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 .
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitkidis (US 2020/0002251) in view of Gleich (US 3921411).
With respect to claims 1-3, Mitkidis a process for oxidative dehydrogenation conversion of ethane to ethylene (see Mitkidis, paragraphs [0033] and [0034]), the process comprising: (a) contacting a feed comprising ethane with a catalyst in the presence of oxygen under conditions to produce a first product stream comprising ethane, ethylene, and one or more gases having lower boiling temperature then ethylene, the conditions comprising a pressure of 0.01 MPa to 3 MPa and temperature in the range of 330°C to 420°C (see Mitkidis, paragraphs [0039] and [0040]); (b) feeding the first product stream to an inlet of a gas separation unit (see Mitkidis, paragraphs [0028] to [0031]); and (c) separating the one or more gases having boiling temperature lower than ethylene to produce a second product stream comprising ethane and ethylene (see Mitkidis, paragraph [0031]).
Mitkidis does not explicitly disclose wherein the separation unit operates at a temperature range of -40°C to -10°C.
However, Mitkidis discloses wherein the separation unit may be a C2 splitter (see Mitkidis, paragraph [0086]). In this regard, it is readily known that operating temperatures of C2 splitter separation units such as referenced in Mitkidis fall within a range of 15°F to 40°F (-9.4°C to 4.4°C) in the bottoms and -30°F to -5°F (-34.4°C to -20.6°C) in the overhead (see Gleich, column 4, lines 14-24). Thus, Examiner finds Applicant’s claims 1-3 unpatentable in view of Mitkidis in view of Gleich.
With respect to claims 4 and 5, Mitkidis discloses wherein ethylene and ethane may be separated into separate streams, and wherein the ethane may be recycled to step (a) (see Mitkidis, paragraphs [0031] and [0032]).
With respect to claims 6 and 13, Mitkidis does not subject the first product stream to compression in steps (a), (b), or (c), and does not add methane to the feed of step (a) (see Mitkidis, entire disclosure).
With respect to claim 7, Mitkidis discloses wherein the first product stream may comprise water and acetic acid and wherein such constituents may be removed (see Mitkidis, paragraphs [0028] and [0058]).
With respect to claims 8 and 9, Mitkidis discloses wherein the gas may comprise carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide and wherein such constituents may be removed (see Mitkidis, paragraphs [0028]-[0030]).
With respect to claims 10, 12, 14, and 15, inasmuch as Mitkidis discloses dehydrogenation conditions within the same range as specified in the claims (see discussion supra at paragraph 6), then it follows that the ethane conversion level, molar vapor fraction, gaseous constituents, and combined gas mole fraction of gases would likewise be expected to be within the same range as specified. “[I]n considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom.” In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826, 159 USPQ 342, 344 (CCPA 1968).
With respect to claim 11, Gleich discloses wherein feed to a C2 splitter may be in the liquid phase (see Gleich, column 6, lines 28-33).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Randy Boyer whose telephone number is (571) 272-7113. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 10:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Prem C. Singh, can be reached at (571) 272-6381. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Randy Boyer/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights