Paper No. ____
`Filed: August 23, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`UNITED LABORATORIES INTERNATIONAL, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`REFINED TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`Patent No. 9,017,488
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 9,017,488
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Filed: August 23, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`UNITED LABORATORIES INTERNATIONAL, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`REFINED TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`Patent No. 9,017,488
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 9,017,488
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`I.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES (37 C.F.R. § 42.8)
`
`
`A.
`
`Real Parties-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`
`Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`
`
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3))
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`8
`
`8
`
`8
`
`8
`
`8
`
`8
`
`9
`
`9
`
`9
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4))
`
`
`III. PAYMENT OF FEES (37 C.F.R. §§ 42.15(a) AND 42.103)
`
`IV. GROUNDS FOR STANDING (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`
`V.
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED FOR
`EACH CHALLENGED CLAIM
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VI. SUMMARY OF THE ‘488 PATENT
`
`VII. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`VIII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`
`A.
`
`“Contaminant”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`15
`
`16
`
`16
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`“Process System”
`
`“Carrier Gas”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“Non-Aqueous Solvent”
`
`“Pressure Vessel”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IX. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART
`
`X. DETAILED EXPLANATION OF GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY
`
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`“a reactor circuit used in a refining hydrotreating
`process and associated equipment”
`
`
`
`“volatizing”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“dry gas” and “purchase fuel gas”
`
`“Substantial”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1-6 and 9-13 are obvious under
`35 U.S.C. § 103 over Foutsitzis and Allen
`
`
`1.
`
`Independent Claim 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`18
`
`18
`
`19
`
`19
`
`21
`
`21
`
`21
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`Preamble: “A method for removing a
`contaminant from a process system, comprising
`the steps of:”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Element 1.1: “(i) providing a water-free
`carrier gas source;”
`
`
`
`
`Element 1.2: “(ii) providing a non-aqueous
`solvent source;”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Element 1.3: “(iii) volatizing non-aqueous solvent
`from the non-aqueous solvent source in water-free
`carrier gas from the carrier gas source and delivering
`the carrier gas containing the volatized
`non-aqueous solvent to the process system; and” 24
`
`Element 1.4: “(iv) removing said contaminant
`out of said system, wherein substantial amount
`of said contaminant is dissolved in said solvent in
`a vapor or liquid state as it is being removed
`from said system,”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`26
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`Dependent Claims 2-6 and 9-13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`27
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`Claim 2: “The method of claim 1, wherein
`the process system is selected from the group
`consisting of a reactor, an absorbent chamber
`containing a molecular sieve, and a pressure
`vessel.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 3: “The method of claim 1, wherein
`the process system comprises a reactor circuit
`used in a refining hydrotreating process and
`associated equipment.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`27
`
`29
`
`Claim 4: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`carrier gas is at least one member selected from
`the group consisting of inert gas, purchase fuel gas,
`and hydrogen.”
`
`
`
`
`
`30
`
`Claim 5: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`carrier gas is at least one dry gas with the chemical
`formula CnH2n+2, wherein n is an integer greater than
`0 but less than 6.”
`
`
`
`
`31
`
`Claim 6: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`carrier gas is hydrogen.”
`
`
`
`
`Claim 9: “The method of claim 1, wherein the
`carrier gas containing the volatized solvent is
`circulated through the system using a
`compressor.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 10: “The method of claim 1,
`wherein the temperature of the equipment in the
`system is adjusted to a range between 225 F
`and 400 F prior to introduction of the solvent.”
`
`Claim 11: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`solvent is introduced into the carrier gas by
`connecting the gas and solvent sources.”
`
`
`
`- 4 -
`
`32
`
`32
`
`34
`
`34
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i.
`
`j.
`
`Claim 12: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`solvent is a non-polar organic solvent.”
`
`
`Claim 13: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`solvent is a C1-C50 hydrocarbon.”
`
`
`
`B. Ground 2: Dependent Claims 7-8 and 14-20 are rendered
`obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 by Foutsitzis in view of
`Allen, and further in view of Jansen
`
`
`
`
`
`
`36
`
`36
`
`37
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Claim 7: “The method of claim 6 wherein
`said organic contaminant comprises at least one
`member selected from the group consisting of
`crude oil and its derivatives, hydrocarbons and
`noxious gases.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`38
`
`Claim 8: “The method of claim 6, wherein
`said organic contaminant is a noxious gas, said noxious
`gas being at least one member selected from the group
`consisting of hydrogen sulfide, benzene, carbon
`monoxide, and a light end hydrocarbon, said
`light end hydrocarbon being capable of resulting in
`a positive reading when tested for the Lower Explosive
`Limit (or “LEL”).”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 14: “The method of claim 1 wherein the solvent
`comprises at least one member selected from the
`group consisting of aliphatic, paraffinic, isoparaffinic,
`aromatic, naphthenic, olefinic, diene, terpene,
`polymeric or halogenated hydrocarbon, and wherein
`the solvent is a naturally occurring, synthetic or
`processed organic solvent.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`40
`
`41
`
`Claim 15: “The method of claim 14 wherein the
`solvent is a natural terpene or its hydrogenated
`derivatives.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`42
`
`Claim 16: “The method of claim 1 wherein the
`solvent is a processed solvent selected from the group
`consisting of an aromatic solvent, virgin naphtha,
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`
`
`terpene and hexane.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim 17: “The method of claim 1 wherein the solvent
`comprises one or more organic compounds.”
`
`
`Claim 18 (“The method of claim 1 wherein the
`solvent is delivered to the system in a vapor and
`the volumetric or weight ratio of said solvent
`vapor and the carrier gas is accurately controlled.”),
`Claim 19 (“The method of claim 1 wherein the
`weight ratio between said solvent vapor and said
`carrier gas is in the range of about 0.1 to about 6.”),
`and Claim 20 (“The method of claim 1 wherein the
`weight ratio between said solvent vapor and said
`carrier gas is in the range of about 2 to about 4.”)
`
`
`
`
`XI. CONCLUSION
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`43
`
`44
`
`44
`
`47
`
`49
`
`50
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 9,017,488 to Nath et al., filed on July 16, 2014
`and issued on April 28, 2015 (“the ‘488 patent”)
`Declaration of Benjamin A. Wilhite dated August 21, 2019
`U.S. Patent No. 5,035,792 to Foutsitzis et al., filed on November
`19, 1990 and issued on July 30, 1991 (“Foutsitzis”)
`U.S. Patent No. 4,008,764 to Allen filed on July 11, 1975 and
`issued on February 22, 1977 (“Allen”)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,936,112 to Jansen et al., filed on November 26,
`2002 and issued on August 30, 2005 (“Jansen”)
`Excerpts from the File Wrapper of the ‘488 patent
`Excerpts from McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and
`Technical Terms (1989, 4th ed.)
`Curriculum Vitae of Benjamin A. Wilhite
`U.S. Patent No. 8,480,812 to Nath et al., filed on June 4, 2009 and
`issued on July 9, 2013 (“the ‘812 patent”)
`Excerpts from the File Wrapper of the ‘812 patent
`Declaration of Eric M. Adams
`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`
`1002
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`1007
`
`1008
`1009
`
`1010
`1011
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`United Laboratories International, LLC (“Petitioner”) requests an inter partes
`
`review of U.S. Patent No. 9,017,488 to Nath et al. (“the ‘488 patent,” Ex. 1001) that
`
`issued on April 28, 2015 and is currently assigned to Refined Technologies, Inc.
`
`(“Patent Owner”). This Petition demonstrates that there is a reasonable likelihood
`
`that claims 1-20 of the ‘488 patent are unpatentable over the cited prior art. Claims
`
`1-20 of the ‘488 patent should be found unpatentable and canceled.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES (37 C.F.R. § 42.8)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A. Real Parties-in-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1))
`
`United Laboratories International, LLC is the real party-in-interest.
`
`B. Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2))
`
`There are no judicial or administrative matters that would affect, or be affected
`
`by, a decision in this proceeding.
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3))
`
`C.
`
`Lead counsel is Eric M. Adams, Reg. No. 56,290. Back-up counsel is John J.
`
`
`
`Love, Reg. No. 64,820.
`
`
`
`
`
`D.
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4))
`
`Petitioner consents to electronic service. Email: eadams@tumeyllp.com;
`
`jlove@tumeyllp.com; Post: 5177 Richmond Avenue, Suite 1188, Houston, Texas
`
`77056; Telephone: 713-622-7005; Facsimile: 713-622-0220.
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`III. PAYMENT OF FEES (37 C.F.R. §§ 42.15(a) AND 42.103)
`
`
`
`The required fees are submitted herewith in accordance with 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§ 42.15(a) and 42.103(a).
`
`IV. GROUNDS FOR STANDING (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a), Petitioner certifies that the ‘488 patent is
`
`available for inter partes review (“IPR”) and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped
`
`from requesting IPR challenging the claims of the ‘488 patent on the grounds
`
`identified in this Petition.
`
`V.
`
`
`
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED FOR EACH CHALLENGED
`CLAIM
`
`Petitioner requests review of claims 1-20 of the ‘488 patent under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 311 and AIA § 6. The specific grounds for relief are as follows:
`
`Ground 1 Claims 1-6 and 9-13
`
`Ground 2 Claims 7-8 and 14-20
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 Foutsitzis and Allen
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 Foutsitzis, Allen, and
`
`Jansen
`
`
`VI. SUMMARY OF THE ‘488 PATENT
`
`The ‘488 patent is entitled “Process for Removing Hydrocarbons and Noxious
`
`Gasses from Reactors and Media-Packed Equipment.” Ex. 1001 at Front Cover. The
`
`underlying application, U.S. Patent Application No. 14/333,381 (“the ‘381
`
`application”) was filed on July 16, 2014. Id. It is a continuation of U.S. Application
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`No. 13/936,807, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Application No. 12/478,580,
`
`now U.S. Patent No. 8,480,812 (“the ‘812 Patent”). (See id.).
`
`According to the Background section of the ‘488 patent, refineries and
`
`chemical plants must perform turnarounds on chemical processing units that use
`
`reactors and other vessels containing packed media.1 Ex. 1001 at 1:14-16. A
`
`turnaround allows for the replacement of catalysts or other media that have lost the
`
`ability to perform. Id. at 1:16-18. The ‘488 patent discusses several prior art methods
`
`for preparing reactor circuits for safe work.2
`
`One prior art method described in the ‘488 patent involves a “hot sweep”
`
`where “the heater in the reactor loop is used to raise the hydrogen stream temperature
`
`levels high enough to strip the heavy hydrocarbons from the catalyst as the hydrogen
`
`compressor circulates the gas.” Ex. 1001 at 2:20-25. The “hot sweep” is followed by
`
`replacing the hydrogen “with nitrogen by repetitively depressurizing the system to
`
`the flare system and pressuring it back up with nitrogen (commonly called a ‘huff
`
`
`1 A turnaround in petroleum refining is “the shutdown of a unit after a normal run
`
`for maintenance and repair work, then putting the unit back into operation.” Ex. 1002
`
`at 11, n. 4; see also Ex. 1007 at 1981.
`
`2 According to the ‘488 patent, “[a]ll equipment in the process circuit can be
`
`collectively referred to as the reactor circuit.” Ex. 1001 at 1:67-2:1.
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`and puff’).” Id. at 2:25-28. “Depending on the design of the compressor, nitrogen
`
`availability and other considerations, the operator may use other gases instead of
`
`nitrogen, including purchased fuel gas (ethane and methane).” Id. at 2:34-37.
`
`Another prior art method described in the ‘488 patent is a “wet dump” for
`
`safely removing a contaminated catalyst from a reactor. Ex. 1001 at 2:48-50. “After
`
`the equipment is cooled down, the reactor is filled with water. The catalyst is
`
`subsequently dumped wet, effectively preventing fires and other hazards.” Id. at
`
`2:50-52. Other prior art methods discussed in the ‘488 patent include removing
`
`noxious gases from equipment by purging with an inert gas such as nitrogen as well
`
`as pressuring a system with nitrogen up to a certain pressure and then venting it
`
`down to a low pressure. Id. at 2:64-3:1.
`
`Further, Figure 1 of the ‘488 patent “illustrates the layout of equipment and
`
`the flow of media in a typical cleaning process.” Ex. 1001 at 3:25-26.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[remainder of page intentionally blank]
`
`- 11 -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Figure 1
`
`“As illustrated in FIG. 1, a typical process system includes a feed drum (1), a slow
`
`roll compressor (2), a furnace (3), a reactor (4), heat exchangers (5), a compressor
`
`(6), a separator (7), a low point drain (8), an injection point (9), adjust fin fan
`
`exchanger (10), a sample point (11), and a trim cooler (12).” Ex. 1001 at 7:4-9.
`
`The ‘488 patent issued with one independent claim (claim 1) and nineteen
`
`dependent claims (claims 2-20). Independent claim 1 reads as follows:
`
`1.
`
`A method for removing a contaminant from a process system,
`comprising the steps of:
`(i) providing a water-free carrier gas source;
`(ii) providing a non-aqueous solvent source;
`
`
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`(iii) volatizing non-aqueous solvent from the non-aqueous
`solvent source in water-free carrier gas from the carrier
`gas source and delivering the carrier gas containing the
`volatized non-aqueous solvent to the process system
`and
`(iv) removing said contaminant out of said system, wherein a
`substantial amount of said contaminant is dissolved in
`said solvent in a vapor or liquid state as it is being
`removed from said system.
`VII. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`The field relevant to the invention of the ‘488 patent is “stripping (or
`
`removing) hydrocarbons from porous media using a vapor flow comprised of
`
`volatized solvent(s) and/or carrier gas.” Ex. 2 at ¶ 22. A person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art (“POSA”) in the relevant field as of June 4, 2009 would have “at least a B.S.
`
`in Chemical, Mechanical, or Petroleum Engineering.” Id. at ¶ 23. “Further, a POSA
`
`would have at least 3 to 5 years of experience in one or more of the above industries
`
`via consulting, research, or industrial employment. Strength in one of these areas
`
`can compensate for a weakness in another.” Id.
`
`VIII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`
`In an IPR proceeding, a patent claim is construed using the same claim
`
`construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action,
`
`“including construing the claim in accordance with the ordinary and customary
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`meaning of such claim as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art and the
`
`prosecution history pertaining to the patent.” 37 CFR § 42.100(b).
`
`“Claim construction seeks to ascribe the ‘ordinary and customary meaning’ to
`
`claim terms as a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood them at
`
`the time of invention.” SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 918 F.3d 1368, 1376
`
`(Fed. Cir. 2019) (citing Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312-14 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2005) (en banc)). “[T]he claims themselves provide substantial guidance as to the
`
`meaning of particular claim terms.” Id. (quoting Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1314). “In
`
`addition, ‘the person of ordinary skill in the art is deemed to read the claim term not
`
`only in the context of the particular claim in which the disputed term appears, but in
`
`the context of the entire patent, including the specification.’” Id. (quoting Phillips,
`
`415 F.3d at 1313).
`
`“Because dictionaries, and especially technical dictionaries, endeavor to
`
`collect the accepted meanings of terms used in various fields of science and
`
`technology, those resources have been properly recognized as among the many tools
`
`that can assist the court in determining the meaning of particular terminology to
`
`those of skill in the art of the invention.” Phillips, 415 F.3d at 1318.
`
`
`
`A.
`
`“Contaminant”
`
`Independent claim 1, as well as dependent claims 7 and 8, of the ‘488 patent
`
`contain the limitation “contaminant.” Ex. 1001 at cols. 9-10. The term
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`
`“contaminant” means “a foreign or unwanted material.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 29. This
`
`construction of “contaminant” is supported by the specification and claim language
`
`of the ‘488 patent, as well as technical dictionary evidence. Ex. 1001 at 4:17-21; Ex.
`
`1007 at 420 (“a foreign or unwanted material”); Ex. 1002 at ¶ 29.
`
`
`
`B.
`
`“Process System”
`
`Independent claim 1, as well as dependent claims 2, 3, 9, 10, and 18, of the
`
`‘488 patent contain the limitation “process system.” Ex. 1001 at cols. 9-10. The term
`
`“process system” means “equipment used in a series of continuous or regularly
`
`occurring actions taking place in a predetermined or planned manner, such as in oil
`
`refining or chemical manufacturing, including, but not limited to, various devices,
`
`vessels, containers, towers, and machines.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 30. This construction of
`
`“process system” is supported by the specification and claim language of the ‘488
`
`patent, as well as technical dictionary evidence. Ex. 1001 at 3:64-4:6 (“The process
`
`system to be cleaned may be a…”), 5:25-40, and 7:4-9 (“a typical process system
`
`includes…”); Ex. 1007 at 1498; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 30.
`
`
`
`C.
`
`“Carrier Gas”
`
`Independent claim 1, as well as dependent claims 4-6, 9, 11, and 18-20, of the
`
`‘488 patent contain the limitation “carrier gas.” Ex. 1001 at cols. 9-10. The term
`
`“carrier gas” means “a gas employed to deliver a solvent including, but not limited
`
`to, one or more of the following: hydrogen, nitrogen, other inert gases, dry gases,
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`and hydrocarbons.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 31. This construction of “carrier gas” is supported
`
`by the specification and claim language of the ‘488 patent. Ex. 1001 at 3:52-53
`
`(“carrier gas such as nitrogen, purchased fuel gas, etc.”), 4:7-16 (“The carrier gas
`
`may be nitrogen or other inert gases. Alternatively, the carrier gas may be a dry
`
`gas…”); see also id. at 4:44-47; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 31.
`
`
`
`D.
`
`“Non-Aqueous Solvent”
`
`Independent claim 1, as well as dependent claims 10-20, of the ‘488 patent
`
`contain the limitation “non-aqueous solvent.” Ex. 1001 at cols. 9-10. The term “non-
`
`aqueous solvent” means “a substance, or combination of substances, which contains
`
`no water, capable of dissolving or dispersing one or more other substances.” Ex.
`
`1002 at ¶ 32. This construction of “non-aqueous solvent” is supported by the
`
`specification and claim language of the ‘488 patent, as well as technical dictionary
`
`evidence. Ex. 1001 at 5:59-6:3 (“Solvent systems containing multiple compounds as
`
`solvents may also be used.”); see also id. at 5:41-58; Ex. 1007 at 1280 (defining
`
`“nonaqueous”) and 1771 (defining “solvent”); Ex. 1002 at ¶ 32.
`
`E.
`
`“Pressure Vessel”
`
`Dependent claim 2 of the ‘488 patent contains the limitation “pressure vessel.”
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001 at col. 9. The term “pressure vessel” means “a metal container capable of
`
`withstanding bursting pressures.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 33. This construction of “pressure
`
`vessel” is supported by the specification and claim language of the ‘488 patent, as
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`well as technical dictionary evidence. Ex. 1001 at 1:62-66 (“a typical hydrotreating
`
`process unit in a petroleum refinery has a reactor containing a metal catalyst, a
`
`hydrogen compressor, shell and tube heat exchangers, piping and other
`
`miscellaneous pressure vessels.”) and 5:34-37 (“a media packed pressure vessel
`
`containing internal processing equipment or material, including but not limited to
`
`catalyst, support material, molecular sieve or desiccant.”); Ex. 1007 at 1489
`
`(defining “pressure vessel”); Ex. 1002 at ¶ 33.
`
`F.
`
`“a reactor circuit used in a refining hydrotreating process and
`associated equipment”
`
`Dependent claim 3 of the ‘488 patent contains the limitation “a reactor circuit
`
`
`
`used in a refining hydrotreating process and associated equipment.” Ex. 1001 at col.
`
`9. The phrase “a reactor circuit used in a refining hydrotreating process and
`
`associated equipment” means “equipment including, but not limited to, one or more
`
`of the following: a reactor, a catalyst, a compressor, heat exchangers, a heater, and
`
`piping.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 34. This construction is supported by the specification and
`
`claim language of the ‘488 patent. Ex. 1001 at 1:60-2:1 (“a typical hydrotreating
`
`process unit in a petroleum refinery has a reactor containing a metal catalyst, a
`
`hydrogen compressor, shell and tube heat exchangers, a heater, air cooled fin tube
`
`exchangers, piping and other miscellaneous pressure vessels. All equipment in the
`
`process circuit can be collectively referred to as the reactor circuit.”); see also id. at
`
`5:37-40; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 34.
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`G.
`
`“volatizing”
`
`Independent claim 1, as well as dependent claims 9, of the ‘488 patent contain
`
`the limitation “volatizing” or “volatized.” Ex. 1001 at cols. 9-10. The term
`
`“volatizing” means “converting a chemical substance from a liquid or solid state to
`
`a gaseous or vapor state by the application of heat, by reducing pressure, or by a
`
`combination of these processes. Also known as vaporizing.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 36. This
`
`construction of “volatizing” is supported by the specification and claim language of
`
`the ‘488 patent, as well as an objective dictionary source. Ex. 1001 at 3:34-38; Ex.
`
`1007 at 2037 (“the conversion of a chemical substance from a liquid or solid state to
`
`a gaseous or vapor state by the application of heat, by reducing pressure, or by a
`
`combination of these processes. Also known as vaporization.”); Ex. 1002 at ¶ 36.
`
`H.
`
`“dry gas” and “purchase fuel gas”
`
`Dependent claim 4 of the ‘488 patent contains the limitation “purchase fuel
`
`gas,” and dependent claim 5 contains the limitation “dry gas.” Ex. 1001 at col. 10.
`
`The term “purchase fuel gas” means “a refinery fuel gas such as ethane or methane.”
`
`Ex. 1002 at ¶ 37. Further, the term “dry gas” is “a gas produced or used in a
`
`petroleum processing facility.” Id. These constructions of “purchase fuel gas” and
`
`“dry gas” are supported by the specification and claim language of the ‘488 patent,
`
`as well as objective dictionary sources. Ex. 1001 at 4:7-13 (“the carrier gas may be
`
`a dry gas produced or used in a petroleum processing facility which has the chemical
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`
`
`formula CnH2n+2, where n is an integer greater than 0 but less than 6. Examples of
`
`such dry gas include ethane and methane (commonly referred to as “purchased fuel
`
`gas” or refinery fuel gas)”); Ex. 1007 at 585 (defining “dry gas”) and 771 (defining
`
`“fuel gas”); Ex. 1002 at ¶ 37.
`
`I.
`
`“Substantial”
`
`
`
`Independent claim 1 of the ‘488 patent contains the limitations “substantial.”
`
`Ex. 1001 at col. 9. The term “substantial” in the context of the ‘488 patent means “at
`
`least 50%.” Ex. 1002 at ¶ 35. This construction of “substantial” is supported by the
`
`specification of the ‘488 patent, which includes the following: “For purpose of this
`
`disclosure, the term ‘substantial’ means at least 50%.” Ex. 1001 at 3:63-64; Ex. 1002
`
`at ¶ 35.
`
`IX. OVERVIEW OF THE PRIOR ART
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,035,792 issued on July 30, 1991 to Foutsitzis et al. and is
`
`assigned on its face to UOP (“Foutsitzis”). Ex. 1003 at Front Cover. Foutsitzis
`
`qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a). Ex. 1002 at ¶ 38. It is directed to
`
`utilization of a hydrocarbon solvent to purge contaminants from a conversion
`
`system. Ex. 1003 at Abstract; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 38. Because Foutsitzis is directed to
`
`removal of contaminants from porous media in the form of a packed-bed of catalyst
`
`particles using a hydrocarbon solvent, this reference relates to the field of patentee’s
`
`endeavor and logically would have commended itself to an inventor’s attention in
`
`
`
`- 19 -
`
`
`
`considering the problems elucidated in the ‘488 patent. Ex. 1002 at ¶ 38; see also In
`
`re Bigio, 381 F.3d 1320, 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,008,764 issued on February 22, 1977 to Allen and is
`
`assigned on its face to Texaco, Inc. (“Allen”). Ex. 1004 at Front Cover. Allen
`
`qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a). Ex. 1002 at ¶ 39. It is directed to a
`
`method of recovering viscous petroleum using a carrier gas vaporized solvent
`
`flooding method. Ex. 1004 at 1:9-14. Because Allen is directed to the removal of
`
`hydrocarbons from porous media in the form of petroleum-containing formations
`
`using a vapor flow comprised of carrier gas and vaporized solvent, this reference
`
`relates to the field of patentee’s endeavor and logically would have commended
`
`itself to an inventor’s attention in considering the problems elucidated in the ‘488
`
`patent.3 Ex. 1002 at ¶ 39; see also In re Bigio, 381 F.3d at 1320.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,936,112 issued on August 30, 2005 to Jansen et al. and is
`
`assigned on its face to Refined Technologies, Inc. (“Jansen”). Ex. 1005 at Front
`
`Cover. Jansen qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a). Ex. 1002 at ¶ 40. It is
`
`
`3 Even assuming for argument’s sake that Allen is not within the same field of
`
`endeavor as the ‘488 patent, Allen is at least reasonably pertinent to the problem
`
`addressed in the ‘488 patent. Ex. 1002 at 26, n. 6; see also In re Bigio, 381 F.3d at
`
`1325.
`
`
`
`- 20 -
`
`
`
`directed to a process for cleaning the metal surfaces of organically contaminated heat
`
`transfer equipment in the petroleum and petrochemical industries. Ex. 1005 at 1:14-
`
`16); Ex. 1002 at ¶ 40. Because Jansen is directed to the removal of contaminants
`
`from the internal surfaces of a process system using a vapor flow comprised of steam
`
`and organic solvents, this reference relates to the field of patentee’s endeavor and
`
`logically would have commended itself to an inventor’s attention in considering the
`
`problems elucidated in the ‘488 patent. In re Bigio, 381 F.3d at 1320.
`
`X. DETAILED EXPLANATION OF GROUNDS FOR UNPATENTABILITY
`
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1-6 and 9-13 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`over Foutsitzis and Allen.
`
`The following discussion illustrates that each and every element of claims 1-
`
`
`
`6 and 9-13 of the ‘488 patent would have been obvious in view of Foutsitzis and
`
`Allen. The particular citations listed are intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive.
`
`A discussion of the rationale to combine is included at the end of the claim 1
`
`1.
`
`Independent Claim 1
`
`a.
`
`Preamble: “A method for removing a contaminant
`from a process system, comprising the steps of:”
`
`discussion.
`
`
`
`
`Assuming that the claim 1 preamble is limiting, this language is disclosed by
`
`the combination of Foutsitzis and Allen. Foutsitzis discloses the following:
`
`
`
`- 21 -
`
`
`
`A hydrocarbon solvent is utilized to purge contaminants, such as
`sulfur, from a conversion process. Complementary contaminant-
`removal steps may include oxidation, reduction, and contaminant
`removal with a sacrificial particulate bed.
`
`
`Ex. 1003 at Abstract. Foutsitzis also includes the following excerpt:
`
`The conversion system of the present invention is an integrated
`processing unit which includes equipment, catalyst, sorbents and
`chemicals used in the processing of a hereinafter-defined
`hydrocarbon feedstock.
`Id. at 3:26-29; see also id. at 3:34-35 (“Preferably, the conversion system is a
`
`catalytic-reforming system.”). Thus, Foutsitzis discloses a method for removing a
`
`contaminant from a process system. Ex. 1002 at ¶¶ 42-43.
`
`b.
`
`Element 1.1: “(i) providing a water-free carrier gas
`source;”
`
`The combination of Foutsitzis and Allen discloses element 1.1. Foutsitzis
`
`
`
`discloses the following:
`
`In an alternative embodiment, inert gases are circulated along with
`the solvent to improve contact between solvent and equipment.
`The gases are inert to reaction with the solvent or contaminant,
`nitrogen and hydrogen being preferred gases and nitrogen being
`especially preferred.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 22 -
`
`
`
`Ex. 1003 at 4:63-68. Inert gases do not react with other elements, and therefore, they
`
`are generally required to be free of water. Ex. 1002 at ¶ 44. Thus, Foutsitzis discloses
`
`providing a water-free carrier gas source. Id. at ¶ 45.
`
`c.
`
`Element 1.2: “(ii) providing a non-aqueous solvent
`source;”
`
`
`The combination of Foutsitzis and Allen discloses element 1.2. Foutsitzis
`
`discloses the following:
`
`The solvent used for contaminant purging in the present invention
`comprises, and preferably consists of, hydrocarbons. Non-
`hydrocarbon solvents are not recommended, and might in some
`cases have an adverse effect on the catalyst which subsequently is
`loaded into the system. A solvent comprising principally aromatic
`hydrocarbons has been
`found
`to be effective
`in
`the
`decontamination step of the present process. Catalytic reformate
`having an aromatics content over 50 volume % is widely available
`and generally is suitable. An aromatic concentrate which may
`comprise
`toluene, C8 aromatics and/or C9+ aromatics
`is
`particularly effective in the present process.
`
`
`Ex. 1003 at 5:6-18. Hydrocarbons are nonpolar molecules, and one property of
`
`nonpolar molecules is not being soluble in water because they are hydrophobic. Ex.
`
`1002 at ¶ 46. Therefore, a hydrocarbon solvent is a non-aqueous solvent. Id. Thus,
`
`Foutsitzis discloses providing a non-aqueous solvent source. Id. at ¶ 47.
`
`
`
`- 23 -
`
`
`
`d.
`
`Element 1.3: “(iii) volatizing non-aqueous solvent from
`the non-aqueous solvent source in water-free carrier
`gas from the carrier gas source and delivering the
`carrier gas containing the volatized non-aqueous
`solvent to the process system; and”
`
`
`The combination of Foutsitzis and Allen discloses element 1.3. Allen
`
`discloses the following:
`
`The gaseous mixture is formed by contacting a normally liquid
`solvent with a carrier gas such as nitrogen and introducing the
`carrier gas having solvent vaporized therein into the formation.
`
`See Ex. 1004 at Abstract. Allen also includes the following excerpt:
`
`I have discovered, and this constitutes my invention, that viscous
`petroleum including bitumen may be recovered from viscous
`petroleum-containing formations including tar sand deposits by
`injecting into the formation a gaseous mixture of a carrier gas and
`a hydrocarbon solvent which is liquid at reservoir conditions.
`Suitable materials for the solvent include paraffinic hydrocarbons
`having from five to 10 carbon atoms such as pentane, hexane, etc.,
`as well as naphtha, natural gasoline, carbon disulfide, and
`mixtures thereof. Suitable carrier gases include nitrogen, carbon
`dioxide, methane, ethane, propane, butane, hydrogen, anhydrous
`ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, ethylene or propylene. For example,
`nitrogen may be passed through a vaporizer to vaporize pentane,
`and then the gaseous mixture injected into a subsurface tar sand
`deposit.
`
`
`
`
`- 24 -
`
`
`
`Id. at 2:60-3:7; see also id. at 5:54-57 and 5:65-66. Further, Allen states the
`
`following:
`
`The process of my invention comprises a non-aqueous gaseous
`fluid injection operation necessitating at least one well drilled into
`and in fluid communication with the petroleum formation. A
`carrier gas such as nitrogen is brought into contact with and
`vaporizes an effective solvent which is normally liquid at reservoir
`conditions and the gaseous mixture is injected via the injection
`well into the formation.
`
`Id. at 3:33-40. Allen, however, does not disclose delivery to the system, which is
`
`disclosed in Foutsitzis. Ex. 1003 at Abstract; see also id. at 4:47-68; Ex. 1002 at
`
`¶ 48. The inert gas disclosed by Foutsitzis is used to enhance effectiveness of the
`
`solvent, and thus, it is used to deliver the solvent to the system. Id.
`
`Foutsitzis and Allen are similarly directed to the removal of substances using
`
`a solvent with a carrier gas in the petroleum industry. Ex. 1003 at Abstract, 1:11-16,
`
`and 4:47-68; Ex. 1004 at Abstract; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 49. In fact, both disclose
`
`hydrocarbon solvents and similar carrier gases. Ex. 1003 at 3:10-12; Ex. 1004 at
`
`2:66-3:1; Ex. 1002 at ¶ 49.
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
