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 .
The amendment dated 02/03/2026 has been considered and entered. The amendment cancels the previous claims 6 – 12 which overcomes the previous rejections over such claims and which are hereby withdrawn. However, the prior art previously applied still applies to the presently added claims.
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 15, 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talukder et al. (WO 2010/005391 A1)
In regards to claim 15, Talukder teaches method for production of biodiesel via enzymatic hydrolysis of oils or fats followed by chemical/enzymatic esterification of free fatty acids produced in the hydrolysis step by reaction of lower alcohol with the fatty acid to produce biodiesel (abstract). The lower alcohols are C1 to C6 alcohols [0022, 0023]. The feedstock are oils and fats from plants and animals and effluents from processing such materials [0027]. The hydrolysis produces free fatty acid, glycerol and water which are refined and separated by distillation to remove water and produce refined glycerol, and the fatty acid is esterified using an acid or enzymatic catalyst, and wherein the esterification reaction produces biodiesel (which can be used or mixed with petroleum diesel) and water [0035].
The feedstock is heated to 20 to 60℃ before hydrolysis and the hydrolyzing enzyme is lipase [0037]. The hydrolysis reaction preferably occurs at 20 to 50℃ at from about 0.5 hours to about 24 hours [0044]. The produced fatty acids are separated from water, and the enzyme catalyst and the free fatty acid are combined with alcohol for esterification reaction [0048]. The esterification reaction occurs at from 40 to 80℃ but which can include an incubation temperature of from 20 to 90℃, and the catalyst is removed after the reaction is complete [0049, 0051]. The alcohol used for esterification can be methanol, ethanol, propanol, butanol etc., and combinations [0050]. The esterification reaction is from 0.2 to about 24 hours [0053].
Thus, Talukder teaches hydrolysis steps a)i), lipase enzymes b)i), removal of fatty acids c), preparation of biodiesel (biofuel) which is separated or mixed with petrol diesel d)i), and recycling of all other unused ingredients for reuse which is obvious according to d)ii) of the claim. For instance, Talukder teaches recycling of rendered oil or fat, water, organic solvent, lipase catalyst, and alcohol and thus makes recycling of any unreacted products such as fatty acids which can be reused in the process obvious [0035].
While Talukder does not particularly discuss the presence of fatty acids after esterification, such unreacted ingredients if present would have to be separated by conventional means such as liquid-liquid extraction.
In regards to claims 17 – 20, Talukder teaches the removal of fatty acids into esterification reactor to be esterified with alcohol at the temperatures of the claim. The process contains fatty acid and alcohol. To the extent that fatty acid is considered oil according to the claim, the fatty acid which is the limiting reagent will have to be provided at equal or lesser amount than the alcohol which would overlap the claimed range. Limitations drawn to the reactor itself, such as number of stages used in the process do not carry patentable weight. Process conditions such as number of stages employed in the reaction process, pressure, temperature and reaction times are parameters that would routinely be optimized by persons of ordinary skill in the art practicing the process. Various reactors are useful including fixed bed, fluidized bed, and stirred tank reactors [0036].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAIWO OLADAPO whose telephone number is (571)270-3723. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5pm.
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.
/TAIWO OLADAPO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771