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 § 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.
Claims 1 and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Youk et al. (KR 20230051053, machine translation referenced herein).
Regarding Claim 1: Youk teaches a method for cleaning a reactor, the method comprising: filling the inside of a reactor by supplying a cleaning solvent from a cleaning solvent supply unit to the reactor through a cleaning solvent supply line (pg. 3, sixth full paragraph);
filling the reactor with the cleaning solvent by passing the cleaning solvent from the cleaning solvent supply unit to the reactor through the cleaning solvent supply line (pg. 3, sixth full paragraph), and
transporting a cleaning solvent stream including polymers to the cleaning solvent supply unit through a cleaning solvent discharge line(pg. 4, sixth full paragraph).
Youk does not expressly disclose heating the cleaning solvent in the reactor, wherein heating the cleaning solvent in the reactor comprises passing a lower discharge stream of the reactor to one or more heating devices and to a side of the reactor. However, Youk teaches that solvent may be heated by a heating device and introduced into the reactor at a side of the reactor (pg. 3, sixth full paragraph, pg. 4, eight full paragraph). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Youk by heating a lower discharge stream of the reactor with the heating device and passing the stream to the side of the reactor in order to contact sidewall with heated solvent as suggested by Youk.
Regarding Claim 7: Youk further teaches preheating the cleaning solvent within the claimed range (pg. 3, final paragraph).
Regarding Claim 8: Youk further teaches circulating the cleaning solvent preheated in the cleaning solvent supply unit through an auxiliary circulation line connecting the cleaning solvent supply line and a cleaning solvent discharge line to each other while heating the cleaning solvent in the reactor (Fig. 4, L10, L11)
Regarding Claim 9: Youk further teaches the cleaning solvent is passed from the cleaning solvent supply unit to one or more of a lower part and a side part of the reactor (pg. 4, eighth full paragraph).
Regarding Claim 10: Youk further teaches an internal temperature of the reactor is within the claimed range (pg. 5, first full paragraph).
Regarding claim 11: Youk further teaches wherein a temperature of the cleaning solvent stream discharged from the upper part of the reactor is within the claimed range (pg. 3, final paragraph).
Regarding Claim 12: Youk further teaches the claimed cleaning solvents(pg. 3, fifth full paragraph).
Regarding Claim 13: Youk teaches a system for cleaning a reactor, the system comprising:
a cleaning solvent supply unit (element 20) configured to receive, store, and preheat a cleaning solvent supplied from the outside and configured to supply the cleaning solvent, wherein the solvent supply unit being connected to one or more of a lower part of the reactor or a side of the reactor through a cleaning solvent supply line (lower element L12), and wherein the cleaning solvent supply unit is configured to recover the cleaning solvent discharged from the reactor, wherein the cleaning solvent supply unit is connected to an upper part of the reactor through a cleaning solvent discharge line (upper element L12);
wherein an auxiliary circulation line connects the discharge line to each other, and the auxiliary circulation line has a first side connected between a valve disposed on the cleaning solvent supply line and the cleaning solvent supply unit, and a second side connected between a valve disposed on the cleaning solvent discharge line and the cleaning solvent supply unit.
Though Youk does not expressly disclose a first heating device configured to heat the cleaning solvent in the reactor using a steam as a heat source. However, steam heat sources are well known in the art and used conventionally to heat solvents. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Youk to provide a heat source which uses steam as is known in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 14-15 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The reviewed prior art does not anticipate or fairly suggest the method or system for cleaning a reactor as set forth in the claims. The closest prior art of record is that of Youk as discussed above. Youk does not, however, disclose or fairly suggest passing a first lower stream to a first heating device and then passing the first lower stream to a first reflux inlet, and passing a second lower stream to a second heating device and then to a second reflux inlet in the manner required by claim 2. Youk does not teach or fairly suggest heating the cleaning solvent in the manner as required by claim 5. Youk does not disclose or fairly suggest the first and second heating devices in the manner as required by claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)270-7382. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM- 5:00 PM EST.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at (571) 272-1344. 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.
/NATASHA N CAMPBELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Prosecution Insights