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 § 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 5, 13 and 17 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.
Claim 5 should depend from either claim 3 or claim 4 to ensure no antecedent basis issue with the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is indefinite because the claim does not specify the composition of the recycled content aromatics stream but the method how said stream is produced. As presently drafted said process steps leading to the recycled content aromatics stream are not part of claim 13 and it is unclear for the skilled person how to differentiate, in terms of composition and properties, a recycled content aromatics stream produced by
said recited process steps i.e. originating from a waste plastic feedstock
(pyrolysis of said waste plastic feedstock followed by FCC treatment of pyrolysis vapors and/or residues which are then further converted in a steam cracker and/or a reformer) from an aromatics stream not produced by the same process steps, e.g. not originating from waste plastic but from crude oil.
Claim 17 is indefinite because claim 17 does not specify the composition or properties of the recycled content paraxylene stream but the method how said stream is produced. As presently drafted said process steps leading to the recycled content paraxylene stream are not part of claim 17 and it is unclear for the skilled person how to differentiate, in terms of composition and properties, a recycled content paraxylene stream produced by said recited process steps i.e. originating from a waste plastic feedstock (pyrolysis of said waste plastic feedstock followed by FCC treatment of pyrolysis vapors and/or residues which are then further converted in a steam cracker and/or a reformer to produce aromatics processed in an aromatics complex to produce paraxylene) from an paraxylene stream not produced by the same process steps, e.g. not originating from waste plastic but from crude oil.
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 1-9 and 11-12 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 Ramamurthy et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0017773 (hereinafter referred to as Ramamurthy).
Regarding claims 1-9 and 11-12, Ramamurthy discloses a chemical recycling process (see Figure 1) comprising; (a) pyrolyzing waste plastic 1 to produce at least a recycled content pyrolysis vapor (r-pyrolysis vapor) stream 12 and at least a recycled content pyrolysis residue (r-pyrolysis residue) stream 13 (Para. [0015]-[0021] and [0030]-[0038]), and (b) catalytically cracking at least a portion of the r-pyrolysis residue stream 13 in an FCC unit 20, or catalytically cracking at least a portion of the r-pyrolysis
vapor stream in an FCC unit, or catalytically cracking at least a portion of the r- pyrolysis vapor stream and at least a portion of the r-pyrolysis residue stream in an FCC unit (Para. [0040]: unit 20 can be a fluid catalytic cracker).
The r-pyrolysis vapor stream and the r-pyrolysis residue stream are combined to form a recycled content combined FCC feed (r-combined FCC feed) stream, when forming the condensed stream 13 leaving the pyrolysis unit 10 (Para. [0030]-[0040]) wherein said r-combined FCC feed is catalytically cracked in unit 20 to produce a recycled content naphtha (r-naphtha) stream 21 (Para. [0039], [0053]-[0055]). A portion of the r-naphtha stream is fed into a reformer unit 40 to thereby providing one or more aromatics streams 41/51/52/63/71 which are processed in aromatics complex 60/70 to produce a stream 71 comprising recycled content paraxylene (r-paraxylene) (Para. [0067]-[0079]).
Ramamurthy further discloses that before entering the reforming unit 40, part of the FCC stream 21a can be separated to produce a stream including C5+ paraffins, iso-paraffins and naphthene i.e. rich in alkanes to be treated in reformer 40 (Para. [0056]-[0057]). Also, that transalkylation and disproportionation of C9, C10 aromatics and toluene into benzene and xylene as well as xylene isomerization are known processes in aromatics complex unit to produce a desired aromatic component (Para. [0071]-[0077]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy in view of Kim et al., US Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0178673 (hereinafter referred to as Kim).
Regarding claims 10 and 13-14, Ramamurthy does not disclose that the paraxylene stream recovered in the aromatics complex comprises at least 85 wt% of paraxylene. The problem to be solved by said difference may be regarded as how to provide a paraxylene stream comprises at least 85 wt% of paraxylene. Ramamurthy discloses that transalkylation and disproportionation of C9 aromatics and toluene into benzene and xylene as well as xylene isomerization increase the yield of paraxylene (Para. [0071] and [0074]).
Kim discloses that in an aromatic complex unit, only paraxylene can be separated from the other xylene isomers (see Figure 2 and Para. [0037]-[0039]). Therefore, the skilled person, when looking for means to increase the para-xylene content in an aromatic complex stream would apply the teaching of Kim, with corresponding results to the stream 63/71 of Ramamurthy thereby arriving at process according to present claims 10 and 13 with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramamurthy in view of Nor Aqilah Mohd Fadzil et al., NPL document entitled A brief review of para-xylene oxidation to terephthalic acid as a model of primary C-H bond activation (hereinafter referred to as Fadzil).
Regarding claims 15-20, Ramamurthy discloses all the limitations discussed above but does not explicitly disclose that the paraxylene stream recovered in the aromatics complex is processed to produce a purified terephthalic acid product.
The difference may be regarded as how to further process the paraxylene from the aromatics complex unit. It is known from Fadzil (see Abstract) to use paraxylene as reactant to produce terephthalic acid. Hence, oxidizing paraxylene to produce terephthalic acids is merely one of several straightforward possibilities from which the skilled person would select, in accordance with circumstances, without the exercise of inventive skill, in order to solve the problem posed with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
There was an unused X/Y reference 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