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 .
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made to Applicant’s claim amendments of 10 November 2025. Claims 1-19 and 24-27 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-12 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Non-Patent Literature “Wafer-Level Artificial Photosynthesis for CO2 Reduction into CH4 and CO Using GaN Nanowires” to AlOtaibi et al. (AlOtaibi) in view of the Non-Patent Literature “Water reduction by a p-GaInP2 photoelectrode stabilized by an amorphous TiO2 coating and molecular cobalt catalyst” to Gu (Gu).
As to claims 1, 7, 8 and 9, AlOtaibi teaches an electrode for a chemical cell (photoreduction cell) comprising a n-type Si structure on which GaN semiconductor nanowires are grown, the GaN nanowires forming an outer surface on which a plurality of platinum nanoparticles are distributed, the platinum nanoparticles forming a catalyst for reduction of carbon dioxide in the chemical cell (Abstract; Page 5343). However, AlOtaibi fails to teach that the electrode further comprises a catalyst layer disposed over the catalyst particles.
However, Gu also discusses water electrolysis and teaches that electrodes can be stabilized by a titanium dioxide coating, including a coating deposited after catalyst attachment (Abstract; Page 457, First Paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the electrode of AlOtaibi with the addition of a titanium dioxide coating disposed over the catalyst, thus an additional catalyst layer disposed along sidewalls of the array of conductive projections.
The combination thus disclosing the same structure as described in the disclosure as filed by the applicants, GaN nanowires with a platinum nanoparticle catalyst and a titanium dioxide coating (see, at least, Figure 2A as filed) and thus inherently teaching a structure that would achieve the claimed result of “such that the catalyst layer and the plurality of catalyst particles synergistically form a metal/oxide co-catalyst interface, the metal/oxide co-catalyst interface providing multifunctional adsorption/reaction sites for CO2 activation and conversion” (MPEP 2112).
As to claim 2, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 1. As discussed above, the structure comprises an n-type semiconductor, thus a semiconductor material configured to generate charge carriers upon absorption of solar radiation such that the chemical cell is configured as a photoelectrochemical system.
As to claims 3, 4, 5, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 2. As discussed above, AlOtaibi teaches that the structure comprises an array of conductive projections comprising GaN, a Group III-V semiconductor material, nanowires defining the outer surface of the structure, thus an array of conductive projection configured to extract the charge carrier generated in the substrate.
As to claim 6, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 1. AlOtaibi further teaches that the structure is planar (Figure 1(a)).
As to claim 10, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 1. AlOtaibi further teaches that the diameter of the platinum nanoparticles are 1-2 nm (Page 5344, Right Column, First Paragraph).
As to claim 11, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 1. Gu further teaches that the coating layer has a thickness of approximately 0.4 nm (Page 457, First Paragraph).
As to claim 12, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 1. The electrode of AlOtaibi is capable of being utilized in any number of cells including a thermochemical cell (MPEP 2114).
As to claim 27, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 4. As discussed above, the combination teaches that each nanowire comprises GaN, a group III-V semiconductor material and that the amorphous oxide material is titanium dioxide.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2016/0376713 A1 to Ono et al. (Ono).
As to claim 24, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrode of claim 1. However, AlOtaibi fails to teach that the catalyst is palladium, instead teaching platinum. However, Ono also discusses photoelectric water electrolysis and teaches that in addition to platinum, palladium is an effective catalyst (Paragraph 0053). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the platinum with palladium as a known equivalent as taught by Hoertz (MPEP 2144.06 II).
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of US 2014/0261645 A1 to Hoertz (Hoertz).
As to claims 25 and 26, the combination of AlOtaibi and Gu teaches the electrodes of claims 1 and 4. As discussed above, AlOtaibi teaches that the nanowires comprise GaN, a Group III-V semiconductor. However, Gu teaches that the oxide coating comprises titanium dioxide not zinc oxide.
However, Hoertz also discusses photoelectrodes for water electrolysis comprising titanium dioxide coatings and teaches that an equivalent coating to titanium dioxide is zinc oxide (Paragraph 0168). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the titanium dioxide with zinc oxide as a known equivalent as taught by Hoertz (MPEP 2144.06 II).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue that it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add a titanium dioxide layer to the Rh/Cr2O3 core shell nanoparticles of AlOtaibi, citing catalytic functionality, surface chemistry, sluggish chemistry and no need for stability. However, the Examiner has not made that rejection, the Examiner has made a rejection over the titanium nanoparticles embodiment of AlOtaibi (AlOtaibi teaching two distinct options).
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 CIEL P Contreras whose telephone number is (571)270-7946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM to 4 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/CIEL P CONTRERAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794