DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This communication is in response to the election filed
Claims 1-31 are pending. Claims 20-31 are withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 5/14/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 20-31 are withdrawn from consideration.
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.
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 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ristic (US 2024/0191144) in view of Kuan (WO 2021242464).
With respect to claims 1 and 4, Ristic (US 20240191144) is directed to the design of a process for steam cracking thermally unstable feedstock of a wide range, including crude oil feedstocks (abstract). Ristic teaches subjecting the feed 1 to initial preheat 6 of the liquid feed in a downstream portion of the convection section 8 such that all the feed remains liquid, the slightly preheated feed 7 is mixed with heated steam 11 and further heated 15 by indirect heat exchange with a heat transfer fluid. The heated feed 16 is subject to vapor liquid separation 17 to produce a vapor 18 and a liquid 19. The vapor 18 is then superheated 20 in an upstream portion of the convection section 8 and cracked in the radiant section 22 to produce effluent 24. Ristic teaches “wherein heating [15 prior to separation] is not performed within a convection section of a steam cracker furnace”. Figure 1, [0038]. The design of heating outside of the convection section is beneficial for maintenance and cleanup of fouling or coking materials. Par. [0039], [0055]. Ristic is silent regarding heating and desalting the crude prior to heating the hydrocarbon in the process disclosed.
Kuan, directed to steam cracking of whole crude oil, teaches wherein the crude oil to the steam cracking unit may first be desalted. See Figure, par. [0063], par. [0034]-[0035]. Desalting can be performed at a temperature in a range of from 50°C to 150°C; thus, it would have been obvious to heat to the desired temperature. Par. [0037]. The desalted feed is then preheated in the convection section of the cracking furnace prior to passing to vapor-liquid separation and eventual cracking. Figure, par. [0063], par. [0037]-[0038].
Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify utilize a preheating step and desalting step in a desalting vessel upstream of the heater 15 and vapor-liquid separator 17 of Ristic as taught in Kuan because both are directed to processing crude oil in steam cracking processes, desalting of Kuan provides a feed with less fouling, and the combination of steps amounts to no more than combining elements known in the art as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. Where the crude oil feed to the steam cracker were preheated and desalted, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize a heat loop (as taught with MPH 43 and HX 15) for preheating the crude to the desalter for the benefit of using waste heat in the convection section while minimizing fouling and coking of an exchanger inside the convection section.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaram (US 2016/0097002) in view of Kuan (WO 2021242464) and Ristic (US 2024/0191144).
Claim(s) 13-16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaram (US 2016/0097002) in view of Ristic (US 2024/0191144).
With respect to claims 1-2, Sundaram teaches a process for producing olefins from mixed hydrocarbon feed, which may be a crude oil. Par. [0001]. The process includes:
heating the hydrocarbon 42 via indirect heat exchange 90 form a heated crude oil, Par. [0053];
separating 27 the preheated crude 92 to recover a first hydrocarbon vapor fraction 42 and a first hydrocarbon liquid fraction 30, Par. [0054];
superheating 44 the first hydrocarbon vapor fraction 42 in a convective section 2 of the steam cracking furnace to recover a first superheated vapor fraction 46, Par. [0044], [0056];
thermally cracking the first superheated vapor fraction 46 in a radiant section 3 of the steam cracking furnace to recover a first cracked effluent 12 comprising olefins. Figure 1-2, Par. [0044].
The liquid fraction 30 from the first separating vessel will pass through a second heating, separating, and cracking stage comprising:
heating the first liquid 30 with heat from the convection section to form a heated first hydrocarbon liquid, Par. [0045];
separating 56 the heated first hydrocarbon liquid to recover a second hydrocarbon vapor fraction 58 and a second hydrocarbon liquid fraction 60, Par. [0045];
superheating the second hydrocarbon vapor fraction 58 in a convective section of the steam cracking furnace to recover a second superheated vapor fraction, Par. [0046];
thermally cracking the second superheated vapor fraction in a radiant section 4 of the steam cracking furnace to recover a second cracked effluent 13 comprising olefins, Par. [0046].
Sundaram is silent regarding heating and desalting the crude prior to heating the hydrocarbon in the process disclosed.
Kuan, directed to steam cracking of whole crude oil, teaches wherein the crude oil to the steam cracking unit may first be desalted. See Figure, par. [0063], par. [0034]-[0035]. Desalting can be performed at a temperature in a range of from 50°C to 150°C; thus, it would have been obvious to heat to the desired temperature. Par. [0037]. The desalted feed is then preheated in the convection section of the cracking furnace prior to passing to vapor-liquid separation and eventual cracking. Figure, par. [0063], par. [0037]-[0038]. Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify utilize a preheating step in a preheater and desalting step in a desalting vessel upstream of the heater and vapor-liquid separator of Sundaram as taught in Kuan because both are directed to processing crude oil in steam cracking processes, both teach using desalted crude, Kuan merely shows the common steps for desalting prior to passing through a heating, separation, and cracking process steps, and the combination of steps amounts to no more than combining elements known in the art as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Sundaram is silent regarding wherein the heating of the feed, desalted feed, and liquid to each subsequent vapor-liquid separators is conducted by indirect heating using a heat transfer fluid that was previously heated in a convection section of a steam cracking furnace to generate the heated heat transfer fluid.
Ristic (US 20240191144), directed to the design of a process for steam cracking thermally unstable feedstock of a wide range, including crude oil feedstocks (abstract), teaches subjecting the feed 1 to initial preheat 6 of the liquid feed in a downstream portion of the convection section 8 such that all the feed remains liquid, the slightly preheated feed 7 is mixed with heated steam 11 and further heated 15 by indirect heat exchange with a heat transfer fluid. The heated feed 16 is subject to vapor liquid separation 17 to produce a vapor 18 and a liquid 19. The vapor 18 is then superheated 20 in an upstream portion of the convection section 8 and cracked in the radiant section 22 to produce effluent 24. Ristic teaches “wherein heating [15 prior to separation] is not performed within a convection section of a steam cracker furnace”. Figure 1, [0038]. The design of heating outside of the convection section is beneficial for maintenance and cleanup of fouling materials. Par. [0039], [0055].
Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sundaram by replacing convection heaters for heating liquid crude oil upstream of the vapor-liquid separator with external heat exchangers heated using a transfer fluid heated by the convections section of the furnace because are in the art of steam cracking crude oil and mixed hydrocarbons, Ristic teaches replacing fouling service convection coils for heavy feed with external coolers to minimize fouling and maintain equipment more economically, and it would have been obvious to replace each of the convection coils for heating liquid hydrocarbon with heat transfer fluid exchangers because each are known in the art and would do not more than heating as intended with the benefits disclosed in Ristic.
With respect to claims 8-9, Sundaram teaches wherein the system may include multiple, separate convection coils, flash separators, and radiant coils. Par. [0006], throughout. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that two entire cracking furnaces could be used in place of a single furnace with multiple coils to do no more than perform the same function in individual furnaces. In such case, each furnace including convection section would be expected to heat a portion of the circulation loops.
With respect to claim 13, Sundaram teaches a process for producing olefins from mixed hydrocarbon feed, which may be a crude oil. Par. [0001]. The process includes:
heating the hydrocarbon 42 via indirect heat exchange 90 form a heated crude oil, Par. [0053];
separating 27 the preheated crude 92 to recover a first hydrocarbon vapor fraction 42 and a first hydrocarbon liquid fraction 30, Par. [0054];
superheating 44 the first hydrocarbon vapor fraction 42 in a convective section 2 of the steam cracking furnace to recover a first superheated vapor fraction 46, Par. [0044], [0056];
thermally cracking the first superheated vapor fraction 46 in a radiant section 3 of the steam cracking furnace to recover a first cracked effluent 12 comprising olefins. Figure 1-2, Par. [0044].
The liquid fraction 30 from the first separating vessel will pass through a second heating, separating, and cracking stage comprising:
heating the first liquid 30 with heat from the convection section to form a heated first hydrocarbon liquid, Par. [0045];
separating 56 the heated first hydrocarbon liquid to recover a second hydrocarbon vapor fraction 58 and a second hydrocarbon liquid fraction 60, Par. [0045];
superheating the second hydrocarbon vapor fraction 58 in a convective section of the steam cracking furnace to recover a second superheated vapor fraction, Par. [0046];
thermally cracking the second superheated vapor fraction in a radiant section 4 of the steam cracking furnace to recover a second cracked effluent 13 comprising olefins, Par. [0046].
Sundaram is silent regarding wherein the heating of the feed is conducted by indirect heating using a heat transfer fluid that was previously heated in a convection section of a steam cracking furnace to generate the heated heat transfer fluid.
Ristic (US 20240191144), directed to the design of a process for steam cracking thermally unstable feedstock of a wide range, including crude oil feedstocks (abstract), teaches subjecting the feed 1 to initial preheat 6 of the liquid feed in a downstream portion of the convection section 8 such that all the feed remains liquid, the slightly preheated feed 7 is mixed with heated steam 11 and further heated 15 using a heat transfer fluid. The heated feed 16 is subject to vapor liquid separation 17 to produce a vapor 18 and a liquid 19. The vapor 18 is then superheated 20 in an upstream portion of the convection section 8 and cracked in the radiant section 22 to produce effluent 24. Ristic teaches “wherein heating [15 prior to separation] is not performed within a convection section of a steam cracker furnace”. Figure 1, [0038]. The design of heating outside of the convection section is beneficial for maintenance and cleanup of fouling materials. Par. [0039], [0055].
Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Sundaram by replacing convection heaters for heating liquid crude oil upstream of the vapor-liquid separators with external heat exchangers heated using a transfer fluid heated by the convections section of the furnace because are in the art of steam cracking crude oil and mixed hydrocarbons, Ristic teaches replacing fouling service convection coils for heavy feed with external coolers to minimize fouling and maintain equipment more economically, and it would have been obvious to replace each of the convection coils for heating liquid hydrocarbon with heat transfer fluid exchangers because each are known in the art and would do not more than heating as intended with the benefits disclosed in Ristic.
With respect to claims 3 and 14, Sundaram teaches wherein the second liquid 60 may also be heated, vaporized, superheated, and thermally cracking to recover a third cracked effluent comprising olefins. Par. [0051].
With respect to claims 4-6 and 15-16, Ristic teaches circulating heat transfer fluid in a heat transfer fluid circulation loop comprising a heat exchange coil disposed in the convective section of the steam cracking furnace. Sundaram teaches that in addition to heating hydrocarbon, the convection zone may be used to heat other process streams, and that the placement and number of is designed for a given feed to maximize heat recovery of the flue gas, par. [0048]-[0149]. Therefore, in the combined process, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the recirculation configuration of Ristic for each external exchanger individually to supply the needed heat without fouling and to optimize heat usage in the convection section.
With respect to claims 10, 18, Sundaram teaches preheating of the crude oil as an alternative to heating in the convection section. Par. [0030]. In the combined process disclosed in claim 1, and where crude heaters are used for preheating, the liquid would not be heated in the convection section. In such case, it would have been obvious to use loop heating as taught in Ristic for the benefit of utilizing waste heat from the convection section without causing fouling and coking in the initial heat exchangers.
With respect to claims 12 and 19, Sundaram teaches wherein the excess heat of the convection section may be used to heat boiler feed water, air, or steam. Par. [0030]. In the combined process, it would have been with in the skill of one in the art to utilize heat from convection through a heat transfer fluid exchanger to heat any of the disclosed streams to do no more than combine known heat exchange means to heat a fluid.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaram (US 2016/0097002) in view of Kuan (WO 2021242464) and Ristic (US 2024/0191144) as applied to claims 1-6 and 8-12, further in view of
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundaram (US 2016/0097002) in view of Ristic (US 2024/0191144), as applied to claims 13-16 and 18-19, further in view of Oprins (WO 2023274970).
With respect to claims 7 and 17, the art cited above teaches the claimed process, but fails to disclose electrically heating heat transfer fluid within one or both of the loops for heating liquid hydrocarbon streams prior to entering the vapor-liquid separation device, i.e. the third and the fourth circulation loops of claim 6 or first and second of claim 17.
Oprins, directed to heating in steam cracking, teaches a method for cracking hydrocarbon feed streams using a pre-heating with an electrically-powered heater with steam heater or with heat transfer fluid, upstream of a flash device, to heat and separate the vapor and liquid components of the crude oil prior to steam cracking the vapor fraction. Abstract. Electric heating provides an improvement in terms of controlling the heat in the convection section with a desired level of accuracy, improved tailoring of heating conditions, and improved environmental considerations. Par. [0008]; see also, par. [0003]-[0005].
Therefore, before the filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the heating to include electric heating in Sundaram in view of Ristic because each are directed to heating liquid portion of hydrocarbon, flashing, and steam cracking the vapor, and because Oprins teaches use of electric heating with a heat transfer fluid can improve accuracy, tailored conditions, and environmental considerations.
Additional Art of Record
US 4,479,869 teaches a flexible feed pyrolysis process, wherein the feed is heated in heat exchangers outside of the convection section to allow for flexibility in feed service.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brandi Doyle whose telephone number is (571)270-1141. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 3:00 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.
/BRANDI M DOYLE/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights