Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 15/669,587

RECHARGEABLE COPPER OXIDE ELECTRODES FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL APPLICATIONS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 04, 2017
Examiner
PARK, LISA S
Art Unit
1729
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
551 granted / 716 resolved
+12.0% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
761
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
50.3%
+10.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 716 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE 1. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 3. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 was filed in this application after a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but before the filing of a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or the commencement of a civil action. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the appeal has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114 and prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 2/11/2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment 4. In response to the amendment received on 2/11/2026: Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-13, 15, 17, and 20-24 are pending in the current application. Claims 1, 12, 13, 15, and 17 have been amended; Claims 6, 9, 14, 16, and 18-19 are cancelled; Claim 20 stands withdrawn; and Claims 21-24 are newly added. The previous objection to the claims has been overcome in light of the amendment. The previous prior art-based rejections have been overcome in light of the amendment. Claim Interpretation 5. All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language. Claim Objections 6. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “copper and bismuth metal oxide oxide” but the limitation should read: “copper and bismuth metal oxide. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 7. Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-11, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites “at least one of the positive electrode active material or the negative electrode active material consisting essentially of Co, Cu2O, Ag2Cu2O3, a mixed copper and bismuth metal oxide oxide…” but this invention is not described in the instant disclosure. There is no support for an active material having all of these elements. Similarly, Claim 12 recites “wherein the cathode material is selected” but there is no previous recitation of the term “cathode material” and so this limitation lacks antecedent basis. In the interest of compact prosecution, Claim 1 is interpreted as claiming the listed species as alternatives, e.g. “at least one of the positive electrode active material or the negative electrode active material is selected from the group consisting essentially of Co, Cu2O, Ag2Cu2O3, a mixed copper and bismuth metal oxide…” and the limitation from Claim 12 is interpreted as “wherein the cathode active material is selected…”. Claims 2-5, 7-8, 10-11, and 21-24 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. 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. 8. Claims 1 and 12 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. Claims 1 and 12 recite a Markush-type list of species from which the positive or negative active material is selected, but “a bismuth-based additive that is an independent species from the positive electrode active material or the negative electrode active material” is included in this list of active materials. It is entirely unclear how the invention takes place in light of this claim construction. CClaims 2-5, 7-8, 10-11, and 21-24 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. 9. Claim 8 is 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 8 recites “wherein the positive electrode comprises AgCuO2” but this material is disclosed by Applicant to be an active material (para 0051 of the submitted disclosure), rendering the limitation indefinite because AgCuO2 is not in the list of active materials in Claim 1 considered “closed” by Applicant (re: the use of “consisting essentially of…”). Therefore, it is unclear how this claim takes place in the claimed invention. Allowable Subject Matter 10. Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10-13, 15, 17, and 21-24 are allowable over the prior art. As Applicant correctly points out, the cited prior art does not disclose the claimed positive electrode active materials. There are other references that teach the use of e.g. Ag2Cu2O3 and AgCuO2 as a positive electrode active material in a battery (see Nanjundaswamy US Patent 6,878,489, col 5, lines 51-64), but this reference does not teach the Bi additive and the previously cited prior art that does encourage the use of such an additive uses it with MnO2 materials, specifically, and so the skilled artisan would not find it obvious to use the additives in the battery of Nanjundaswamy. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA S PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-3597. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30a to 3p Eastern Time. 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, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached on 5712721481. 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. /LISA S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 04, 2017
Application Filed
Mar 16, 2020
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 29, 2020
Response Filed
Oct 06, 2020
Final Rejection — §112
Jan 14, 2021
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 16, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 30, 2021
Non-Final Rejection — §112
May 05, 2021
Response Filed
Sep 12, 2021
Final Rejection — §112
Dec 16, 2021
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 20, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 22, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 30, 2022
Response Filed
Apr 19, 2023
Final Rejection — §112
Aug 23, 2023
Notice of Allowance
Oct 23, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 29, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 25, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 12, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 13, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 13, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 13, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 14, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603356
MULTI-LAYER PROTECTION ELEMENT FOR A BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603358
BATTERY HOUSING AND BATTERY SYSTEM COMPRISING SUCH A HOUSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603292
ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597626
Apparatus for Adhering of Tape for Rechargeable Battery and Method Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586842
SWAPPABLE BATTERY MODULES COMPRISING IMMERSION-THERMALLY CONTROLLED PRISMATIC BATTERY CELLS AND METHODS OF FABRICATING THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.8%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 716 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month