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 .
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vannauker (US 20190048270).
Vannauker teaches a process for reducing the amount of aromatics in a raw feed stream comprising hydrocarbons at least 10% by weight di-aromatics or poly-aromatics and at least 30% by weight aromatics in total, said process comprising the steps of hydrotreating said raw feed stream in the presence of hydrogen and a material catalytically active in hydrotreatment with a severity resulting in a conversion of sulfur hydro-carbon heteroatoms to hydrogen sulfide of at least 50% providing a pre-treated stream, separating said pre-treated stream at least into a second stage feed stream and a stream rich in hydrogen sulfide, directing said second stage feed stream to contact a material catalytically active in hydrocracking and ring opening, and to contact a material catalytically active in saturation of aromatics, wherein the material catalytically active in hydrocracking and ring opening is positioned upstream, downstream or mixed with said material catalytically active in saturation of aromatics, and withdrawing a dearomatized stream, wherein said the amount of aromatics of said dearomatized stream is less than 95% of the amount of aromatics in said raw feed stream, with the associated benefit of said process of providing efficient dearomatization with low yield loss (see abstract).
The material catalytically active in hydrocracking and ring opening the first material comprises a base metal and is provided in presulfided form and said material catalytically active in saturation of aromatics comprises a noble metal and is provided in prereduced form (see claim 2). A hydrocracking (HDC) process shall in the context of the Vannauker be construed as a process in which hydrocarbons are reacted in the presence of hydrogen to form smaller hydrocarbons. Materials catalytically active in HDC may also catalyze ring opening of aromatics, in which a bond of an aromatic ring is broken without decomposition of the molecule (see para 0009). Vannauker meets the limitations of the claims other than the differences that are set forth below.
Vannauker does not exemplify a process wherein all of the conditions of claim 1 are met. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to practice a process of hydrocracking a feed stream as set forth in claim 1 because Vannauker teaches hydrocracking a feed stream containing aromatic rings wherein the amount of aromatics of the dearomatized stream is less than 95% of the amount of aromatics in the raw feed stream.
Claims 1, 2, 8 and 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Girgis (US 20220306947).
Girgis teaches processes for ring-opening of hydrocarbon species comprising aromatic and cycloparaffinic rings in hydrocarbon feeds to produce ring-opened products. In particular, the process comprises contacting hydrocarbon species comprising aromatic and cycloparaffinic rings with hydrogen in the presence of a ring-opening catalyst comprising a noble metal on a low-acidity crystalline material containing external pockets to facilitate ring-opening of the hydrocarbon species comprising aromatic and cycloparaffinic rings. The processes are useful in the transformation of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) to ring-opened products (see abstract).
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) formed during cracking reactions accumulate in recycle streams of hydrocracking units. These species cause plugging of equipment and poison hydroprocessing catalysts (see para 0003). In hydrocracking processes, it is desirable to open the rings of cycloparaffins to produce n-paraffins and branched paraffins (see para 0006).
Typically, the process is conducted under suitable hydrocracking conditions for the particular catalyst used. In certain embodiments, the process is conducted at a temperature of about 200° C to about 400° C. In certain embodiments, the process is conducted at a pressure in the range of about 1 psig to about 2500 psig. In certain embodiments, the process is conducted at a weight hourly space velocity in the range of about 0.4 to about 2.0 WHSV hr−1 (see para 0059). The process results in greater than about 90% conversion of the cycloparaffins in the hydrocarbon feed (see para 0062).
“Hydrocracking” refers to a process in which hydrogenation and dehydrogenation accompanies the cracking/fragmentation of hydrocarbons, e.g., converting heavier hydrocarbons into lighter hydrocarbons, or converting aromatics and cycloparaffins into non-cyclic paraffins (see para 0024).
The processes of Girgis may be used for reacting a feed comprising hydrocarbon species comprising aromatic and cycloparaffinic rings at conditions of elevated temperatures and pressures in the presence of hydrogen and ring-opening catalyst particles to open the cycloparaffinic rings in the feed, i.e. to convert the cycloparaffinic rings to branched paraffin moieties (see para 0049). Cycloparaffin ring-opening is an important reaction for upgrading petroleum streams. Superior cold flow properties (i.e., low pour point) can be achieved by converting cycloparaffins to branched paraffins. Aromatic ring saturation may also occur during the processes described by Girgis. In certain embodiments, the processes can be used to upgrade components containing aromatic rings to branched paraffins (see para 0050). Girgis meets the limitations of the claims other than the differences that are set forth below.
Girgis does not exemplify a process wherein all of the conditions of claim 1 are met. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to practice a process of hydrocracking a feed stream as set forth in claim 1 because Girgis teaches reacting a feed comprising hydrocarbon species comprising aromatic and cycloparaffinic rings and aromatics at conditions of elevated temperatures and pressures in the presence of hydrogen and ring-opening catalyst particles to open the rings in the feed. With respect to the at least 95 vol % of all rings present in the feed produce aliphatics, it would be reasonable to expect such a percentage because Girgis teaches that the rings of the compounds are opened and that the process results in greater than about 90% conversion of the cycloparaffins in the hydrocarbon feed.
Claims 3-7, 10 and 11 are 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. The prior art does not teach or suggest fractionating the hydrocracked effluent stream to produce an overhead stream and a bottoms stream comprising heavy naphtha and recycling the bottom stream.
Claims 12-20 are allowed. The prior art does not teach or suggest the process of hydrocracking a feed stream, comprising: hydrocracking a feed stream comprising one or more of a naphtha stream , a kerosene stream, a diesel stream, a gas oil stream, deasphalted oil stream, a pyrolysis oil stream, and a pyrolysis gasoline stream, in a hydrocracking reactor over a hydrocracking catalyst in the presence of a hydrocracking hydrogen stream to open at least 95 vol% of all rings present in said feed stream and produce a hydrocracked effluent stream; fractionating said hydrocracked effluent stream to produce an overhead stream and a bottoms stream comprising heavy naphtha; and hydrocracking said bottoms stream. The prior art also does not teach or suggest a process of hydrocracking a feed stream, comprising: hydrocracking a first feed stream comprising one or more of a kerosene stream, a diesel stream, a gas oil stream, a deasphalted oil stream, pyrolysis gasoline stream, and a pyrolysis oil stream and a second feed stream comprising a naphtha stream or a butane stream in a hydrocracking reactor over a hydrocracking catalyst in the presence of a hydrocracking hydrogen stream to produce a hydrocracked effluent stream.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CEPHIA D TOOMER whose telephone number is (571)272-1126. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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 571-272-6368. 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.
/CEPHIA D TOOMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771 19050888/20260820
Prosecution Insights