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 1 (Claims 1-15) in the reply filed on 06/04/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that amended claims 16-26 relate directly to the catalyst of claims 1-15, directed to a catalyst comprising zeolite beta and hierarchical zeolite Y. This is not found persuasive because although the identified claim groups may include certain common features, the applicable standard for restriction is whether the claimed inventions are independent or distinct. As set forth in the restriction requirement, the identified groups are independent or distinct for the reasons previously provided. Applicant has not presented persuasive argument or evidence demonstrating an error in the restriction.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 10-18 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 04/10/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ding (US 20210170376 A1).
With respect to claim 1, the claim requires “a catalyst, the catalyst comprising: zeolite beta; and hierarchical zeolite Y;” Ding teaches a composite of nano-sized zeolite beta and hierarchical zeolite Y (Ding, abstract).
Claim 1 further requires “wherein: the zeolite beta comprises a plurality of micropores having a pore size of less than 2 nm and a plurality of mesopores having a pore size of greater than or equal to 2 nm to less than or equal to 50 nm;” Ding teaches a zeolite beta comprising micropores/ mesopores with an average pore size of 18 nm and a plurality of mesopores having a pore size of greater than or equal to 2 nm to less than or equal to 50 nm (Ding, table 2).
Claim 1 further requires “a volume of mesopores is greater than or equal to 35% of a total pore volume of the zeolite beta; and an average particle size of the zeolite beta is less than or equal to 100 nm.“ Ding teaches a volume percentage of mesopores of 35% of total. (Ding, Table 2). Ding further teaches average particle size of the zeolite beta is 30-60 nm (Ding, table 2).
Regarding claim 2, Ding teaches the ratio of hierarchical zeolite Y to nano-sized zeolite beta ratio is between about 1:5 and 5: 1 (Ding 2, [0022]).
Regarding claim 3, Ding teaches using alumina as a binder (Ding 2, [0020]).
Regarding claim 4, Ding teaches a metal source of molybdenum oxide (MoO3 ), nickel nitrate, or both (Ding 2, [0020]).
Regarding claim 5, Ding teaches a catalyst composition of Zeolite Z-1: 20%, Zeolite Z-2: 30%, NiO:5% and Al303: 30 (Ding 6, table 3).
Regarding claim 6, Ding teaches a catalyst composition of Zeolite Z-1: 20% + Zeolite Z-2: 30% = 50%, NiO:5%, and Al303: 30% (Ding 6, table 3).
Regarding claim 7, Ding teaches a Ni-W catalyst composition of WO3: 20-26 wt. %; NiO: 4-6 wt. %; and zeolite: 10-60 wt.% (Ding 6, [0024]).
Regarding claim 8, Ding teaches a catalyst composition of 15% MoO3 (Ding 6, table 3). Regarding claim 9, Ding teaches SiO/Ai2O3 molar ratios of 60%, 30%, and 38% (Ding 6, table 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STARFARI TESHAWN MCCLAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-0169. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM- 5 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at (571) 270-3591. 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.
/STARFARI TESHAWN MCCLAIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights