DETAILED ACTION
This is the initial Office action for application SN 18/851,833 having an effective date of 27 September 2024 and a Foreign Priority date of 28 March 2022. A preliminary amendment was filed on 27 September 2024. Claims 1-19 are pending. 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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dvorak et al (“Commercial scale mixed plastics recycling – Final Report).
Dvorak et al [“Dvorak”] disclose a method for producing a hydrocarbon product from mixed polymer waste, preferably plastic waste and/or post-consumer plastic waste, wherein said mixed polymer waste comprises 50-99.5 wt.% polyolefins and 0.5-50 wt.% compounds comprising heteroatoms, based on the total weight of the mixed polymer waste (page 77, section 13.2.5; page 81 section 13.3).
The method comprises (i) feeding said mixed polymer waste into a single screw extruder; where the material was then melted, de-gassed and melt filtered through a fine mesh prior to extrusion through a die to pellet form (Section 13.2.5); (ii) adding chemicals to said mixed polymer waste to degrade said polymers comprising heteroatoms, such as the colored HDPE bales to which cold water wash with caustic (approx. 1% NaOH) is added (Section 13.3) and the mixture of waste plastics having high levels of HDPE and PET (Section 7.3) or PET/PP/PE (Section 13.1-1); (iii) removing degradation products derived from said compounds comprising heteroatoms from said hydrocarbon product; and (iv) collecting the hydrocarbon product, as set forth above with the de-gassing and melt filtering for the PP feed.
Thus, the examiner is of the position that Dvorak discloses both the method of independent claim 1 and the system of independent claim 17 and 19. Further, Dvorak discloses (page 11, paragraph 13.2.5; page 81, paragraph 13.3; page 73-page75, paragraph 13.1; page 45-paragraph 7.1) all the ranges of compounds as according to the depending claims as well as the subsequent step of pyrolyzing the pretreated polymer waste and the temperature for heating in the extruder (Section 16.5 and 16.7.2). Also, the removal of the heteroatoms in the gas and solids as well as the mixing is disclosed. Consequently, the examiner is of the position that none of the dependent claims have allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLEN M MCAVOY whose telephone number is (571)272-1451. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am - 7:00 pm EST.
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.
/ELLEN M MCAVOY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
EMcAvoy
June 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights