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
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 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.
Claims 1-6 and 8-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nobukawa et al. (US 20170234185 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nobukawa et al. discloses an exhaust gas purification system that includes an internal combustion engine for emitting exhaust gas and a first exhaust gas purification catalyst device (paragraphs 0024 & 25). The first exhaust gas purification device includes a substrate (corresponds to base material); a first catalyst layer formed on the surface of the substrate (corresponds to the second layer); and a second catalyst layer formed on a surface of the first catalyst layer (corresponds to the first layer) (paragraph 0058).
An embodiment of the invention is produced in Example A1 (paragraphs 0151-0163). A second catalyst layer slurry 1 is applied to 22% of the whole length of the substrate from the upstream end (corresponds to upstream side catalyst layer) (paragraph 0155). The slurry contains a Pd nitrate solution and a ceria-zirconia composite powder (paragraphs 0156 & 0157). A second catalyst layer slurry 2 is applied to 80% of the whole length of the substrate from the downstream end (corresponds to downstream side catalyst layer) (paragraph 0159). The slurry contains a Rh nitrate solution and a ceria-zirconia composite powder (paragraph 0160). The amount of ceria in the second catalyst layer from the upstream end is 2.640 g/L and the amount in the downstream end is 4.160 g/L (Table 1), so the downstream end of the second layer has greater ceria quantity than the upstream end in the second layer.
The first layer of example A1 contains a Pt nitrate solution (paragraph 0152) and a barium sulfate powder as a sintering inhibitor (paragraph 0152) which can also act as a NOx storing material.
Regarding claim 2, Nobukawa et al. discloses in Example A1 the amount of ceria in the second catalyst layer from the upstream end is 2.640 g/L and the amount in the downstream end is 4.160 g/L (Table 1). The ratio of downstream/upstream ceria quantity is 1.58.
(4.160 g/L)/(2.640 g/L) = 1.58
Regarding claim 3, Nobukawa et al. discloses barium sulfate as a sintering inhibitor (Table 1, page 10) which can also act as a NOx storing material.
Regarding claim 4, Nobukawa et al. discloses Example A1 which has a total first layer coat quantity of 126.5 g/L. This value was obtained from adding the components of the first catalyst layer in Table 1 (Table 1, pages 9 & 10).
Regarding claim 5, Nobukawa et al. discloses in Example A1 the amount of barium sulfate in the first catalyst layer is 13.500 g/L (Table 1, page 10).
Regarding claim 6, Nobukawa et al. discloses the first catalyst layer slurry is applied to a length of 90% the whole length of the honeycomb substrate from the upstream end (outflow) toward the downstream end (inflow) (paragraph 0154).
Regarding claim 8, Nobukawa et al. discloses barium sulfate as a sintering inhibitor (Table 1, page 10) which can also act as a NOx storing material.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Nobukawa et al. discloses Example A1 which has a total first layer coat quantity of 126.5 g/L. This value was obtained from summing the components of the first catalyst layer in Table 1 (Table 1, pages 9 & 10).
Regarding claims 11-13, Nobukawa et al. discloses in Example A1 the amount of barium sulfate in the first catalyst layer is 13.500 g/L (Table 1, page 10).
Regarding claims 14-17, Nobukawa et al. discloses the first catalyst layer slurry is applied to a length of 90% the whole length of the honeycomb substrate from the upstream end (outflow) toward the downstream end (inflow) (paragraph 0154).
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.
Claims 7 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nobukawa et al. as applied to claims 1-6 and 8-17 above, and further in view of Kato et al. (US 20110041486 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 18-20, Nobukawa et al. discloses the exhaust gas purifying catalyst of claims 1-4 but does not disclose a third layer that is relatively closer to the surface of the base than the second layer.
Kato et al. discloses a catalyst for purifying exhaust gas by providing a honeycomb structure-type catalyst, wherein the surface of the honeycomb-type structure is coated with two or more layers of catalyst compositions, in a flow passage of exhaust gas exhausted from an internal combustion engine (paragraph 0028). An additional coating layer made be provided separately at the lower side of the lower layer (paragraph 0118) totaling 3 catalyst layers. The metal in the additional layer is not disclosed, but Kato et al. discloses the catalyst layer is in a range not to obstruct an action of the present invention (paragraph 0118), so one would have had a reasonable expectation of success to add a catalytic metal such as Pd, Pt, or Rh.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a 3rd layer in Nobukawa et al. because additional catalytic metals can be effective in reducing exhaust gas into non-pollutants.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kabashima (US 20170226905 A1) discloses an NSR (NOx storage reduction) catalyst that supports a NOx storage catalyst layer with a carrier (paragraph 022). The catalyst layer is composed of multiple lower layers with high NOx reducing ability and Rh, Pt, and Pd noble metals (paragraph 0023). Multiple upper layers are formed on the lower layers which contain Pt and Pd (paragraph 0023).
Hoshino et al. (US 20160199815 A1) discloses an exhaust cleaning catalyst in an exhaust path from an internal combustion engine (paragraph 0014). The catalyst comprises a porous substrate and a catalyst coating layer formed on the porous substrate (paragraph 0014). The catalyst coating layer has multiple coating layers that include at least two layers having different compositions with a carrier comprising OSC and a precious metal catalyst (paragraph 0014). The CeO2 content in a top coating layer’s upstream portion is less than the CeO2 content in a top coating layer’s downstream portion (paragraph 0014).
The table below shows more prior art that could be applied to the claims of the present application.
Hirao
US 20230381748 A1
Kabashima
US 10612438 B2
Hoshino
US 20190193057 A1
Satoh
US 20080026932 A1
Miura
WO 2022030240 A1
Aoki
CN 103157516 A
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A CALDERON whose telephone number is (571)272-9866. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 5712721176. 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.
/DAVID ANDREW CALDERON/Examiner, Art Unit 1742 /CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights