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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 22-40 in the reply filed on May 19, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that this restriction will not reduce the workload of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or simplify prosecution of the application.
This is not found persuasive because this restriction will reduce the workload of this examiner because she will not have to examine a claim that is directed to a totally different invention from that of the elected claims.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claims 22-23 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaufman (US 5,372,009).
Kaufman teaches a method for treating a gaseous composition comprising: (i) providing a gaseous composition comprising mainly C2-C4+ gaseous mixtures containing large amounts of ethene, ethane and/or propene/propane. Significant amounts of hydrogen and methane usually accompany cracked hydrocarbon gas, along with minor amounts of C3+ hydrocarbons, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and acetylene (see col. 2, lines 40-46). This teaching suggests the gaseous composition comprising
H2, methane, ethane, propane and hydrocarbons having a carbon number of at least C4, wherein the total amount of H2, methane, ethane, propane and hydrocarbons having a carbon number of at least C4 is at least 80 wt% (see Figure 1 (15G); column 2, lines 40-55; column 3, lines 7-17). The gaseous composition is subjected to distillation in a thermally coupled distillation system comprising 4 distillation columns (see Figure 1 (30), (34), (40) and (50)) and 3 condensers (see Figure 1 (31), (36) and (66)) and 3 reboilers (see Figure 1 (40B) and (62)) to recover a propane composition (see Figure 1 (40L)).
Kaufman does not specifically teach that the objective of the process of his invention is to recover a propane composition. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that propane is recovered because Kaufmann teaches that he removes C3 and heavier hydrocarbons and that during fractionation he recovers propene, butene, etc., and that bottom conduit means 140L recovers at least one high boiling component (e.g. C4+) from the first distillation tower reboiler stage, conduit means 150L recovers at least one middle boiling component (e.g. propane) from the second distillation tower reboiler stage and conduit means 168 recovers the low boiling component (e.g. propene).
Claims 24-25 and 27-40 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. The prior art does not teach or suggest the limitations as set forth in the above claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is cited for teaching the general state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CEPHIA D TOOMER whose telephone number is (571)272-1126. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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 571-272-6368. 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.
/CEPHIA D TOOMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771 19719090/20260619
Prosecution Insights