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 Final Office action is based on the 18/770895 application originally filed July 12, 2024.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 11, 15, 27, 28, 31 and 33-41, filed March 30, 2026, are pending and have been fully considered. Claims 4, 10, 12-14, 16-26, 29-30 and 32 have been canceled. Claims 1-3, 5-9 and 11 have been withdrawn.
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 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.
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 15, 27-28 and 33-41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Acosta et al. (US 2016/0010018) hereinafter “D’Acosta” in view of Clague et al. (US 2004/0211112) hereinafter “Clague”.
Regarding Claims 15, 27-28 and 33-41
D’Acosta discloses in paragraph 0002, a lead-free piston engine fuels comprising hydrocarbon components blended together to produce unique piston-engine motor fuel formulations with a high motor octane number that offers excellent engine and operational performance for aviation purposes. These unique fuels have very low freeze points, low environmental toxicity, and a high degree of compatibility with materials used in fuel systems.
D’Acosta further discloses in paragraph 0030, the fuel formulations generally comprise about 80 to about 99 wt % C4-C12 aliphatic hydrocarbons, and less than about 5 wt % aromatic hydrocarbons (arene hydrocarbons (carrier)), up to 20% cumidine (amine), and the formulations are substantially free of lead-containing constituents. D’Acosta further discloses in paragraph 0102, the aviation gasoline further comprises oxygenated compounds that help gasoline burn more completely, reducing tailpipe emissions. D’Acosta further discloses in paragraph 0102, a variety of fuel additives have been known and used in the art to increase octane ratings, and thereby reduce knocking. Typical "octane booster" gasoline additives include methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) and ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE), both of which are known as oxygenates which are compounds that contain oxygen as part of their chemical structure. Oxygenates help gasoline burn more completely, reducing tailpipe emissions.
D’Acosta discloses in paragraphs 0064 and 0066, motor fuel must meet the power demands for the selected engines. The motor octane number, or MON, is a standard measure of the performance of a fuel. The higher the MON, the more compression the fuel can withstand before detonating. In broad terms, fuels with a higher motor octane rating are most useful in high-compression engines that generally have higher performance. Various MON ratings are considered to be base requirements for aircraft use, depending on the type of engine and other factors. The aviation fuels which have a MON of at least 100, preferably 102 or greater.
D’Acosta further discloses in paragraph 0090 and 0094, oxidation inhibitors (antioxidants) may be added to the fuel separately, or in combination, in total concentration not to exceed 12 mg of inhibitor (not including weight of solvent) per liter of fuel (does not exceed 12 ppm), such as: 2,6-ditertiary butyl-4-methylphenol.
D’Acosta further discloses in paragraph 0034, up to 5% by weight of at least one additive selected from the group consisting of octane boosters, antioxidants, co-solvents, toluene, xylene, electrical conductivity additives, corrosion inhibitors, metal deactivators, dyes, and any combinations and mixtures thereof.
It is to be noted, D’Acosta fails to specifically teach the addition of a calcium petroleum sulfonate.
However, Clague discloses in paragraph 0019, the fuel composition having these advantages and capabilities comprises about 95 to about 99.5 wt. % combustible hydrocarbonaceous liquid fuel, about 1 to about 5 wt. % lubricant comprising an oil of lubricating viscosity, about 0.001 to about 0.05 wt. % detergent comprising an alkaline earth metal-containing compound, and about 1 ppm to about 10 ppm Mo from a molybdenum source.
Clague further discloses in paragraph 0027, by “hydrocarbonaceous fuel” herein means a liquid fuel that can introduced into a combustion chamber and combusted in a two-stroke engine. Examples include, but are not limited to, diesel fuels, biodiesel fuels, biodiesel-derived fuels, alcohols, ethers, kerosene, jet fuels, low sulfur fuels, synthetic fuels, such as Fischer-Tropsch fuels, liquid petroleum gas, fuels derived from coal, genetically engineered biofuels and crops and extracts therefrom, natural gas, propane, butane, unleaded motor gasolines, aviation gasolines, and so-called reformulated gasolines which typically contain both hydrocarbons of the gasoline boiling range and fuel-soluble oxygenated blending agents, such as alcohols, ethers and other suitable oxygen-containing organic compounds. In one embodiment, it is preferred that the hydrocarbonaceous fuel is substantially sulfur-free, by which is meant a sulfur content not to exceed on average about 30 ppm of the fuel.
Clague discloses in paragraph 0024, the fuel composition also includes a detergent compound that is an alkaline earth metal-containing compound. These detergents are metallic additives containing charged polar groups, such as sulfonates, phenates, carboxylates, or phosphonates, with aliphatic, cycloaliphatic, or alkylaromatic chains, and several metal ions that will include at least one alkaline earth metal ion. These detergents function by lifting deposits in the combustion chamber, which can include related injection valves, injection ports, and so forth. The alkaline earth metal-containing detergent compound includes calcium, magnesium, barium and strontium salts imparting detergent action in a fuel-oil composition. Examples include neutral and overbased alkaline earth metal sulphonates, and neutral and overbased alkaline earth metal phenates. These detergents may include alkaline earth metal salts of petroleum sulphonic acids and long chain mono- or di-alkylarylsulphonic acids with each alkyl group comprising 12-18 carbon atoms and the aryl group being benzyl, tolyl, and xylyl. These detergents also may include alkaline earth metal phenates of alkylphenols and alcylmercaptophenols in which the linear or branched alkyl groups comprising from 4-50 carbon atoms and more particularly from 8-20 carbon atoms. Clague discloses in paragraph 0025, particular examples of the detergent include salts such as selected from the group consisting of neutral calcium sulphonate, overbased calcium sulphonate, neutral calcium phenate, overbased calcium phenate, neutral magnesium sulphonate, neutral magnesium sulphonate, overbased magnesium phenate, overbased magnesium phenate, or combinations and mixtures thereof. In one preferred embodiment, the detergent comprises a neutral calcium salt.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the calcium sulfonates of Stoldt in the unleaded gasoline of D’Acosta. The motivation to do so is to use of calcium sulfonates as a detergent in unleaded gasolines aids in lifting deposits in the combustion chamber, which can include related injection valves, injection ports, and so forth.
Claim 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Acosta et al. (US 2016/0010018) hereinafter “D’Acosta” in view of Clague et al. (US 2004/0211112) hereinafter “Clague” and further in view Kaufman et al. (US 2010/0132253) hereinafter “Kaufman”.
Regarding Claim 31
D’Acosta modified by Stoldt discloses the composition and method of independent claim 15 of the presently claimed invention, including the calcium petroleum sulfonates are present in the amount of 5 to 200 ppm. Stoldt fails to teach the detergent additive components of claims 30 and 31.
However, Kaufman discloses in paragraph 0016, a fuel composition for an internal combustion engine having a major amount of a hydrocarbon fuel and a minor amount of a fuel additive. Kaufman further discloses in paragraph 0018, methods for enhancing fuel economy of an internal combustion engine by combusting in the engine a hydrocarbon fuel comprising a major amount of a hydrocarbon fuel, and a minor amount of a fuel additive. In one embodiment, the hydrocarbon fuel can include gasoline, diesel fuel, kerosene or jet fuel.
Kaufman further discloses in paragraph 0042, the fuel additive composition can include a fuel detergent. The fuel additive composition can include a fuel detergent. The detergent used in the fuel additive described herein may include any suitable commercially available detergent or deposit inhibitor available for this function. For example, the detergents may be present at a level of about 20-about 1000 ppm (relative proportion of the detergent to hydrocarbon fuel), as is typically well known to those skilled in the art. Deposit inhibitors for gasoline, usually referred to as detergents or dispersants, are well known and a variety of compounds can be used. Examples include, but are not limited to, any polyether amine and/or one or more of the type based on a polyolefin, e.g., polyethylene, polypropylene, polybutylene, including isomers thereof, and copolymers of at least two of the foregoing; and polyolefin-based detergents, e.g., imides such as succinimide, amines and the like where the latter may be made by chlorinating selected olefins, and reacting the thus-chlorinated olefins with polyamines, e.g., ethylenediamine, tetraethylenepentaamine, etc. A suitable selected olefin is polyisobutene having a molecular weight in the range of from 450 to 1500, and more preferably 900 to 1400. Another suitable detergent may be based on a polyisobutene, preferably of molecular weight in the range of from 450 to 1500, more preferably 900 to 1400, which has been reacted with maleic acid and the resulting acid-functionalized polyolefin thereafter reacted with a polyamine such as tetraethylenepentamine. For example, the OXO process used by BASF in preparing a polyolefin-amine which are commercially available as Puradd FD-100 and the like.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add the aviation detergent additive components of Kaufman to the aviation fuel of Stoldt and D’Acosta. The motivation to do so is to use the aviation fuel detergent additive that aids in the inhibition of deposits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments directed to the newly submitted claimed amendments, filed March 30, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 15, 27-28 and 33-41 under D’Acosta et al. (US 2016/0010018) hereinafter “D’Acosta” in view of Stoldt (US 5,160,350) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of D’Acosta et al. (US 2016/0010018) hereinafter “D’Acosta” in view of Clague et al. (US 2004/0211112) hereinafter “Clague”.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 on 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 on 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 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/Latosha Hines/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights