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
Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 6-22-2026 is acknowledged. Claims 17-33 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-3, 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al (PGPub 2019/0025200) (Yang) in view of Du et al (Du X, Zeisel SH. Spectral deconvolution for gas chromatography mass spectrometry-based metabolomics: current status and future perspectives. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2013 Jun 28;4:e201301013. doi: 10.5936/csbj.201301013. PMID: 24688694; PMCID: PMC3962095) (Du)
Regarding Claim 1, Yang discloses a method comprising:
preparing a slurry catalyst mixture comprising a multi-modal catalyst and a carrier fluid, wherein the multi-modal catalyst comprises a first activated catalyst and a second activated catalyst (Paragraphs 57 & 58);
introducing the slurry catalyst mixture into a sample chamber (140, Fig. 1, Paragraphs 88 & 146. Step i);
illuminating the slurry catalyst mixture in the sample chamber with light generated from a light source (Paragraph 146, Step ii);
capturing a spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture using a detector (step iii, Paragraph 146). Inherently the spectrum is captured by a detector,
wherein the spectrum comprises at least one spectrum selected from the group consisting of UV-Vis spectrum, emission spectrum, and combinations thereof (Paragraphs 86 & 146); and
determining a calculated ratio of an amount of the first activated catalyst and an amount of the second activated catalyst in the multi-modal catalyst from the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture (Paragraphs 53 & 179);
Yang fails to explicitly disclose determining a calculated ratio of an amount of the first activated catalyst and an amount of the second activated catalyst by fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the first activated catalyst and a single component spectrum of the second activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution;
However, Du teaches using a Spectral Deconvolution to extract quantitative information about the sample (Abstract, Page 3, Section: Deconvolution, 1st Paragraph);
Where this is achieved by fitting the spectrum of the sample to a single component spectrum of the first part of the sample and a single component spectrum of the second part of the sample, using spectral deconvolution (Pages 3 & 4, Section: Spectrum Deconvolution by AMDIS);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang with determining a calculation ratio of the first and second catalysts is achieved by fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the first activated catalyst and a single component spectrum of the second activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution because spectral deconvolution is capable of determining single component mass spectra from a spectrum that is taken of a sample with multiple components thus being useful in analyzing the amount of each component in such a sample.
Regarding Claim 2, Yang as modified by Du discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the slurry catalyst mixture further comprises a third activated catalyst and/or a fourth activated catalyst, and wherein the method further comprises fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the third activated catalyst and/or a single component spectrum of the fourth activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution;
However, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the slurry catalyst of Yang in combination with Du to produce the slurry catalyst mixture further comprises a third activated catalyst and/or a fourth activated catalyst, and wherein the method further comprises fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the third activated catalyst and/or a single component spectrum of the fourth activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution because such a process is considered to be a duplication of parts that has no patentable significance unless a new unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.04;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as Modified by Du with wherein the slurry catalyst mixture further comprises a third activated catalyst and/or a fourth activated catalyst, and wherein the method further comprises fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the third activated catalyst and/or a single component spectrum of the fourth activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution because the slurry and method for measuring the amounts would be applicable to any number of catalysts and it would be obvious to try it in cases where the slurry has more than two catalysts.
Regarding Claim 3, Yang as modified by Du discloses the aforementioned. Further, Yang discloses wherein the light source outputs light from 200 - 900 nm and wherein the detector is configured to capture the UV-Vis spectrum (Paragraph 47).
Regarding Claim 6, Yang as modified by Du discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose one or more of subtracting background contribution from the spectrum, subtracting scattering contribution from the spectrum, or normalizing the spectrum, to form a modified spectrum wherein the modified spectrum is used in the spectral deconvolution;
However, the examiner takes official notice that this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du with one or more of subtracting background contribution from the spectrum, subtracting scattering contribution from the spectrum, or normalizing the spectrum, to form a modified spectrum wherein the modified spectrum is used in the spectral deconvolution because these are well-known techniques for improving the signal to noise ratio of a spectral measurement in both absorbance and fluorescence spectroscopy.
Regarding Claim 7, Yang as modified by Du discloses the aforementioned. Further, Yang discloses wherein the slurry catalyst mixture comprises a contact product of a first catalyst, a second catalyst, a support, an activator, and the carrier fluid (Paragraphs 58 & 59),
wherein the support comprises silica (Paragraphs 125 & 126);
wherein the activator comprises an aluminoxane (Paragraph 145);
wherein the first catalyst and the second catalyst each comprise a metallocene or a non- metallocene catalyst (Paragraph 44), and,
wherein the activator activates at least a portion of the first catalyst to produce the first activated catalyst and wherein the activator activates at least a portion of the second catalyst to produce the second activated catalyst (Paragraph 77);
Yang as modified by Du fails to explicitly discloses wherein the carrier fluid comprises mineral oil or mixture of mineral oils;
However, the examiner takes official notice that this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du with wherein the carrier fluid comprises mineral oil or mixture of mineral oils because a mineral oil slurry catalyst mixture combines solid catalytic particles dispersed in a purified mineral oil carrier fluid and this is commonly used for safe transport and direct injection into industrial polymerization or hydroprocessing reactors.
Regarding Claim 8, Yang as modified by Du discloses the aforementioned. Further, Yang discloses wherein the first catalyst comprises a bridged bis- cyclopentadienyl hafnocene (Paragraph 110), and wherein the second catalyst comprises an unbridged indenyl- cyclopentadienyl zirconocene (Paragraph 106).
Claim(s) 9-11, 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Du and further in view of Marrow et al (US PAT 7,505,129) (Marrow).
Regarding Claim 9, Yang discloses a method comprising:
preparing a slurry catalyst mixture comprising a multi-modal catalyst and a carrier fluid, wherein the multi-modal catalyst comprises a first activated catalyst and a second activated catalyst (Paragraphs 57 & 58);
continuously feeding the slurry catalyst mixture into the sample chamber (140, Fig. 1, Paragraphs 88 & 146. Step i);
illuminating the slurry catalyst mixture in the sample chamber with light generated from the light source (Paragraph 146, Step ii), while continuously feeding the slurry catalyst mixture into the sample chamber;
capturing a spectrum of the continuously fed slurry catalyst mixture using a detector (step iii, Paragraph 146). Inherently the spectrum is captured by a detector,
wherein the spectrum comprises at least one spectrum selected from the group consisting of UV-Vis spectrum, emission spectrum, and combinations thereof (Paragraphs 86 & 146); and
determining a calculated ratio of an amount of the first activated catalyst and an amount of the second activated catalyst in the multi-modal catalyst from the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture (Paragraphs 53 & 179);
Yang fails to explicitly disclose determining a calculated ratio of an amount of the first activated catalyst and an amount of the second activated catalyst by fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the first activated catalyst and a single component spectrum of the second activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution; and providing an optical probe, the optical probe comprising a light source, a detector, and an optic fiber, wherein the optic fiber is configured to transmit light emitted from the light source to a sample chamber and wherein the optic fiber is further configured to transmit light from the sample chamber to the detector;
However, Du teaches using a Spectral Deconvolution to extract quantitative information about the sample (Abstract, Page 3, Section: Deconvolution, 1st Paragraph);
Where this is achieved by fitting the spectrum of the sample to a single component spectrum of the first part of the sample and a single component spectrum of the second part of the sample, using spectral deconvolution (Pages 3 & 4, Section: Spectrum Deconvolution by AMDIS);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang with determining a calculation ratio of the first and second catalysts is achieved by fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the first activated catalyst and a single component spectrum of the second activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution because spectral deconvolution is capable of determining single component mass spectra from a spectrum that is taken of a sample with multiple components thus being useful in analyzing the amount of each component in such a sample;
Yang as modified by Du still fails to explicitly disclose providing an optical probe, the optical probe comprising a light source, a detector, and an optic fiber, wherein the optic fiber is configured to transmit light emitted from the light source to a sample chamber and wherein the optic fiber is further configured to transmit light from the sample chamber to the detector;
However, Marrow discloses a method and system for on-line analysis system (figs. 1 & 2), comprising:
providing an optical probe (Fig. 2), the optical probe comprising a light source (fig. 1, 12), a detector (16), and an optic fiber (Fig. 2, 206, 208, 210), wherein the optic fiber is configured to transmit light emitted from the light source to a sample chamber and wherein the optic fiber is further configured to transmit light from the sample chamber to the detector (Column 10, lines 19-39);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du with providing an optical probe, the optical probe comprising a light source, a detector, and an optic fiber, wherein the optic fiber is configured to transmit light emitted from the light source to a sample chamber and wherein the optic fiber is further configured to transmit light from the sample chamber to the detector because this is a common design that is used with a fiber which allows for flexible maneuverability for positioning of the probe in in-situ situations.
Regarding Claim 10, Yang as modified by Du and Marrow discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the slurry catalyst mixture further comprises a third activated catalyst and/or a fourth activated catalyst, and wherein the method further comprises fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the third activated catalyst and/or a single component spectrum of the fourth activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution;
However, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the slurry catalyst of Yang in combination with Du to produce the slurry catalyst mixture further comprises a third activated catalyst and/or a fourth activated catalyst, and wherein the method further comprises fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the third activated catalyst and/or a single component spectrum of the fourth activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution because such a process is considered to be a duplication of parts that has no patentable significance unless a new unexpected result is produced. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), MPEP 2144.04;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as Modified by Du and Marrow with wherein the slurry catalyst mixture further comprises a third activated catalyst and/or a fourth activated catalyst, and wherein the method further comprises fitting the spectrum of the slurry catalyst mixture to a single component spectrum of the third activated catalyst and/or a single component spectrum of the fourth activated catalyst, using spectral deconvolution because the slurry and method for measuring the amounts would be applicable to any number of catalysts and it would be obvious to try it in cases where the slurry has more than two catalysts.
Regarding Claim 11, Yang as modified by Du and Marrow discloses the aforementioned. Further, Yang discloses wherein the light source outputs light from 200 - 900 nm and wherein the detector is configured to capture the UV-Vis spectrum (Paragraph 47).
Regarding Claim 14, Yang as modified by Du and Marrow discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose one or more of subtracting background contribution from the spectrum, subtracting scattering contribution from the spectrum, or normalizing the spectrum, to form a modified spectrum wherein the modified spectrum is used in the spectral deconvolution;
However, the examiner takes official notice that this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du and Marrow with one or more of subtracting background contribution from the spectrum, subtracting scattering contribution from the spectrum, or normalizing the spectrum, to form a modified spectrum wherein the modified spectrum is used in the spectral deconvolution because these are well-known techniques for improving the signal to noise ratio of a spectral measurement in both absorbance and fluorescence spectroscopy.
Regarding Claim 15, Yang as modified by Du and Marrow discloses the aforementioned. Further, Yang discloses wherein the slurry catalyst mixture comprises a contact product of a first catalyst, a second catalyst, a support, an activator, and the carrier fluid (Paragraphs 58 & 59),
wherein the support comprises silica (Paragraphs 125 & 126);
wherein the activator comprises an aluminoxane (Paragraph 145);
wherein the first catalyst and the second catalyst each comprise a metallocene or a non- metallocene catalyst (Paragraph 44), and,
wherein the activator activates at least a portion of the first catalyst to produce the first activated catalyst and wherein the activator activates at least a portion of the second catalyst to produce the second activated catalyst (Paragraph 77);
Yang as modified by Du fails to explicitly discloses wherein the carrier fluid comprises mineral oil or mixture of mineral oils;
However, the examiner takes official notice that this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du and Marrow with wherein the carrier fluid comprises mineral oil or mixture of mineral oils because a mineral oil slurry catalyst mixture combines solid catalytic particles dispersed in a purified mineral oil carrier fluid and this is commonly used for safe transport and direct injection into industrial polymerization or hydroprocessing reactors.
Regarding Claim 16, Yang as modified by Du and Marrow discloses the aforementioned. Further, Yang discloses wherein the first catalyst comprises a bridged bis- cyclopentadienyl hafnocene (Paragraph 110), and wherein the second catalyst comprises an unbridged indenyl- cyclopentadienyl zirconocene (Paragraph 106).
Claim(s) 4 & 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Du and further in view of Kitamori et al (US PAT 4,808,828) (Kitamori).
Regarding Claims 4 & 5, Yang as modified by Du discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises a laser and the detector is configured to capture the emission spectrum; and wherein the light source comprises a pulsed light source or intensity modulated light source and wherein the spectrum comprises a time-resolved response of fluorescence and/or phosphorescence lifetimes of the catalyst slurry mixture;
However, Kitamori discloses a method and apparatus for simultaneous determination (Fig. 6), comprising:
wherein the light source comprises a pulsed light source (37) or intensity modulated light source and wherein the spectrum comprises a time-resolved response of fluorescence and/or phosphorescence lifetimes of the catalyst slurry mixture (Columns 6 & 7, lines 62-68 & 1-14);
the detector (42) is configured to capture the emission spectrum (Column 7, lines 14-18);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du with wherein the light source comprises a laser and the detector is configured to capture the emission spectrum; and wherein the light source comprises a pulsed light source or intensity modulated light source and wherein the spectrum comprises a time-resolved response of fluorescence and/or phosphorescence lifetimes of the catalyst slurry mixture because this is a functionally equivalent method for determining the constituents of a sample through spectral analysis and would be chosen based upon availability and cost.
Claim(s) 12 & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Du and Marrow and further in view of Kitamori et al (US PAT 4,808,828) (Kitamori).
Regarding Claims 12 & 13, Yang as modified by Du and Marrow discloses the aforementioned but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises a laser and the detector is configured to capture the emission spectrum; and wherein the light source comprises a pulsed light source or intensity modulated light source and wherein the spectrum comprises a time-resolved response of fluorescence and/or phosphorescence lifetimes of the catalyst slurry mixture;
However, Kitamori discloses a method and apparatus for simultaneous determination (Fig. 6), comprising:
wherein the light source comprises a pulsed light source (37) or intensity modulated light source and wherein the spectrum comprises a time-resolved response of fluorescence and/or phosphorescence lifetimes of the catalyst slurry mixture (Columns 6 & 7, lines 62-68 & 1-14);
the detector (42) is configured to capture the emission spectrum (Column 7, lines 14-18);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Yang as modified by Du and Marrow with wherein the light source comprises a laser and the detector is configured to capture the emission spectrum; and wherein the light source comprises a pulsed light source or intensity modulated light source and wherein the spectrum comprises a time-resolved response of fluorescence and/or phosphorescence lifetimes of the catalyst slurry mixture because this is a functionally equivalent method for determining the constituents of a sample through spectral analysis and would be chosen based upon availability and cost.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHON COOK whose telephone number is (571)270-1323. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-7pm.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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.
/JONATHON COOK/Examiner, Art Unit 2877 August 25, 2026
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights