Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 16/913,958

LOW COST AIR ELECTRODES

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jun 26, 2020
Examiner
DOVE, TRACY MAE
Art Unit
1725
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Form Energy Inc.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
480 granted / 695 resolved
+4.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
751
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
35.6%
-4.4% vs TC avg
§102
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§112
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 695 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 8/6/25. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not found persuasive. Clams 1, 14 and 71-75 are pending. This Action is Non-FINAL. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/6/25 has been entered. Claims Analysis The claims are directed toward a bifunctional air electrode. Method limitations contained in the claims are not given patentable weight. Claim 1 is interpreted as a bifunctional air electrode comprising a porous solid metal substrate of nickel coated stainless steel particles wherein metal nitride catalyst is deposited on the porous solid metal substrate. 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 1, 14 and 71-75 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. Claim 1 recites the limitation "nickel coated stainless steel" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests “nickel coated stainless steel particles”. Claim 1 recites “metal nitride catalyst deposited on nickel coated stainless steel of porosity of the porous sintered solid of the metal substrate”, which is indefinite. Porosity is a measure of void spaces within a material calculated as the ratio of pore volume to total volume. It is unclear what “of porosity of the porous sintered solid of the metal substrate” encompasses. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 1, 14, 73 and 75 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuno, WO 2012/023018 A1 in view of Dopp et al., US2011/0114496 A1. Mizuno teaches an air electrode including an air electrode catalyst that contains a metal nitride or metal oxynitride (abstract). The metal nitrides include both transition metal nitrides and typical metal nitrides. The metal oxynitride may be a transition metal oxynitride [0016]. The air electrode has an air electrode layer and an air electrode current collector. The air electrode layer may optionally contain a binder and/or a conductive material [0017-0018]. The metal nitrides and metal oxynitrides may be used singly or in combination with another oxygen reduction catalyst as the air electrode catalyst. Examples of the other oxygen reduction catalyst include perovskite oxides that contain a transition metal such as cobalt, manganese or iron. Also inorganic ceramics such as manganese dioxide maybe used [0019]. The air electrode layer is formed by applying the air electrode material that contains at least the air electrode catalyst to a support such as an air electrode current collector [0022]. The material for the air electrode current collector may be a metal mesh (having a porosity). The metal may be stainless steel, nickel, aluminum, iron or titanium [0024]. The metal nitride may be zirconium nitride (ZrN) [0016]. Mizuno does not explicitly teach the air electrode current collector comprises a nickel coated stainless steel. However, Dopp teaches the fabrication of electrodes and electrode surfaces as well as devices that use the electrodes. For example, a metallic powder may be co-plated. Applications include electrolysis cells, fuel cells and bifunctional gas electrodes (abstract). A three-component high-surface area electrode is described. In embodiments, the electrode comprises: A first component may be, substantially, a substrate such as a plate or other structure having a regular or complex geometry and having a smooth or rough surface and consisting of transition metals including among others, nickel, iron, stainless steel, or silver. The first component may be defined by a reticular structure, a plate, a random textile, channeled, dendritic, foam, or self-similar patterned or unpatterned structure with internal channels or external grooves or pits, spines, fins, or any kind of structure that permit fluids or fluid components to reach a surface or surfaces thereof, including a surface of a material layered on the substrate, either by convection, advection or diffusion. The first component may include polytetrafluoroethylene [0041]. A second component may be, substantially, a component of transition metals including among others, nickel, gold or silver attached to the first component, for example by electroplating. A third component may be, substantially, metal particles; preferably nano-sized metal particles and/or mixed nano-micron sized particles of transition metals including among others iron, tin, nickel, silver, manganese, cobalt and alloys and oxides of these metals. The third component may be partially embedded in the second component and may be principally of nano and/or micron sized particles partially embedded in the second component but exposed such that when the completed electrode is immersed in electrolyte, the third component is in intimate contact with the electrolyte. The third component may be partially covered by the second component but, due to the second component's overlying the third component closely, so conforming to the third component size and shape that the third component imparts a roughness to the surface of the second component that is responsive to the size and shape of the third component [0008-0012]. See also Figure 2. A bifunctional gas electrode is further described at [0051-0057]. Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made because Mizuno teaches the material for the air electrode current collector is not specifically limited as long as it has electrical conductivity. An air electrode current collector with high current collection efficiency is desirable [0024]. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to use the current collector of Dopp as the air electrode current collector of Mizuno because both current collectors provide electrical conductivity to the respective air electrodes. The current collector of Dopp provides for high current collection efficiency. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 71-72 and 74 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The cited prior art does not teach the specific metal nitride catalysts of the claims. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 8/6/25 have been fully considered but they are not entirely persuasive. Applicant argues Mizuno and Dopp have not been shown to have described or made obvious a bifunctional electrode including “metal nitride catalyst deposited on nickel coated stainless steel within porosity of the porous sintered solid of the metal substrate”. Examiner disagrees and notes this limitation has been rejected as indefinite. Applicant asserts Mizuno does not teach the cited limitation. However, no support and/or evidence is provided for the assertion. Dopp has been combined with Mizuno to teach and suggest the nickel coated stainless steel metal substrate. Applicant argues Dopp does not teach a catalyst within porosity of a substrate. However, Dopp is not cited to teach the catalyst. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Dopp teaches a first component may be, substantially, a substrate such as a plate or other structure having a regular or complex geometry and having a smooth or rough surface and consisting of transition metals including among others, nickel, iron, stainless steel, or silver. The first component may be defined by a reticular structure, a plate, a random textile, channeled, dendritic, foam, or self-similar patterned or unpatterned structure with internal channels or external grooves or pits, spines, fins, or any kind of structure that permit fluids or fluid components to reach a surface or surfaces thereof, including a surface of a material layered on the substrate, either by convection, advection or diffusion. The first component may include polytetrafluoroethylene [0041]. A second component may be, substantially, a component of transition metals including among others, nickel, gold or silver attached to the first component, for example by electroplating. Examiner notes “sintered” is a process limitation. Applicant has not provided evidence the claimed metal substrate is structurally different from the metal substrate of Dopp. Applicant states Dopp teaches a metallic powder (particles) is coplated (top of page 7 of the amendment). Dopp teaches multiple structures for the first component and is not limited to any specifically disclosed structure. Dopp teaches a metallic powder (particles). Arguments relating to the different processes of electroplating and sintering are not found persuasive as the claims are not directed toward a method of producing a bifunctional air electrode. Applicant asserts Dopp “is not the same as a metal substrate of porous sintered solid” without any apparent support for the assertion. Applicant has not provided any evidence the claimed bifunctional air electrode is structurally different from the bifunctional air electrode of the cited prior art. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY DOVE whose telephone number is (571)272-1285. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-3:00. 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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. /TRACY M DOVE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 26, 2020
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 12, 2023
Response Filed
Sep 21, 2023
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 27, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 28, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 04, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 10, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603290
ELECTRODE BINDER SLURRY COMPOSITION FOR LITHIUM ION ELECTRICAL STORAGE DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597615
CURRENT COLLECTOR AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR, SECONDARY BATTERY, BATTERY MODULE, BATTERY PACK, AND POWER CONSUMING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592375
LITHIUM-SULFUR BATTERY CATHODE USING FABRIC MATERIAL, LITHIUM-SULFUR BATTERY COMPRISING SAME, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592376
ELECTROCHEMICALLY GROWN ZINC OXIDE LAYER ON CURRENT COLLECTORS FOR MITIGATING GROWTH OF LITHIUM DENDRITES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592392
ELECTRODE, METHOD FOR PREPARING SAME, BATTERY AND ELECTRICAL APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+10.1%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 695 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