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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment 12/16/2025.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-10, 12-20 are pending. Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
The previous rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, is withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment.
The previous rejection of claims 1, 5, 8-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ran et al. (CN108383151A) is withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment.
The previous rejection of claims 3, 4, 6, and 7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran et al. (CN108383151A) is withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-10, 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the first acid solution is acetic acid and pH value is 2”. The recitation is to be construed as the first acid solution consists of acetic acid and has a pH 2. This recitation is inacceptable because as a weak acid, typically has a pH between 2.4 and 3.4, depending on its concentration.
Claims 3, 4, 7-10, 12 are rejected as being depended on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran et al. (CN108383151A).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 8, Ran discloses a method for preparing a lead iodide, comprising: adding an iodine compound (potassium iodide) to a first acid solution, in which a lead compound is dissolved (dissolving lead acetate trihydrate in an acetic acid aqueous solution), to form a reaction solution comprising a first lead iodide; and heating the reaction solution to a temperature of about 120°C for 8–16 hours, to obtain a second lead iodide (para 0010). Rand discloses the first acid solution comprises acetic acid with mass fractions are 5%, 10%, 20%, 40% and 80% (examples 2 and 6, para 0020, 0043-0045 and para 0073-0075). Ran also discloses a peak intensity of a (003) crystal plane of the second lead iodide is greater than or equal to a peak intensity of a (110) crystal plane and wherein a peak intensity of the (001) crystal plane of the second lead iodide is greater than or equal to a peak intensity of (101) crystal plane (Figure 3, 5% and 10% acetic acid solutions).
Ran differs from the claimed invention in that Ran does not disclose the pH of the acetic acid solution and the heating temperature of the reaction solution to 130oC-160oC for 1-3 hours. However, Ran discloses the introduction of acetic acid can effectively regulate the concentration of H+ in the system, and the adsorption of H+ on Pbl₂ can effectively change the surface energy of different crystal planes, thereby achieving the purpose of regulating the crystal morphology of Pbl2 (para 0016). The morphology of Pbl₂ crystals can be controlled by adjusting the H+ concentration in the reaction system. In the method of the present invention, as the content of H+ increases, the size of the prepared Pbl₂ particles is smaller and the size distribution is more uniform (para 0016). In addition, concentrations, reaction times and temperatures are well- established as reaction parameters in chemistry, and reaction parameters are recognized in the art to be result-effective variables. Thus, the concentration (to determine the pH), reaction temperature and time are readily achievable by one skilled in the art without undue experimentation. A patent will not be granted based upon the optimization of result effective variables when the optimization is obtained through routine experimentation unless there is a showing of unexpected results which properly rebuts the prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to determine a suitable standing time and temperature, thereby preparing the Pbl₂ materials having desired size and morphology.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Ran discloses a method for preparing a lead iodide described above and is incorporated herein by reference. Ran does not disclose the method further comprising adding a second acid solution to the reaction solution after a formation of the first lead iodide and before heating the reaction solution. However, Ran discloses the introduction of acetic acid can effectively regulate the concentration of H+ in the system, and the adsorption of H+ on Pbl₂ can effectively change the surface energy of different crystal planes, thereby achieving the purpose of regulating the crystal morphology of Pbl2 (para 0016). The morphology of Pbl₂ crystals can be controlled by adjusting the H+ concentration in the reaction system. In the method of the present invention, as the content of H+ increases, the size of the prepared Pbl₂ particles is smaller and the size distribution is more uniform (para 0016). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the invention to add a second acid solution to the reaction solution, to adjust the acid content of the reaction solution, thereby regulating the morphology and size of Pbl₂ materials.
Regarding claim 9, Ran discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the iodine compound is dissolved in water before adding to the first acid solution (para 0044 and para 0074).
Regarding claim 10, Ran discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the peak intensity of the (003) crystal plane of the second lead iodide relative to the peak intensity of the (110) crystal plane is 2.5 times or more (Figure 3, 5% acetic acid solution).
Regarding claim 12, Ran discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the peak intensity of the (001) crystal plane of the second lead iodide relative to the peak intensity of the (101) crystal plane is twice or more (Figure 3, 5% and 10% acetic acid solutions).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Ran fails to disclose the feature of "wherein the first acid solution is acetic acid and pH value is 2 wherein a peak intensity of a (003) crystal plane of the second lead iodide is greater than or equal to a peak intensity of a (110) crystal plane" of the present application (an acetic acid aqueous solution with a pH of 2 is approximately equivalent to one containing a 34% mass).
As described above, the recitation “wherein the first acid solution is acetic acid and pH value is 2” in claim can only be construed as the first acid solution consists of acetic acid and has a pH 2. Acetic acid is a weak acid, typically has a pH between 2.4 and 3.4, depending on its concentration and thus the first acid solution consists of acetic acid, the pH cannot be 2 nor an acetic acid aqueous solution with a pH of 2 is not equivalent to one containing a 34% mass. It is important to note that in the present invention, none of examples shows the first acid solution has the pH value of 2.
Applicant also argues that Ran does not disclose the feature of "heating the reaction solution to a temperature of 130°C to 160°C" and in the present application, the lead iodide crystal form is primarily controlled by adjusting the reaction temperature. The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s argument. It is noted that in the present invention, only one of six examples has reaction solution is heated to “a temperature of 130°C to 160°C”, while other five examples are heated to 60oC-120oC, which are similar to Ran’s examples. In addition, example 1 and 2, where the temperatures are 160oC and 120oC, respectively, the lead iodide crystal forms are same (Type I). Therefore, when the reaction temperature is outside the claimed range, the lead iodide crystal form is not affected. Ran discloses the claimed lead iodide crystal forms Type I (Figure 3, 5% and 10% acetic acid solutions).
According the Ran through examples, the reaction temperature plays an important role in the morphological integrity of PbI2 materials (para 0076). In addition, reaction times and temperatures are well- established as reaction parameters in chemistry, and reaction parameters are recognized in the art to be result-effective variables. Thus, the reaction temperature and time at which the reaction solution is taking place is readily achievable by one skilled in the art without undue experimentation. A patent will not be granted based upon the optimization of result effective variables when the optimization is obtained through routine experimentation unless there is a showing of unexpected results which properly rebuts the prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-10, and 12 remain unpatentable for the reasons of record.
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 HAIDUNG D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5455. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 10a-3p.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/HAIDUNG D NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
4/7/2026