DETAILED ACTION
1. This Non-Final Office Action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination filed August 14, 2025.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 5-17, and 21-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over the Mulder reference (US Patent No. 2016/0194767).
5. Regarding claim 1, the Mulder reference discloses:
a process for producing ammonia [Abstract] comprising:
feeding N2 (221) to an electrolytic cell (100) that comprises at least one source of protons [Abstract], and consisting essentially of a cathode electrode (110), an anode electrode (120), and an electrolyte (133) [Paragraph 0094];
allowing the N2 (221) to come into contact with [[a]] the cathode electrode surface (111) in the electrolytic cell (10), wherein the cathode electrode surface (111) comprises a catalyst surface comprising at least one transition metal oxide [Paragraph 0061] selected from the group consisting of Niobium oxide, Tantalum oxide, Osmium oxide, Rhenium oxide, and Iridium oxide [Paragraph 0061]; wherein the catalyst surface comprises at least one surface having a rutile structure and
running a current through said electrolytic cell (10) [Paragraph 0094], whereby nitrogen reacts with protons to form ammonia [Abstract].
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the electrolysis art to use a rutile structure for a catalyst for the purpose of providing a specific surface area structure. Please see US 2011/0008709 Paragraph 0182 for reference.
6. Regarding claim 5, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
wherein the catalyst surface comprises at least one surface having a (110) facet.
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of catalysts to use a surface having a (110) facet for the purpose of facilitating chemical reactions. Please see US Patent No. 9,169,167 Claim 1 for reference.
7. Regarding claim 6, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
wherein ammonia is formed in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -1.0 V, more preferably less than about -0.8 V and even more preferably less than about -0.5 V relative to standard hydrogen electrode (SHE).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the
production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
8. Regarding claim 7, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the catalyst comprises Niobium oxide [Paragraph 0094],
The Mulder reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the reference fails to disclose wherein ammonia is formed in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -1.1 V, relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
9. Regarding claim 8, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the catalyst comprises Rhenium oxide [Paragraph 0061].
The Mulder reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the reference fails to disclose wherein ammonia is formed in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -0.7 V relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the
production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
10. Regarding claim 9, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the catalyst comprises Tantalum oxide [Paragraph 0049].
The Mulder reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the Mulder reference fails to disclose wherein ammonia is formed in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -0.7 V relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
11. Regarding claim 10, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
wherein less than 50% moles H2 are formed compared to moles NH3 formed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an well known
methods of producing ammonia using nitrogen and hydrogen [Paragraph 0013]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
12. Regarding claim 11, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein said electrolytic cell comprises one or more aqueous electrolytic solution [Paragraph 0055].
13. Regarding clam 12, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
wherein said electrolytic cell comprises an electrolytic solution comprising an organic protic or aprotic solvent, or a miscible mixture thereof, preferably a water-miscible organic solvent.
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of electrolysis to have electrolytic solutions that includes organic products for the purpose of providing a nonaqueous solutions. See US 2012/0183843 Paragraph 0064 for reference.
14. Regarding claim 13, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein said nitrogen is fed to the electrolytic cell by bubbling nitrogen gas to electrolytic solution in contact with said cathode electrode surface [Paragraph 0009].
15. Regarding claim 14, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the source of protons in the formation of ammonia is from water splitting at the anode or H2 oxidation reaction at the anode [Paragraph 0055].
16. Regarding claim 15, the Mulder reference further discloses:
operated at a temperature in the range from about -10° to about 40°C [Paragraph 0009].
17. Regarding claim 16, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the process is effective at an ambient room temperature and atmospheric pressure [Paragraph 0046].
18. Regarding claim 17, the Mulder reference discloses:
a system for generating ammonia [Abstract], the system comprising at least one electrochemical cell (10), which comprises at least one cathode electrode (110) having a catalytic surface (111) [Paragraph 0061, 0094], wherein the catalytic surface is charged with at least one catalyst comprising one or more transition metal oxide [Paragraph 0061] selected from the group consisting of Niobium oxide, Tantalum oxide, Osmium oxide, Rhenium oxide and Iridium oxide [Paragraph 0021] [Paragraph 0094]; wherein the catalyst surface comprises at least one surface having a rutile structure and
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the electrolysis art to use a rutile structure for a catalyst for the purpose of providing a specific surface area structure. Please see US 2011/0008709 Paragraph 0182 for reference.
19. Regarding claim 21, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
wherein the catalyst surface comprises at least one surface having a (110) facet.
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of catalysts to use a surface having a (110) facet for the purpose of facilitating chemical reactions. Please see US Patent No. 9,169,167 Claim 1 for reference.
20. Regarding claim 22, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein said electrolytic cell further comprises one or more electrolytic solution [Paragraph 0055].
21. Regarding claim 23, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein said electrolytic cell comprises an acidic, neutral or alkaline aqueous solution [Paragraph 0002].
22. Regarding claim 24, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
wherein said electrolytic cell comprises an electrolytic solution comprising an organic protic or aprotic solvent, or a miscible mixture thereof.
The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art of electrolysis to have electrolytic solutions that includes organic products for the purpose of providing a nonaqueous solutions. See US 2012/0183843 Paragraph 0064 for reference.
23. Regarding claim 25, the Mulder reference fails to disclose:
which is configured to produce ammonia in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -1.0 V relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the
production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
24. Regarding claim 26, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the catalyst comprises Niobium oxide [Paragraph 0094]
The reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the reference fails to disclose wherein the system is configured to produce ammonia in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -1.1 V relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
25. Regarding claim 27, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the catalyst comprises Rhenium oxide [Paragraph 0061].
The reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the reference fails to disclose wherein the system is configured to produce ammonia in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -0.7 V relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the
production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
26. Regarding claim 28, the Mulder reference further discloses:
wherein the catalyst comprises Tantalum oxide [Paragraph 0061].
The reference discloses the invention as essentially claimed. However, the reference fails to disclose wherein the system is configured to produce ammonia in the electrolytic cell at an electrode potential at less than about -0.7 V relative to SHE.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art by the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the ranges above, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-A). Note that the general conditions of the claim are taught in the prior art with the reference teaching that an electrochemical reaction occurs, which implicitly discloses a voltage to drive the reaction, for the production of ammonia in [Paragraph 0002]. These ranges are mere optimizations of the disclosed general conditions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 14, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The species is expressly disclosed. Non-disclosure of the species is required for the remaining guidance to apply. Accordingly, the other legal arguments are not applicable. Accordingly, the claims are finally rejected.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES J BRAUCH whose telephone number is (313)446-6511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM to 6 PM.
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, Lindsay Low can be reached on (571) 272-1196. 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.
/CHARLES JOSEPH BRAUCH/
Examiner
Art Unit 3747
/LINDSAY M LOW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights