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 .
Response to Election/Restriction
This is the response to election/restriction filed 03/11/2026 for application 18/709713.
Claims 1-8, 10-11, 17, 23-29, and 31-32 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Claims 9, 12-16, 18-22, 30 and 33 have been cancelled.
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-8 and 10-11 in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 17, 23-29, and 31-32 have been withdrawn, without prejudice by applicant, for being directed toward a nonelected invention.
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) 1-7 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ADAM (WO 2021 204821) as evidenced by TIMKEN et al. (USPGPUB 2017/0368544).
ADAM teaches a process for producing olefins from a hydrocarbon stream comprising pyrolysis plastic oil.
Regarding claim 1, ADAM teaches on page 2 that plastic waste is complex and heterogeneous material and comprise numerous different polymers.
The process is elaborated on in pages 7-8.
Plastic waste is pyrolyzed to form pyrolysis oil and then upgraded to form olefins.
A hydrocarbon stream comprising or consisting pyrolysis plastic oil is treated.
The hydrocarbon stream is placed in contact with silica gel, clays, alkaline or alkaline earth metal oxide, iron oxide, ion exchange resins, active carbon, active aluminum oxide, molecular sieves, alkaline oxide and/or porous support or any mixture thereof to trap silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates and/or water trap. (method of removing metal compounds and non-metal compounds from a plastic waste pyrolysis oil and obtaining a mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil containing metal compounds and non-metal compounds, the non-metal compounds being two or more of silica compounds, halogenated compounds, phosphorous compounds, oxygenates, and nitrogenates)
Treated hydrocarbon stream is subjected to selective hydrogenation.
Hydrogenation is taught on page 9 to be performed in one or more catalyst beds. (supplying the partially decontaminated pyrolysis oil from the vessel to a hydrogenation unit; and processing the partially decontaminated pyrolysis oil in presence of a hydrogenation catalyst in the hydrogenation unit to convert a portion of the olefin compounds in the partially decontaminated pyrolysis oil into saturated hydrocarbon compounds to produce a decontaminated hydrogenated pyrolysis oil with a reduced amount of the metal compounds and the non-metal compounds as compared to the amount of metal compounds and non-metal compounds in the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil)
With respective to trapping silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates and/or water, the process is further elaborated on pages 18-20.
Trapping is done with a trap that may comprise one or more active guard bed with adapted porosity.
A multi-layered guard bed is taught in a preferred embodiment with at least 2 layers where the top layer and the bottom layer are independently selected from a group consisting of silica gel, clays, alkaline or alkaline earth metal oxide, iron oxide, ion exchange resins, active carbon, active aluminum oxide, and molecular sieves.
The last layer may be molecular sieves.
It would be well within one of ordinary skill in the art to use multiple layers such as 3 or 4 layers and adapting the layers with decreasing pore sizes to remove the silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates by size.
For example, TIMKEN et al. teach contacting a first bed layer with larger porosities prior to contacting than a second bed layer.
The reasoning is to optimize the trapping process. Having multiple beds with different porosities would allow for trapping of varying particle sizes.
It stands to reason that in a sequence, the pore size of the first layer that contacts the pyrolysis oil would be the widest and decrease as it proceeds through the second and third layers. Doing so allows for incremental trapping with larger particles trapped first and passing the pyrolysis oil to a second layer where smaller particles are trapped second and further on.
(passing the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil through a first adsorption bed with a first porous bed material to adsorb a portion of the metal compounds from the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil;
passing the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil from the first adsorption bed through a second adsorption bed, the second adsorption bed having a second porous bed material to adsorb a portion of the silica compounds from the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil, pores of the first porous bed material being greater in size than pores of the second porous bed material;
passing the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil from the second adsorption bed through a third adsorption bed, the third adsorption bed having a third porous bed material to adsorb a portion of the halogenated compounds from the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil, the pores of the second porous bed material being greater in size than pores of the third porous bed material;
introducing the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil from the third adsorption bed into a vessel containing a plurality of molecular sieves, the plurality of molecular sieves to adsorb a portion of oxygenates, phosphorous compounds and nitrogenates from the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil and produce a partially decontaminated pyrolysis oil)
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.
Regarding claim 2, other pretreatment steps to apply to the pyrolysis plastic oil can be found on page 8 of ADAM. The pretreatment steps are taught to be performed prior to putting the pyrolysis oil in contact with silica gel, clays, alkaline or alkaline earth metal oxide, iron oxide, ion exchange resins, active carbon, active aluminum oxide, molecular sieves for trapping silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates and/or water trap.
Filtration can be used to extract the particles and gums.
Effective feed filtration is taught on page 21 of ADAM to include a guard bed for decreasing particle size with a fraction of 0.3 to 2.0 cm diameter.
A particle size with a fraction of 0.3 to 2.0 cm diameter would be at least a portion of solid particles greater than about 10 microns. (prior to passing the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil through the first adsorption bed, passing the mixed plastic waste pyrolysis oil through a filter that removes at least a portion of solid particles greater than about 10 microns from the mixed plastic water pyrolysis oil to produce a filtered pyrolysis oil)
Regarding claim 3, another pretreatment step is taught on page 8 of ADAM to include a desalting unit to remove water-soluble salts. The pretreatment steps are taught to be performed prior to putting the pyrolysis oil in contact with silica gel, clays, alkaline or alkaline earth metal oxide, iron oxide, ion exchange resins, active carbon, active aluminum oxide, molecular sieves for trapping silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates and/or water trap.
Embodiment 10 is taught on page 34 of ADAM that comprises a desalting unit and impurities removal with guard bed(s) and a separation unit for filtration.
The desalting is taught on pages 16-17 where pyrolysis plastic oil and water are intensively mixed and then the polar water droplets are coalesced such that salty water can be separated.
The motivation to perform the desalting pretreatment step being applied after the filtration step and before the hydrogenation step can be found on page 16. The salts may have negative effects for downstream process due to scale formation and corrosion and catalyst deactivation. The filtration step removes larger particles prior to further treatment to remove smaller particles such as salts. (supplying the filtered pyrolysis oil from the filter to a coalescing unit with a coalescing medium therein to coalesce and separate at least a portion of water from the mixed plastic waste)
Regarding claim 4, desalting is taught on pages 16-17 of ADAM to consist of desalting techniques that are known in the art.
It would be well within one of ordinary skill in the art to perform the desalting at a temperature of at least 50°C to allow for settling of the oil and water into 2 separate liquid phases for separation. (cooling the filtered pyrolysis oil to at least 50°C before supplying the filtered pyrolysis oil to the coalescing unit)
Regarding claim 5, the desalter is taught on pages 16-17 of ADAM to include a horizontal cylindrical tank that provide long enough residence time to separate the water and oil mixture in two phases.
The horizontal cylindrical tank may be considered a filter cartridge. (the coalescing medium is a pad or a filter cartridge)
Regarding claim 6, another pretreatment step is taught on page 8 of ADAM to include a desalting unit to remove water-soluble salts.
The desalting is taught on pages 16-17 where pyrolysis plastic oil and water are intensively mixed and then the polar water droplets are coalesced such that salty water can be separated.
The desalting is taught to be a pretreatment step that is performed prior to putting the pyrolysis oil in contact with silica gel, clays, alkaline or alkaline earth metal oxide, iron oxide, ion exchange resins, active carbon, active aluminum oxide, molecular sieves for trapping silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates and/or water trap.
However, other pretreatment steps include impurities removal treatment steps to remove silicon, phosphorus, metals, and/or halogenated compounds with a guard bed.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill that a desalting step can be performed after putting the pyrolysis oil in contact with silica gel, clays, alkaline or alkaline earth metal oxide, iron oxide, ion exchange resins, active carbon, active aluminum oxide, molecular sieves for trapping silicon and/or metals and/or phosphorus and/or halogenates and/or water trap given that the desalting step may be performed after the impurities removal treatment step with a reasonable expectation of success. (supplying the partially decontaminated pyrolysis oil to a coalescing unit with a coalescing medium therein to coalesce and separate at least a portion of water from the partially decontaminated pyrolysis oil)
Regarding claim 7, ADAM teaches on pages 17-18 that acids may be added as an emulsion breaker for desalting.
ADAM teaches on page 17 that at least hydrochloric acid would cause corrosion downstream.
Adding an acid scavenger to remove any remaining acids.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add an acid scavenger prior to the first layer for any remaining acids from the desalting step.
Regarding claim 11, an example 5 on page 39 of ADAM is taught in which pyrolysis oil was subjected to nitrogen blanketing. (adding a nitrogen blanket to the decontaminated hydrogenated pyrolysis oil)
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ADAM (WO2021204821) as evidenced by TIMKEN et al. (USPGPUB 2017/0368544) as applied to claims 1-7 and 11 above, and further in view of LEMCOFF et al. (US 5176722).
The above discussion of ADAM as evidenced by TIMKEN et al. is incorporated herein by reference.
LEMCOFF et al. teach in column 6 of LEMCOFF et al. a pressure swing adsorption process that employs reactors 1 and 2 in parallel with beds of adsorbents 3 and 4 in parallel respectively. If the purity level of the output from the outlet from reactor 1 drops below a predetermined level, a stop valve is employed to pass the output from the outlet from reactor 1 into reactor 2.
It would be well within one of ordinary skill in the art to employ this process for process that ADAM teaches with a second set of adsorbent beds in layers in parallel.
The motivation to do so is to ensure a specific purity is maintained by the process.
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ADAM (WO2021204821) as evidenced by TIMKEN et al. (USPGPUB 2017/0368544) as applied to claims 1-7 and 11 above, and further in view of SAPPOK e al. (US 2009/0008296).
The above discussion of ADAM as evidenced by TIMKEN et al. is incorporated herein by reference.
ADAM teaches the production of a plastic pyrolysis oil that is then further treated to remove impurities such as metals and halogenates and phosphorus and nitrogenates to form treated plastic pyrolysis oil.
SAPPOK et al. teach in paragraph 3 that products of pyrolysis can have their storage stability improved by the addition of an antioxidant.
It would be obvious to add an antioxidant to the treated plastic pyrolysis oil if the treated plastic pyrolysis oil must be stored prior to use.
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.
JAVEED (USPGPUB 20190270939) teaches the application of chloride scavengers for dichlorination of mixed plastics pyrolysis.
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
Prosecution Insights