0308] As illustrated in FIG. 16, with the assistance of framework Ti (Example 10), the SCR performance at 200° C. is significantly improved compared to the analogous sample without Ti (Example 6) at comparable Cu %, and no sacrifice of the high temperature (600° C.) NOx conversion efficiency is observed.) (e.g. See Figures 7-9; Paragraphs [0009, 0288, 0307-0308]).
Regarding claim 15, Yang further discloses catalyst article effective to abate nitrogen oxides (NOx) from a lean burn engine exhaust gas, the catalyst article comprising a substrate carrier having a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) catalyst according to claim 1 (e.g. See Paragraphs [0186-0188, 0260-0261]).
Regarding claim 16, Yang further discloses wherein the substrate carrier is a honeycomb substrate, and optionally constructed of metal or ceramic (e.g. See Paragraphs [0186] By way of example, the powder or sprayed material is admixed with or coated by suitable modifiers well known in the art. By way of example, modifiers such as silica, alumina, zeolites or refractory binders (for example a zirconium precursor) may be used. The powder or the sprayed material, optionally after admixing or coating by suitable modifiers, may be formed into a slurry, for example with water, which is deposited upon a suitable refractory carrier, for example, a flow through honeycomb substrate carrier or a wall flow honeycomb substrate carrier.) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0186, 0196, 0201, 0233-0234]).
Regarding claim 17, Yang further discloses wherein the honeycomb substrate carrier is a flow-through substrate or a wall flow filter (e.g. See Paragraphs [0186, 0199-0204]).
Regarding claim 18, Yang further discloses a lean burn engine that produces an exhaust stream; and the catalyst article positioned downstream from the lean burn engine and in fluid communication with the exhaust gas stream (e.g. See Paragraphs [0193] .... As used herein, the terms “upstream” and “downstream” refer to relative directions according to the flow of an engine exhaust gas stream from an engine towards a tailpipe, with the engine in an upstream location and the tailpipe and any pollution abatement articles such as filters and catalysts being downstream from the engine. According to one or more embodiments, the laterally zoned ammonia storage material and SCR catalyst material can be arranged on the same or a common substrate or on different substrates separated from each other.) (e.g. See Paragraphs [0040, 0188, 0193, 0261]).
Regarding claim 19, Yang further discloses one or more of the following: a. a diesel oxidation catalyst (DOC) positioned upstream of the catalyst article; b. a soot filter positioned upstream of the catalyst article; and c. an ammonia oxidation catalyst (AMOX) positioned downstream of the catalyst article (e.g. See Paragraphs [0199, 0207-0208, 0264]).
Regarding claim 20, Yang further discloses a process for preparing a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) catalyst comprising: (a) preparing the catalyst based on any one of claims 1 ; (b) applying the catalyst as a coating onto a ceramic or metallic honeycomb substrate monolith (e.g. See Paragraphs [0189]); (d) drying the coated monolith; (e) calcining the coated monolith at a temperature ranging from 400 °C to 800 °C (e.g. See Paragraphs [0189-0191]). However, where a product by process claim is rejected over a prior art product that appears to be identical, although produced by a different process, the burden is upon the applicants to overcome forward with evidence establishing an obvious difference between the two. See In re Marosi, 218 USPQ 289 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims; and also to overcome the claim objections set forth in this Office action, such as to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, and 112 2nd paragraph.
Since allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant is encouraged to submit Final Formal Drawings (If Needed) in response to this Office action. The early submission of formal drawings will permit the Office to review the drawings for acceptability and to resolve any informalities remaining therein before the application is passed to issue. This will avoid possible delays in the issue process.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and consists of six patents:
Chen et al. (Pat./Pub. No. US 2018/0093259), Okubo et al. (Pat./Pub. No. US 2016/0115039), Memo et al. (Pat./Pub. No. US 2013/0243887), Frantz et al. (Pat./Pub. No. US 2011/0229392), Rodriguez et al. (Pat./Pub. No. US 2020/0016251), and Moini et al. (Pat./Pub. No. US 2023/0348287), all discloses an exhaust gas purification for use with an internal combustion engine.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner Binh Tran whose telephone number is (571) 272-4865. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors, Mark Laurenzi, can be reach on (571) 270-7878. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are (571) 273-8300 for regular communications and for After Final communications.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Binh Q. Tran
/BINH Q TRAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3748
March 04, 2026