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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
Claims 1 – 7, 9 – 22, 24 – 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Littlewood et al. (US 2023/0069964) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Littlewood et al. (US 2023/0069964)
In regards to claim 1, Littlewood teaches the production of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) hydrocarbon from carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and H2 containing feed which is converted by reforming and/or reverse water-gas shift (RWGS) reactions, and wherein the feed mixture comprises biogas (title, abstract). The RWGS is a reversed water gas shift reaction as follows: H2 + CO2 ↔ H2O + CO which is an endothermic reaction, which is in connection with the syngas → LPG reaction process which is an exothermic reaction as claimed [0084].
The process involves reforming biogas (CO2 and CH4) to provide syngas (H2 + CO) intermediate which is used for the production of LPG [0011, 0030]. Littlewood teaches the recycle of syngas (H2 + CO) to the feed from the products comprising LPG and syngas [0012]. The feed comprising syngas and the recycled syngas from the products are reacted to produce methanol, and the methanol undergoes a dehydration reaction using a catalyst such as zeolite to provide the LPG [0015, 0016 and 0058]. The process of converting the biogas (CO2 + CH4) feed comprises steam reforming and/or RWGS [0024].
Littlewood teaches the feed which comprises biogas (CO2 + CH4) and H2 can be obtained from a wide variety of sources [0031]. Thus, the process of converting the bio synthesis gas to LPG which provides an exothermic reaction that generates heat, using a heat transfer fluid from the RWGS reaction system to absorb the heat to increase the enthalpy of the RWGS process and returning the heat transfer fluid with decreased enthalpy to the exothermic reaction and recovering of bio-LPG from the effluent is provided or at least obvious.
In regards to claim 2, Littlewood teaches the process wherein the gaseous feed containing oxygen or oxygen-containing components [0029, 0053]. The reforming stage in the production of methanol from syngas is a catalytic process using zeolite or molecular sieve [0016, 0037 – 0039]. Thus, the catalytic oxygenate synthesis process appears to be provided.
In regards to claim 3, Littlewood teaches the process of converting syngas to methanol as an intermediate product and thus would be expected to comprise a majority of the product such as greater than 50%.
In regards to claims 4 – 7, Littlewood teaches the process having the claimed limitations as previously discussed.
In regards to claim 9, Littlewood teaches the process wherein the LPG synthesis stage for conversion of synthesis gas (H2 +CO) to LPG occurs at temperatures of from 204 to 454℃ [0063].
In regards to claims 10, 11, Littlewood teaches the process which would be expected to provide heat transfer fluids having a liquid or gas state after heat transfer. The phase of the fluid in the process does not carry patentable weight and would routinely be optimized by persons of ordinary skill in the art practicing the invention.
In regards to claim 12 – 15, 17, Littlewood teaches the process and the catalyst as previously stated [0016, 0069 and 0071]. The catalysts are the same as those of the claims and as discussed in paragraph 0064 of applicant’s disclosure as originally filed, and will be expected to have similar silica to alumina ratios as claimed.
In regards to claims 16, 31, Littlewood teaches the process using catalysts such as zeolite beta, ZSM-5, SAPO-34 etc., but fails to particularly recite the catalyst of the claims [0069, 0071]. However, in view of Littlewood et al. (US 2025/0026698) (i.e., Littlewood ‘698) which is drawn to similar processes of preparing LPG from syngas and which recites the interchangeable use of catalysts such as zeolite beta, ZSM-5, SAPO-34, SSZ-13 etc., the interchangeable use of SSZ-13 in the place of the recited catalysts would have been obvious in the process of Littlewood [see 0008 of Littlewood ‘698].
In regards to claims 18, 19, Littlewood teaches the process and provides the gaseous effluent primarily comprising propane and butane (LPG) at 60% or higher, and a pentane (i.e., C5 hydrocarbon) content in the effluent of about 1-2% (Table 3).
In regards to claims 20 – 22, 24 – 30, 32 – 34, Littlewood teaches the process having the claimed limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 23 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Littlewood fails to recites the endothermic process which converts cycloparaffin to an aromatic and hydrogen and supplies the hydrogen to the bio-synthesis gas as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAIWO OLADAPO whose telephone number is (571)270-3723. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5pm.
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.
/TAIWO OLADAPO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights