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
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akah (US 11,760,938 B2) (supplied by the IDS), evidenced by Narayanswamy et al (CN 108504380 A).
With respect to claims 1, 11 and 12, Akah discloses a process and system for producing light olefins and aromatics (circular chemicals) comprising:
“The method may include feeding a plastic feedstock to a dechlorination operation to melt the plastic feedstock to release HCl and generate a liquid plastic stream; feeding the liquid plastic stream to a pyrolysis reactor, the pyrolysis reactor to generate hydrocarbon vapors; feeding the hydrocarbon vapors to an acid gas removal reactor with a solid inorganic alkali salt disposed within the reaction vessel to remove residual HCl and sulfur-containing compounds from the hydrocarbon vapors to generate a plastic derived oil; and feeding the plastic derived oil to a fluid catalytic cracking reactor to generate a product stream comprising light olefins having a carbon number of C2-C4 and aromatics. The associated system for processing mixed plastics into aromatics and light olefins is also described” (Abstract).
Akah also discloses combining a second hydrocarbon feed, which may be a conventional FCC feedstock such as hydrocracker bottoms, virgin or hydrotreated vacuum gas oils, deasphalted oils, coker gas oi, cycle oil, visbreaker oil, atmospheric residue, along with the plastic oil feed (Fig. 2, column 3, lines 1-3; column 11, lines 9-15; claim 8). It is to be noted that a light crude oil comprises all the components mentioned above. Therefore, it is expected that the hydrocarbon feed in Akah process and system can be easily substituted by light crude oil as claimed. This is evidenced by Narayanaswamy et al (CN 108504380 A).
Narayanaswamy et al disclose a similar process and system of converting a mixed feed of plastic oil and hydrocarbon feed in an FCC rector to produce olefins and aromatics (Abstract, Page 3, bottom 4 paragraphs).Narayanaswamy et al also disclose that petroleum feed stocks may include crude oil from normal pressure and vacuum distilling device for vacuum gas oil, atmospheric gas oil and diesel, naphtha or residue or each stream generated by the secondary processing in the refinery (page 4, bottom paragraph to page 5, paragraph 1, page 8, paragraph 3).
With respect to claim 2, Akah discloses, “In one or more embodiments and with reference to FIG. 2, the plastic derived oil 160 is combined with a secondary hydrocarbon stream 260 for delivery into the fluid catalytic cracking reactor 80 as a single combined stream. Specifically, the composition of plastic derived oil 160 in the single combined stream as fed to the fluid catalytic cracking reactor 80 may vary from 0.1 weight percent (wt. %) to 100 wt. % with the remainder comprising the secondary hydrocarbon stream” (column 10, lines 62-67, column 11, lines 1-3).
With respect to claims 3-6, Akah discloses the hydrocarbon feed which appears to be derived from any typical crude oil. It is to be noted that the claimed invention discloses, “Conventional hydrocarbon feeds for catalytic cracking processes include hydrocracked bottoms, and heavy feed fractions such as vacuum gas oils and atmospheric residue; however, these hydrocarbon feeds are limited and are obtained through costly and energy intensive refining steps. Crude oil may also be a potential feedstock, but concentrations of metal, nitrogen, and sulfur in crude oils contribute to deactivation of cracking catalysts” (Specification, paragraph 0002). This indicates that it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use any crude oil including Arab light crude oil with all the specifications as claimed, in place of the hydrocarbon feed disclosed in Akah. The light crude oil feed is expected to give similar performance as other hydrocarbon feeds.
With respect to claim 7, Akah discloses the different kinds of plastics (Table 1) similar to the plastics used by the claimed invention (Specification, paragraph 0047). This indicates that the plastic derived oil stream is expected to have density in a range as claimed.
With respect to claims 8 and 10, Akah discloses that after de-chlorination and acid gas removal, the plastic derived oil comprises less than 3 ppmw chlorine containing compounds (Column 1, 50-65; column 2, lines 25-30; column 3, lines 35-38; column 16, claim 6). This indicates that before de-chlorination, the chloride content must have been more that 3 ppmw, including in a range as claimed.
With respect to claim 9, Akah discloses plastic derived oil composition (Table 2). Table shows naphtha boiling range 25-221oC and heavy distillate with 343+temperature.
With respect to claim 13, Akah discloses that the process uses any conventional FCC cracking catalyst known to those skilled in the art, including the solid cracking catalyst in conjunction with ZSM-5 additive to enhance light olefin yield (column 10, lines 31-36). This indicates any typical FCC catalyst in conjunction with ZSM-5 can be used including USY as claimed. This is also evidenced by Narayanaswamy et al.
Narayanaswamy et al disclose using USY zeolite with ZSM-5 in FCC (page 15, claims 1 and 14).
With respect to claims 14 and 15, Akah discloses FCC reactor temperature 450-700oC, pressure from 1 to 20 kg/cm2, contact time 0.1 sec to 30 sec and catalyst to oil ratio of from 3:1 to about 20:1 (column 10, lines 14-30).
With respect to claim 16, Akah discloses a separation and regeneration vessel to regenerate spent catalyst and recycle the regenerated catalyst back to the reactor along with fresh catalyst (column 9, lines 40-61).
With respect to claim 17, Akah discloses catalytic cracking in a fixed bed reactor (column 12, lines 59-64).
With respect to claim 18, Akah discloses a system for upgrading solid waste plastics and petroleum derived feed into light olefins and fuels, the system comprising (Fig 2, 3):
a plastic derived oil stream 160 derived from solid waste plastic (column 10, lines 62-67); an acid gas removal unit 62, where the acid gas removal unit comprises a reaction vessel and an acid gas removal catalyst disposed within the reaction vessel, to remove halogen compounds and sulfur-containing compounds (column 8, lines 52-67). Akah further discloses a cracking reactor system downstream of the acid gas removal unit and comprising a cracking reactor 80 and a cracking catalyst disposed in the cracking reactor (column 9, lines 17-39). Akah also discloses combining a secondary hydrocarbon stream 260 before entering the FCC reactor (Fig. 2, 3). Akah further discloses production of light olefins and fuels from the FCC (column 10, lines 37-61).
With respect to claims 19 and 20, Akah discloses acid gas removal unit 60 to separate an acid gas from the unit to produce treated plastic oil (Fig. 1, 2, 3; column 8, lines 52-67). Akah also discloses a dichlorination unit 20 melting the plastic feedstock to remove or reduce chlorine content, passing the dechlorinated stream to pyrolysis reactor 50 to produce plastic derived oil stream (Fig. 1,2, 3; column 7, lines 13-28).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Adam et al, WO-2021/204821 A.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PREM C SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-6381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00 AM to 3:00 PM (Eastern).
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, Patricia Mallari can be reached at 571-272-4729. 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.
/PREM C SINGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights