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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is based on the 18/718546 application originally filed June 11, 2026.
Amended claims 1-15, filed June 11, 2026, are pending and have been fully considered.
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 1-8, 9 and 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.
Regarding Claims 1-4, the phrase “maximum of the palladium and/or gold concentration” within the shell catalyst is unclear which makes the claims indefinite. The term “maximum” has numerous interpretations of various numerical value. Due to the numerous interpretations, it cannot be determined a detailed parameter to meet the limitation of “maximum” palladium and/or gold concentration. Further amending and/or clarification is required.
Regarding claims 2-3, 5-8, 10 and 15, the phrase “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: specific steps that define “a process for producing alkenyl carboxylic esters WITH shell catalyst (see page 20 and 21 of the current specification that defines method steps for claim 15). Further amending and/or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mestl et al. (US 2015/012630) hereinafter “Mestl”.
Regarding Claims 1-15
Mestl discloses in the abstract, a method for producing a shell catalyst which is suitable for the synthesis of alkenyl carboxylic acid esters, in particular for producing vinyl acetate monomers (VAM) from ethylene and allyl acetate monomers from propylene by means of oxy-acetylation.
Mestl discloses in paragraphs 0008-0011, producing a shell catalyst is characterized by the following method steps: (a) applying an acetate to a support body; (b) applying a Pd precursor compound and an Au precursor compound to a support body obtained after step (a); (c) reducing the metal components of the precursor compounds of the support body obtained after step (b) to the elemental metals. Mestl discloses in paragraph 0012, the term “shell catalyst” is meant a catalyst which comprises a support body and a shell with catalytically active material.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0028, an acetate for example in the form of an alkali acetate to a support body before the application of the metal precursor compounds and before the reduction of the metal components of the precursor compounds leads to a VAM shell catalyst which has a much higher activity and selectivity than shell catalysts in which the acetate is applied after the application of the metal precursor compounds and/or after the reduction of the metal components of the precursor compounds.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0029, the acetate to be used in step (a) of the method according to the invention is preferably an alkali or alkaline earth acetate, in particular an alkali acetate. The alkali acetate can be lithium acetate, sodium acetate, potassium acetate, caesium acetate or rubidium acetate, but preferably potassium acetate.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0030, the Pd precursor compounds and Au precursor compounds used in the method are preferably water-soluble compounds. Mestl further discloses in paragraph 0031, the Pd precursor compound used in the method according to the invention is preferably selected from: nitrate compounds, nitrite compounds, acetate compounds, tetraamine compounds, diamine compounds, hydrogen carbonate compounds and hydroxidic metallate compounds.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0037, the Au precursor compounds used in the method according to the invention are preferably selected from: acetate compounds, nitrite or nitrate compounds and oxidic or hydroxidic metallate compounds.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0047, after the application of the solution containing acetate, a drying is preferably carried out in the temperature range of from 70 to 120° C, in air, lean air or inert gas. The duration of the drying of the support bodies loaded with acetate preferably lies in the range of from 10 to 100 minutes, more preferably 30 to 60 minutes. The drying of the support body loaded with acetate can be carried out in a conventional drying device, but also in the coating device. If the drying is carried out in the coating device, drying preferably takes place such that the support bodies are present static therein, i.e. they are not moved. If a fluid bed or fluidized bed device is used, the support bodies are preferably not moved during the drying in the fluid bed or the fluidized bed.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0048, in step (b) of the method the Pd precursor compound and the Au precursor compound are preferably present dissolved in solution. The Pd precursor compound and the Au precursor compound can be present dissolved in a mixed solution, but they can also each be present in a separate solution. Pure solvents and solvent mixtures in which the selected metal compound(s) is/are soluble and which, after application to the catalyst support, can be easily removed again from same by means of drying are suitable as solvents for the transition metal precursor compounds.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0049, the application of the precursor compounds in step (b) of the method is preferably carried out by spraying the support body with a solution containing the precursor compound. The support body is preferably moved in the same way as during the application of the acetate. Here too, it is preferred that the support bodies are moved in a process gas, e.g. in a coating drum, a fluid bed, a fluidized bed or in a static coating chamber of an Innojet AirCoater, wherein heated process gas is preferably blown in, with the result that the solvent is quickly evaporated. In this way, the precursor compounds are present in the named defined shell of the support body. The spraying rate is preferably chosen during the spraying such that a balance is achieved between the evaporation rate of the solvent and the feed rate of the precursor compounds on the support body. This makes it possible to set the desired shell thickness and palladium/gold distribution in the shell. Depending on the spraying rate, the shell thickness can thus be infinitely variably set and optimized, for example up to a thickness of 2 mm. But very thin shells with a thickness in the range of from 50 to 300 μm are thus also possible. If the Au precursor compound and the Pd precursor compound are applied from a mixed solution, the mixed solution is preferably conveyed from a receiver container via a pump to a spray nozzle via which the precursor compounds are sprayed onto the support bodies. If the Au precursor compound and the Pd precursor compound are applied from two separate solutions, it is preferred that these are stored in two separate receiver containers. They can then be conveyed from these by means of two pumps to two spray nozzles, with the result that the two solutions are sprayed in separately. Alternatively, the separate solutions can also be conveyed by means of two pumps to one spray nozzle, with the result that both solutions are sprayed in via one nozzle.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0051, if a fluid bed unit is used in step (a) and/or step (b) of the method, it is preferred if the support bodies circulate elliptically or toroidally in the fluid bed. To give an idea of how the support bodies move in such fluid beds, it may be stated that in the case of “elliptical circulation” the support bodies move in the fluid bed in a vertical plane on an elliptical path, the size of the main and secondary axes changing. In the case of “toroidal” circulation the support bodies move in the fluid bed in a vertical plane on an elliptical path, the size of the main and secondary axes changing, and in a horizontal plane on a circular path, the size of the radius changing. On average, the support bodies move in a vertical plane on an elliptical path in the case of an “elliptical circulation”, on a toroidal path in the case of a “toroidal circulation”, i.e. a support body travels helically over the surface of the torus with a vertically elliptical section.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0053, furthermore, the support body used in the method is preferably heated during a spray impregnation in step (b), for example by means of heated process air. The process air here preferably has a temperature of from 10 to 110° C. The named upper limits should be adhered to in order to guarantee that the named outer shell has a small layer thickness with a high concentration of noble metal.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0055, if the Pd precursor compound and Au precursor compound in step (b) are applied from one solution, the solution preferably contains a proportion of Pd precursor compound such that Pd lies in the range of from 0.1 to 5 wt.-%, more preferably in the range of from 0.3 to 2 wt.-% and most preferably in the range of from 0.5 to 1 wt.-%, and a proportion of Au-containing precursor compound such that the proportion of Au lies in the range of from 0.05 to 10 wt.-%, more preferably in the range of from 0.1 to 5 wt.-% and most preferably in the range of from 0.1 to 1 wt.-%, in each case relative to the atomic weight proportion of the metals in solution. Mestl discloses in paragraph 0056, if the Pd precursor compound and the Au precursor compound are applied separately from different solutions, the Pd-containing solution preferably contains Pd in the range of from 0.1 to 10 wt.-%, more preferably in the range of from 0.2 to 5 wt.-% and most preferably in the range of from 0.5 to 1 wt.-%, and the Au-containing solution preferably contains Au in the range of from 0.1 to 15 wt.-%, more preferably in the range of from 0.2 to 5 wt.-% and most preferably in the range of from 0.3 to 1 wt.-%, in each case relative to the atomic weight proportion of the metals in solution.
Mestl discloses in paragraph 0057, after the step of applying the precursor compounds to the support body in step (b), a drying step preferably takes place before the reducing step. The drying step is preferably carried out below the decomposition temperature of the precursor compounds, in particular at the temperatures mentioned above, which are also mentioned for the drying of the applied acetate solution. The drying times as for the drying of the support body to which the acetate solution was applied also apply. By a decomposition temperature is meant the temperature at which the precursor compounds start to decompose. The drying preferably takes place either by processing air in the fluid bed or fluidized bed device—if one is used—by standing in air or in a drying oven, preferably at a temperature in the range of from 60° C. to 120° C. If the drying is carried out in the fluid bed apparatus or the fluidized bed apparatus, it is preferred that the support bodies are present static in the device, i.e. are not swirled by process air.
The claimed invention is anticipated by the reference because the reference teaches a composition which comprises all of the claimed components. In the alternative, no patentable distinction is seen to exist between the reference and the claimed invention absent evidence to the contrary.
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).
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, the invention as a whole was prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, as evidenced by the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Hagemeyere et al. (US 2010/0197488) hereinafter “Hagemeyere”.
Regarding Claims 1-7
Hagemeyere discloses in paragraph 0009, a shell catalyst production method by means of which it is possible to produce shell catalysts which, over comparatively large regions of their shell thickness, have a substantially uniform concentration of catalytically active species and a substantially uniform shell thickness. Hagemeyere further discloses in paragraph 0014, to produce catalysts with very thin shells, for example less than 100 μm.
Hagemeyere discloses in paragraph 0089, catalysts preferred in accordance with the invention comprise two different metals in metallic form in the shell, the two metals being combinations of one of the following pairs: Pd and Ag; Pd and Au; Pd and Pt. Catalysts with a Pd/Au shell are suitable especially for producing VAM, those with a Pd/Pt shell are suitable especially as an oxidation and hydrogenation catalyst, and those with a Pd/Ag shell are suitable especially for the selective hydrogenation of alkynes and dienes in olefin streams, i.e. for example, for producing purified ethylene by selective hydrogenation of acetylene present in the crude product.
Hagemeyere discloses in paragraph 0090, with regard to the provision of a VAM shell catalyst with sufficient VAM activity, it is preferred that the catalyst comprises, as the catalytically active species, Pd and Au, and the proportion in the catalyst of Pd is from 0.6 to 2.0% by mass, based on the mass of the catalyst support laden with noble metal.
Hagemeyere discloses in paragraph 0091, context that the Au/Pd atomic ratio of the catalyst is between 0 and 1.2, preferably between 0.1 and 1, preferentially between 0.3 and 0.9 and especially preferably between 0.4 and 0.8.
Hagemeyere discloses in paragraph 0092, in the case of a Pd/Au shell catalyst, this catalyst preferably comprises, as a promoter, at least one alkali metal compound, preferably a potassium compound, a sodium compound, a cesium compound or a rubidium compound, preferably a potassium compound. The suitable and particularly preferred potassium compounds include potassium acetate KOAc, potassium carbonate K2CO3, potassium hydrogen carbonate KHCO3 and potassium hydroxide KOH, and also all potassium compounds which can be converted under the particular reaction conditions of the VAM synthesis to potassium acetate KOAc. The potassium compound can be applied to the catalyst support either before or after the reduction of the metal components to the metals Pd and Au. In a further preferred embodiment of the inventive catalyst, the catalyst comprises an alkali metal acetate, preferably potassium acetate.
Hagemeyere discloses in paragraph 0122, the lower the thickness of the shell of the catalyst, the higher the product selectivity of the inventive catalyst. In a further preferred embodiment of the inventive catalyst, the shell of the catalyst therefore has a thickness of less than 300 μm, preferably one of less than 200 μm, preferentially one of less than 150 μm, further preferably one of less than 100 μm and more preferably one of less than 80 μm. The thickness of the shell may, in the case of supported metal catalysts, frequently be measured optically by means of a microscope.
The claimed invention is anticipated by the reference because the reference teaches a composition which comprises all of the claimed components. In the alternative, no patentable distinction is seen to exist between the reference and the claimed invention absent evidence to the contrary.
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).
From the teachings of the references, it is apparent that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in producing the claimed invention. Therefore, the invention as a whole was prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, as evidenced by the references, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LATOSHA D HINES whose telephone number is (571)270-5551. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
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.
/Latosha Hines/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights