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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 17/616,105, filed on 12/02/2021.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 recites “comprisesless” in line 1, which should have a space separating the words “comprises” and “less”. The Office suggests that Applicant change this to “comprises less”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the ratio C/O is at least 2.5” in line 6, which is indefinite because the basis for the ratio is unclear because it could be “weight ratio C/O”, “molar ratio C/O”, “volume ratio C/O”, or any other basis. Based on the specification of the instant application (p. 3, l. 27; p. 5, l. 30; p. 6, l. 2-3; p. 11, Table 2, l. 5; p. 13, Table 4), for further examination of the claims, this limitation is interpreted as “the weight ratio C/O is at least 2.5”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “comprisesless than 0.05% by weight of total Cl, preferably less than 0.03% by weight” in lines 1-2, which is indefinite because the term “preferably” makes it unclear if “less than 0.03% by weight” is required. For further examination of the claims, this limitation is interpreted as “comprises less than 0.05% by weight of total Cl”.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jansen et al. (US 2015/0087031 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 3, Jansen teaches high purity lignin [0285] obtained using a limited-solubility solvent purification method [0286], wherein the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including sulfur in an amount up to 1% weight/weight, chloride in an amount up to 0.1% weight/weight, a formula of CaHbOc, wherein a is 9, b is less than 10, and c is less than 3, an O/C weight ratio of less than 0.4, and at least 97% lignin on a dry matter basis [0287], wherein the lignin is lignin extracted from dried matter that is a lignocellulosic remainder stream dried to lower the moisture content to less than 15% [0086], which reads on a processed lignin, which processed lignin comprises the elements carbon (C), hydrogen (H), and oxygen (O) in the following amounts: carbon in an amount of 66 to 86% by weight, hydrogen in an amount of 0.65 to 7.4%, oxygen in an amount of 12 to 30% by weight, wherein the weight ratio carbon/hydrogen C/H is 11.9 to 107, and the ratio C/O is greater than 2.5, and wherein the processed lignin comprises up to 0.1% by weight of total Cl, wherein it has a sulfur content of up to 10 g/kg, and wherein the moisture content of it is less than 15% by weight.
The carbon amount is based on the calculations 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 9.9 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol) * 100% = 66% and 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 1 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol) * 100% = 86%.
The hydrogen amount is based on the calculations 1.008 g/mol * 9.9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 9.9 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol) * 100% = 7.4% and 1.008 g/mol * 1 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 1 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol) * 100% = 0.65%.
The oxygen amount is based on the calculations 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 1 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol) * 100% = 30% and 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 9.9 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol) * 100% = 12%.
The weight ratio carbon/hydrogen C/H is based on the calculations 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / 1.008 g/mol / 9 mol = 11.9 and 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / 1.008 g/mol / 1 mol = 107.
The ratio C/O is based on the calculation 1 / 0.4 = 2.5.
The sulfur content is based on the calculation 1 g / 100 g * 1000 g / kg = 10 g/kg.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that the processed lignin comprises the element hydrogen (H) in the following amount: hydrogen in an amount of between 3.0 and 6.0% by weight, and does not teach with sufficient specificity that the weight ratio C/H is between 12.5 and 20.0. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to select Jansen’s b in Jansen’s formula of CaHbOc to be between 4.7 and 7.9. The proposed modification would read on wherein the processed lignin comprises the elements carbon (C), hydrogen (H), and oxygen (O) in the following amounts: carbon in an amount of between 67 and 84% by weight, hydrogen in an amount of between 3.0 and 6.0% by weight, oxygen in an amount of between 12 and 29% by weight, wherein the weight ratio carbon/hydrogen C/H is between 13.6 and 22.8 as claimed, which reads on the claimed range with sufficient specificity. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for providing a value of Jansen’s b in Jansen’s formula of CaHbOc that is suitable for Jansen’s high purity lignin and because it would have been obvious to try with a reasonable expectation of success because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including a formula of CaHbOc, wherein a is 9, b is less than 10, and c is less than 3 [0287], and that in some cases, b is less than 9.5, 9.0, 8.5, 8.0, 7.5, or 7.0 [0295], which encompasses between 4.7 and 7.9. Examples of rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include: "Obvious to try" – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143(I)(E)). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
The carbon amount is based on the calculations 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 7.9 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol) * 100% = 67% and 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 4.7 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol) * 100% = 84%.
The hydrogen amount is based on the calculations 1.008 g/mol * 7.9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 709 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol) * 100% = 6.0% and 1.008 g/mol * 4.7 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 4.7 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol) * 100% = 3.0%.
The oxygen amount is based on the calculations 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 4.7 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 2.9 mol) * 100% = 29% and 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol / (12.011 g/mol * 9 mol + 1.008 g/mol * 7.9 mol + 15.999 g/mol * 1 mol) * 100% = 12%.
The weight ratio carbon/hydrogen C/H is based on the calculations 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / 1.008 g/mol / 7.9 mol = 13.6 and 12.011 g/mol * 9 mol / 1.008 g/mol / 4.7 mol = 22.8.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that the processed lignin comprises less than 0.1% by weight of total Cl. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize Jansen’s amount of chloride in Jansen’s high purity lignin to be less than 0.1% weight/weight. The proposed modification would read on the processed lignin comprises less than 0.1% by weight of total Cl as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for optimizing the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including chloride in an amount up to 0.1% weight/weight [0287], that in some embodiments, the high purity lignin has a low content of chloride [0293], and that in some cases, the high purity lignin has chloride in an amount up to 0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 2.0% weight/chloride [0293], which means that Jansen’s amount of chloride in Jansen’s high purity lignin in % weight/weight would have affected the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that it has a sulfur content of below 1 g/kg. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize Jansen’s amount of sulfur in Jansen’s high purity lignin to be below 0.1% weight/weight. The proposed modification would read on it has a sulfur content of below 1 g/kg as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for optimizing the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including sulfur in an amount up to 1% weight/weight [0287], that in some embodiments, the high purity lignin has a low content of sulfur [0293], and that in some cases, the high purity lignin has sulfur in an amount up to 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5.0, 10.0% weight/weight [0293], which means that Jansen’s amount of sulfur in Jansen’s high purity lignin in % weight/weight would have affected the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin.
The sulfur content is based on the calculation 0.1 g / 100 g * 1000 g / kg = 10 g/kg.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that the moisture content of it is less than 3% by weight. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize the moisture content of Jansen’s high purity lignin to be less than 3% by weight. The proposed modification would read on the moisture content of it is less than 3% by weight as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for optimizing the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including at least 97% lignin on a dry matter basis [0287], that the lignin is lignin extracted from dried matter that is a lignocellulosic remainder stream dried to lower the moisture content to less than 15% [0086], that in some embodiments, the high purity lignin has a high purity [0289], and that in some cases, the high purity lignin is more than 80, 85, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 99.5, 99.7, or 99.9% pure [0289], which means that the moisture content of Jansen’s high purity lignin in % by weight would have affected the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin.
Regarding claim 2, Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including chloride in an amount up to 0.1% weight/weight [0287], which reads on wherein the processed lignin comprises less than or equal to 0.1% by weight of total Cl.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that the processed lignin comprises less than 0.05% by weight of total Cl, preferably less than 0.03% by weight. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize Jansen’s amount of chloride in Jansen’s high purity lignin to be less than 0.05% weight/weight. The proposed modification would read on wherein the processed lignin comprises less than 0.05% by weight of total Cl as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for optimizing the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including chloride in an amount up to 0.1% weight/weight [0287], that in some embodiments, the high purity lignin has a low content of chloride [0293], and that in some cases, the high purity lignin has chloride in an amount up to 0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 2.0% weight/chloride [0293], which means that Jansen’s amount of chloride in Jansen’s high purity lignin in % weight/weight would have affected the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin.
Regarding claim 4, Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including an O/C weight ratio of less than 0.4 [0287], which reads on wherein the weight ratio C/O is greater than 2.5.
The weight ratio C/O is based on the calculation 1 / 0.4 = 2.5.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that the weight ratio C/O is between 2.5 and 6.0. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to select Jansen’s O/C weight ratio to be less than 0.4 and greater than 0.17. The proposed modification would read on wherein the weight ratio C/O is between 2.5 and 6.0 as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for providing a value of Jansen’s O/C weight ratio that is suitable for Jansen’s high purity lignin and because it would have been obvious to try with a reasonable expectation of success because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including an O/C weight ratio of less than 0.4 [0287], that in other embodiments, the high purity lignin is characterized by an O/C weight ratio of less than 0.40, 0.39, 0.38, 0.37, 0.36, 0.35, 0.34, 0.33, 0.32, 0.31, 0.30, 0.29, 0.28, 0.27, 0.26, 0.25, 0.24, 0.23, 0.22, 0.21, 0.20, or 0.20-0.22, 0.22-0.24, 0.24-0.26, 0.26-0.28, 0.28-0.30, 0.32-0.34, 0.34-0.36, 0.36-0.38, or 0.38-0.40 [0291, 0295], which encompasses less than 0.4 and greater than 0.17. Examples of rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include: "Obvious to try" – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143(I)(E)). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
The weight ratio C/O is based on the calculations 1 / 0.4 = 2.5 and 1 / 0.17 = 6.0.
Regarding claim 5, Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including sulfur in an amount up to 1% weight/weight [0287], which reads on wherein it has a sulfur content of up to 10,000 mg/kg/
The sulfur content is based on the calculation 1 g / 100 g * 1000 g / kg * 1000 mg / g = 10,000 mg/kg.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that it has a sulfur content of below 400 mg/kg. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize Jansen’s amount of sulfur in Jansen’s high purity lignin to be below 0.05% weight/weight. The proposed modification would read on wherein it has a sulfur content of below 400 mg/kg as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for optimizing the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including sulfur in an amount up to 1% weight/weight [0287], that in some embodiments, the high purity lignin has a low content of sulfur [0293], and that in some cases, the high purity lignin has sulfur in an amount up to 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.5, 2, 2.25, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5.0, 10.0% weight/weight [0293], which means that Jansen’s amount of sulfur in Jansen’s high purity lignin in % weight/weight would have affected the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin.
The sulfur content is based on the calculation 0.05 g / 100 g * 1000 g / kg * 1000 mg / g = 500 mg/kg.
Regarding claim 6, Jansen teaches that the lignin is lignin extracted from dried matter that is a lignocellulosic remainder stream dried to lower the moisture content to less than 15% [0086], which reads on wherein the moisture content of it is less than 15% by weight.
Jansen does not teach with sufficient specificity that the moisture content of it is less than 2% by weight. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to optimize the moisture content of Jansen’s high purity lignin to be less than 2% by weight. The proposed modification would read on wherein the moisture content of it is less than 2% by weight as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it would have been beneficial for optimizing the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin because Jansen teaches that the high purity lignin is characterized by characteristics including at least 97% lignin on a dry matter basis [0287], that the lignin is lignin extracted from dried matter that is a lignocellulosic remainder stream dried to lower the moisture content to less than 15% [0086], that in some embodiments, the high purity lignin has a high purity [0289], and that in some cases, the high purity lignin is more than 80, 85, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 99.5, 99.7, or 99.9% pure [0289], which means that the moisture content of Jansen’s high purity lignin in % by weight would have affected the purity of Jansen’s high purity lignin.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID KARST whose telephone number is (571)270-7732. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-5:00 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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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 T KARST/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767