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 § 102/103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Vilja et al., International Publication No. WO/2021/094655 (hereinafter referred to as Vilja – for citation purposes USPG-PUB No. 2022/0403252 is being used).
Regarding claims 1-4 and 6-13, Vilja discloses a method for combined production of an aviation fuel and a diesel fuel both of biological origin, the method comprising providing feedstock of biological origin containing fatty acids and/or esters of fatty acids, and subjecting the feedstock to hydrotreatment and isomerization to obtain a paraffinic hydrocarbon intermediate, and fractionating said paraffinic hydrocarbon intermediate into at least two fractions; a lighter fraction, and a heavier fraction, wherein yield of the lighter fraction is 20-90 wt% of the total weight of the two fractions, and yield of the heavier fraction is 10-80 wt% of the total weight of the two fractions, and wherein a combined yield of the two fractions is at least 98 wt% of the paraffinic hydrocarbon intermediate of biological origin.
The diesel fuel component of biological origin is provided comprising 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, wherein the diesel fuel components have a T10 distillation point of 293.3°C, a T90 distillation point of 297°C, a cloud point of -36, an aromatics component of less than 1.1 wt%, a density of 787.7 kg/m3, an oxygen content of less than 0.2 wt%, a final boiling point of 314.6°C (as recited in claims 1 and 13 and reads on claims 2-4 and 6-12) (Para. [0013]-[0014], [0043] and [0128]-[0140] and see Tables 4-6).
Regarding claims 14-20, see discussion above.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abdallah et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0187827 (hereinafter referred to as Abdallah) in view of Vilja.
Regarding claims 1-13, Abdallah discloses blending of dewaxed biofuels with mineral-based jet distillate cuts (as recited in claim 13) (see Title) comprising; a mineral-distillate component having an initial boiling point of at least about 100°, a T90 distillation point from about 250°C to about 295°C, a final boiling point from about 275°C to about 300°C, a naphthalene content from about 2.8 vol % to about 3.5 vol % providing a deoxygenated and dewaxed renewable component derived from triglycerides and/or fatty acids and having an isoparaffin to normal paraffin ratio from about 2:1 to about 6:1, an aromatics content less than about 1 vol %, an oxygen content of less than less than 5 wppm, and blending from about 75 vol % to about 97 vol % of the mineral-based distillate components (as recited in claims 1 and 13 and reads on claims 2, 4-6 and 8-12) (see Title and see Claim 1 and Para. [0014], [0023], [0030]-[0031] and [0036]);
with from about 3 vol % to about 25 vol % of the renewable component to form a jet fuel composition (as recited in claim 13) (see Title and see Claim 1).
Abdallah discloses all the limitations discussed above including a T10 distillation temperature, but not within the range recited in claims 1 and 13.
Vilja discloses all the limitations discussed above and would have been obvious to use the diesel fuel component of Vilja in the blended composition of Abdallah as it is a simple substitution of one known element for another in order to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claims 14-20, see discussion above.
Conclusion
9. There were unused X references from the ISR report. The examiner is of the position that the prior art cited adequately reads on the claims as instantly recited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL V VASISTH whose telephone number is (571)270-3716. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-4:30 and 7:00-10:00p.
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 5712726381. 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.
/VISHAL V VASISTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights