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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/25/25 has been entered.
The amendment filed 9/25/25 has been considered and entered. Claims 14 has been canceled. Claims 1-13 and 15-20 remain in the application with claims 18-19 having been withdrawn from consideration as being directed toward a non-elected invention as detailed in paper filed 12/5/22. Hence, claims 1-13,15-17 and 20 remain in the application for prosecution thereof.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Considering the amendment filed 9/25/25, the 35 USC 103 rejections have been withdrawn. However, the following rejections has been necessitated by the amendment.
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 2 and 4-6 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.
Regarding claim 2, the claim is unclear and confusing as the substance in independent claim 1 is recited as a conductive polymer and the claim recites the substance being a nickel chloride solution? Should this claim recite the “metal species” instead of “the substance”? Is the aqueous nickel chloride in addition to the conductive polymer? Clarification is requested. (claim 8 recites the nickel metal salt solution being a conductive metal species)
Regarding claims 4-6, the claim is confusing and unclear as tot eh substance being claimed in claim 1 as a conductive polymer and the claim recites the substance being a glassy carbon precursor which is not a conductive polymer? Clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-9,15-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) further in combination with Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025).
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) is drawn to a thermally conductive member comprising a matrix of carbon nanotubes (abstract). As shown in Figure 6A, the carbon nanotubes are formed in a gas cloud and then deposited onto a moving belt which collects the nanotubes to form a nonwoven sheet [0031]-[0034]. Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) discloses that the nanotubes are collected onto a belt and subsequently forms a continuous extensible structure such as a nonwoven sheet wherein the nonwoven sheet includes non-aligned and intermingled nanotubes, bundles of nanotubes, or intertwined nanotubes with sufficient structural integrity to be handled as a sheet and includes multiple adjacent carbon nanotubes which overlap and form connections [0033].
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) fails to teach adding material substance to infiltrate the nanotube structure and reducing the material substance to reduce electrical resistance thereof the nonwoven sheet.
Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) teaches a similar process whereby metal particles are applied on carbon nanotubes whereby the particles are formed thereon by applying a metal catalyst salt solution and reducing the salt solution to form the catalyst particles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) process to include applying metal salt solution and reducing to form the metal particles as evidenced by Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) with the expectation of reducing electrical resistance and improving conductivity of the nonwoven carbon nanotube structure.
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) fail to specifically teach the conductive material to be place at the junctions or crossovers of the nanotubes.
Kim et al. (2010/0044074) teaches a similar structure whereby a carbon nanotube network is provided with metal bridges at the intertube junctions thereby reducing the resistance at the intertube junction and improving conductivity thereof (abstract, [0003] and Fig. 1A)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) process to include adding the conductive material to the junctions/crossovers of the carbon nanotubes as evidenced by Kim et al. (2010/0044074) with the expectation of increasing the electrical conductance thereof the structure.
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) fail to teach increasing in-plane conductivity and minimizing traverse plane conductivity.
Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) teaches carbon nanotubes can be configured to decrease normal (traverse plane) conductivity while permitting in-plane conductivity or by using a spacer (abstract and col. 1, line 55 – col. 2, line 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention have modified Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) process to configure the CNT sheet to have in-plane conductivity while minimizing traverse plane conductivity as evidenced by Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) with the expectation of producing the desired structure.
Features detailed above concerning the teachings of Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) are incorporated here.
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) fails to teach a cross-linking agent for the layer of nanotubes.
Allen (2013/0172482) teaches a polymer composition whereby a composite of CNTs can be crosslinked using a divinyl benzene crosslinking which would result in a higher heat distortion temperature (abstract and [0532]-[0535]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) to incorporate a material having a crosslinking agent in with the CNT’s as evidenced by Allen (2013/0172482) with the expectation of achieving a higher heat distortion temperature conductive CNT network.
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) fails to teach treating the CNT network with a conductive polymer along with the metal specie and a glassy carbon.
Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) teaches a conductive polymer coating and methods whereby the conductive polymer is applied to a surface including carbon and in the form of fibers, fabric or mats to improve the conductivity of the surface (abstract and col. 8, lines 8-30). The conductive polymer includes polyacetylene, PEDOT, polypyrrole and poly p-phenylene vinylene (col. 1, lines 28-32 and col. 3, lines 61-66). The conductive polymer coating can also include metallic species to improve conductivity of the coating col. 4, lines 32-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) to include a conductive polymer as detailed in Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) with the expectation of improving the conductivity of the CNT coating layer.
Regarding claim 1, Kim et al. (2010/0044074) teaches conductive material at the junction of the nanotubes. Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) teaches using glassy carbon, furfuryl alcohols and phenol formaldehyde as conductive precursor materials for carbon nanotubes to improve conductivity [0040]-[0050]. Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) teaches the claimed conductive polymers as detailed above.
Regarding claims 2 and 8, Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) teaches platinum or ruthenium chloride and teaches using other metals including nickel and hence suggestive of nickel chloride [0018].
Regarding claim 3, reduction with heated hydrogen gas is a known inert gas and would be suggested to produce the reduced metal.
Regarding claims 4-6, Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) teaches using glassy carbon, furfuryl alcohols and phenol formaldehyde as conductive precursor materials for carbon nanotubes to improve conductivity [0040]-[0050].
Regarding claim 7, Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) teaches evaporating solvent which water is a known solvent [0043].
Regarding claim 9, Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) teaches a similar process whereby metal particles are applied on carbon nanotubes whereby the particles are formed thereon by applying a metal catalyst salt solution and reducing the salt solution to form the catalyst particles with reducing agents.
Regarding claims 15-17, the use of solvents to swell or expand a porous structure to enable improved infiltration of the particles is a known technique which would improve penetration of the particles and therefore improve conductivity.
Regarding claim 16, Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) teaches compressing the composite which inherently reduces pore size and thickness [0049]-[0051].
Regarding claim 20, Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) teaches the carbon nanotube sheets to include CNT yarns (col. 3, lines 15-20 and col. 7, lines 23-26).
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) further in combination with Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) further in combination with Smithyman et al. (2011/0111279).
Features detailed above concerning the teachings of Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) further in combination with Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) are incorporated here.
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) further in combination with Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) fails to teach compositing the metal along with the carbon nanotubes in a single composition.
Smithyman et al. (2011/0111279) teaches a network of CNTs in which particles or fibers are embedded therein to make a composite material (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) in view of Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) further in combination with Kim et al. (2010/0044074) further in combination with Lashmore et al. (8,722,171) in combination with Allen (2013/0172482) further in combination with Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) process to incorporate the metal particles in with the CNTs as evidenced by Smithyman et al. (2011/0111279) with the expectation of achieving similar success in producing an improved conductive CNT network.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, solvents are known to be utilized and removed by heating to form the metal sites on the CNTs.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-13,15-17 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argued the prior art fails to teach treating the CNT layer with a conductive polymer, metallic species and a glass carbon.
Lashmore et al. (2009/0277897) teaches using glassy carbon, furfuryl alcohols and phenol formaldehyde as conductive precursor materials for carbon nanotubes to improve conductivity [0040]-[0050]. Pryce Lewis et al. (8,227,025) teaches the claimed conductive polymers as detailed above. Dodelet et al. (2005/0220988) teaches platinum or ruthenium chloride and teaches using other metals including nickel and hence suggestive of nickel chloride [0018].
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.
Prior Art
WO 2015/168,411 – teaches SWCNT crosslinked with crosslinking agents including divinyl benzene [0098]-[0099].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN K TALBOT whose telephone number is (571)272-1428. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6:30-5PM - Fri OFF.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached on 571-272-5166. 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.
/BRIAN K TALBOT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1715