DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the claim amendments and arguments filed 27 August 2026. In the response dependent claim 13 was canceled and incorporated into claim 1. Claims 1-12 and 14-32 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 .
In response applicant amended independent claim 1 to include “wherein a cetane number of the blend component is lower than a cetane number of the mineral distillate boiling range fraction”. Applicant argued that the applied prior art reference to Kuronen et al (US 2022/0364004) discloses a cetane number for the composition of 74 to 84, and that middle distillate boiling range fractions typically have substantially lower cetane numbers of about 40 to 55. Applicant argued that the disclosure of Kuronen et al does not teach or suggest the composition as now claimed is deemed to be persuasive. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-32 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuronen et al (US 2022/0364004) is withdrawn.
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 7-8, 10-12, 14, 17-18 and 22-23 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.
Dependent claims 7, 8, 10-12 and 14 refer to “The composition of any of claims 1…” which is indefinite. The claims should be amended to “The composition of claim 1…”.
Dependent claims 22 and 23 refer to “The composition of any of claims 15…” which is indefinite. The claims should be amended to “The composition of claim 15…”.
Dependent claim 7 recites that the blend component of claim 1 “comprises 10 wt% to 50 wt% of C19+ hydrocarbons”, and dependent claim 8 recites that the blend component of claim 1 “contains 5.0 wt% or less C19+ hydrocarbons”. It is not clear how independent claim 1, drawn to a diesel boiling range composition, can contain both 10 wt% to 50 wt% of C19+ hydrocarbons and 5.0 wt% or less C19+ hydrocarbons. Further, the term “hydrocarbons” is not recited in independent claim 1. It is assumed that “hydrocarbons” refer to the isoparaffins and iso-olefins recited in claim 1.
Dependent claim 17 recites that the blend component of claim 15 “comprises 10 wt% to 50 wt% of C19+ hydrocarbons”, and dependent claim 18 recites that the blend component of claim 15 “contains 5.0 wt% or less C19+ hydrocarbons”. It is not clear how independent claim 15, drawn to a diesel boiling range composition, can contain both 10 wt% to 50 wt% of C19+ hydrocarbons and 5.0 wt% or less C19+ hydrocarbons. Further, the term “hydrocarbons” is not recited in independent claim 15. It is assumed that “hydrocarbons” refer to the isoparaffins and iso-olefins recited in claim 15.
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) 1-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VILJA et al (US 2022/0403252).
VILJA et al [“VILJA”] disclose a diesel fuel component produced from feedstock of biological origin and a method for producing the same. VILJA discloses diesel fuel blends containing the diesel fuel component of biological origin, and at least one additional diesel fuel selected from a fossil diesel fuel, a renewable diesel fuel, and/or a biodiesel fuel [0128]-[0130].
VILJA discloses that, in an embodiment of the invention, the diesel fuel component of biological origin may comprise 0-5 wt% of n-paraffins in C16-C20 range, and 90-97 wt% isoparaffins in C16-C20 range, from 21 wt% to 45 wt% of C17 paraffins and from 50 wt% to 75 wt% of C18 paraffins [0106]. VILJA teaches that in one embodiment, the diesel fuel component of biological origin comprises 85-97 wt.% isoparaffins in C17-C20 range, and preferably 88-97 wt% isoparaffins because with increased isoparaffin concentration the fuel cold properties are improved [0108].
VILJA discloses that the “fossil diesel fuel” of the invention is a diesel fuel made from crude oil containing hydrocarbons of the paraffinic, naphthenic, and aromatic classes [0132]. Fossil diesel fuel refers to diesel fuel produced from crude oil, such as crude oil produced in a crude oil refining facility and including straight-run diesel, hydrotreated fluidized catalytic cracker light cycle oil, hydrotreated coker light gasoil, hydrocracked FCC heavy cycle oil, and the like [0132]. VILJA discloses that fossil diesel fuel is typically any fossil diesel fuel fulfilling the requirements of ASTM D 975 or EN 590 or premium diesel grade [0132]. The examiner is of the position that the fossil diesel fuels disclosed in VILJA meet the limitations of the claimed “mineral distillate boiling range fraction” having cetane numbers of up to 100.
VILJA discloses that the diesel fuel blends may contain “renewable diesel fuel”, examples of which are set forth in [0131], and that the diesel fuel blends may contain “biodiesel” fuels, examples of which are set forth in [0133].
Regarding claims 1-12, 14 and 31-32, VILJA discloses in one embodiment the diesel fuel blend comprises from 1 wt.% to 99 wt% of the diesel fuel component of biological origin of the invention, and from 1 to 99 wt% of the fossil diesel fuel [0137]. Claim 1 includes the limitation that a cetane number of the blend component is lower than a cetane number of the mineral distillate boiling range fraction. Although not specifically set forth in VILJA, the prior art discloses that the fossil diesel fuels are typically any fossil diesel fuel fulfilling the requirements of ASTM D 975 or EN 590 or premium diesel grade [0132] which would include diesel fuels having a range of cetane numbers. Aside from demonstrating unexpected results, a prima facie case of obviousness is seen to exist for claim 1 as now amended, which requires that the cetane number of the blend component is lower than a cetane number of the mineral distillate boiling range fraction.
In regard to claim 15-23, VILJA discloses in one embodiment the diesel fuel blend comprises from 1 wt.% to 99 wt% of the diesel fuel component of biological origin of the invention, and from 1 to 99 wt% of the renewable diesel fuel [0139]. The examiner is of the position that a cetane number of 40 or more for the diesel boiling range composition, and a cloud point of -10°C or less for the diesel boiling range composition, is taught by the prior art. VILJA in Example 2, Table 1, sets forth properties for component 5, a diesel fuel component of the invention, wherein a density at 15°C is 787.1 kg/m3, a cetane number of 82.6, a flash point of 136°C, and a cloud point of -33°C, which meets the claim limitations for the claimed blend component.
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In regard to independent claim 24 drawn to “A marine distillate or marine distillate blend component composition”, VILJA discloses a diesel fuel blend comprising from 1 wt.% to 99 wt% of the diesel fuel component of biological origin of the invention, and from 1 to 99 wt% of the fossil diesel fuel [0137], or from 1 to 99 wt% of the renewable diesel fuel [0139]. The examiner is the position that the intended use claim language “marine distillate” or “marine distillate blend” carry no weight in the composition. The composition of claim 24 is not required to be used in a marine environment. Further, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art composition can perform the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Additionally, VILJA in Example 2, Table 1, sets forth properties for component 5, a diesel fuel component of the invention, wherein a density at 15°C is 787.1 kg/m3, a cetane number of 82.6, a flash point of 136°C, and a cloud point of -33°C. VILJA discloses that diesel fuel component 5 exhibits a high flash point which ensures safe product handling, high cetane number and low cloud point ensure excellent combustion properties even at low winter temperatures [0168].
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Slade et al (US 2019/0218466) discloses blended fuel compositions comprising about 5 to about 95 vol.% of synthetic paraffinic diesel fuel having a cetane number of about 70, about 5 to about 95 vol.% of a biodiesel fuel, and about 0 to about 90 vol.% of a petroleum diesel fuel.
Schuetzle et al (US 2015/0021231) disclose blends of synthetic diesel fuel and petroleum diesel fuel with improved performance characteristics such as cetane number, lubricity, sulfur content and oxidative stability.
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
October 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights