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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8-20 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3 September 2025.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 26 June 2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 21 are amended; claims 23-24 are added. Accordingly, claims 1-3 and 6-24 remain pending in the application with claims 1-3, 6-7, and 21-24 considered in this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the text in Figures 1-3 and 9-15 is blurry/illegible. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yotsuhashi (US 2012/0018311) as evidenced by CHEMM (“Blood/Systemic Agents”).
Regarding Claim 21, Yotsuhashi discloses a method for adsorbing carbon monoxide (carbon monoxide meets the limitation of an analyte) on tantalum carbide and niobium carbide (tantalum carbide and niobium carbide meet the limitation of a MXene composition; [0016]), such that the MXene composition is contacted with the analyte, the contacting resulting in selective adsorption of the analyte to the MXene composition. Yotsuhashi further discloses the use of an electrode in which tantalum carbide powder is supported on an electrode substrate [0029], such that Yotsuhashi teaches the MXene composition being in the form of a powder.
CHEMM discloses carbon monoxide prevents red blood cells from carrying or delivering oxygen to tissues and cells (par. 6), such that carbon monoxide is a blood agent.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (“Preparation of Ti3C2 and Ti2C MXenes by fluoride salts etching and methane adsorptive properties”) in view of Gao (“Titanium carbide Ti3C2Tx (MXene) enhanced PAN nanofiber membrane for air purification”).
Regarding Claim 1, Liu discloses a method of adsorbing methane (methane meets the limitation of an analyte), comprising: using MXenes for methane adsorption (using MXenes for methane adsorption meets the limitation of contacting a MXene composition with the analyte, the contacting resulting in selective adsorption of the analyte to the MXene composition; pg. 784, Col. 2, par. 2). Liu further discloses the MXenes are in the form of a powders (pg. 782, Col. 1, par. 4).
Liu is silent to the MXene composition being comprised in a cartridge or filter.
Gao discloses a method of adsorbing PM2.5, comprising contacting a filter comprising MXene with the PM2.5 (pg. 167, Col. 2, par. 2-pg. 168, Col. 1, par. 1). Guo further discloses increased filtration performance as a direct result of the surface modification of PAN by MXene (pg. 163, Col. 1, par. 2), and such filters can significantly improve air quality (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to incorporate the teachings of Gao wherein the MXene composition is comprised in a filter for increased filtration performance in order to improve air quality, as recognized by Gao (pg. 163, Col. 1, par. 2; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 2, Liu further discloses Ti3C2 and Ti2C MXenes (pg. 782, Col. 1, par. 4), such that the MXene formula of Ti3C2 and Ti2C of Liu meets the limitation of the formula Mn+1Xn where M is Ti, X is C, and n is 1 or 2.
Regarding Claim 3, Liu further discloses the outer surfaces of the exfoliated layers of the Ti2C MXenes are terminated with F and O groups (F and O groups meet the limitation of halide and oxide; pg. 785, Col. 2, par. 1, Fig. 8 a-d).
Regarding Claim 6, Liu further discloses the outer surfaces of the exfoliated layers of the Ti2C MXenes are terminated with F and O groups (pg. 785, Col. 2, par. 1, Fig. 8 a-d).
The Specification of the present application teaches surface terminations like fluorination (- F) or chlorination (-Cl) for preferential rejection of high abundance clutter molecules (water and hydrocarbons) [0011].
Therefore, the MXene composition of Liu with F surface terminations would inherently be configured so as to preferentially reject at least one of water and a hydrocarbon.
Regarding Claim 7, Liu further discloses the MXenes can adsorb natural gas (methane) under high pressure and release natural gas (release natural gas meets the limitation of releasing at least some of the analyte adsorbed to the MXene composition) under low pressure (low pressure meets the limitation of effecting conditions; pg. 785, Col. 1, par. 2).
Regarding Claim 22, Liu discloses a method of adsorbing methane using MXenes (pg. 784, Col. 2, par. 2).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (“Preparation of Ti3C2 and Ti2C MXenes by fluoride salts etching and methane adsorptive properties”) in view of Gao (“Titanium carbide Ti3C2Tx (MXene) enhanced PAN nanofiber membrane for air purification”) and Bai (CN 109679146).
Regarding Claim 24, Liu and Gao teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Liu is silent to the MXene composition being in the form of a suspension, a gel, a fabric, or a monolith.
Bai discloses a method for preparing a MXene/cellulose composite aerogel (aerogel meets the limitation of a gel) with excellent absorbing property (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu to incorporate the teachings of Bai wherein the MXene composition is in the form of a gel, because an MXene gel is a known alternative for MXene powder for sorption, as recognized by Bai.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciou (US 2022/0219993) in view of Yotsuhashi (US 2012/0018311) and Gao (“Titanium carbide Ti3C2Tx (MXene) enhanced PAN nanofiber membrane for air purification”).
Alternatively, regarding Claim 1, Ciou discloses a method of adsorbing an analyte, comprising [0072]: exposing a suitable material to an environment where the analyte is present, wherein the suitable material comprises MXenes (exposing MXenes to an environment where the analyte is present meets the limitation of contacting a MXene composition with the analyte; [0010]-[0011]), and wherein the analyte may be a volatile organic compound [0075], resulting in the adsorption of volatile organic compounds (adsorption of volatile organic compounds meets the limitation of the contacting resulting in selective adsorption of the analyte to the MXene composition; [0073]). Ciou further discloses the volatile organic compound may be ammonia [0113].
Ciou is silent to the MXene being in the form of a suspension, a powder, a gel, a fabric, a fiber, a monolith, or any combination thereof.
Ciou, however, compares the adsorption and desorption of N2 for a Ti3C2 MXene powder known in the art with the Ti3C2 MXene paper (aka thin film) of Ciou ([0092], [0128], Fig. 14, Table 2).
Yotsuhashi discloses an electrode for adsorption of CO2 [0036]. Yotsuhashi further discloses an electrode including a thin film of tantalum carbide (tantalum carbide meets the limitation of a MXene composition), and even with the use of an electrode in which tantalum carbide powder is supported on an electrode substrate, the same activity can be obtained as with the use of the thin film [0029].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciou to incorporate the teachings of Yotsuhashi to use a MXene composition in the form of a powder instead of a paper/thin film to adsorb the analyte, because an MXene powder is a known alternative for MXene thin films, as recognized by Yotsuhashi.
Ciou is silent to the MXene composition being comprised in a cartridge or filter.
Gao discloses a method of adsorbing PM2.5, comprising contacting a filter comprising MXene with the PM2.5 (pg. 167, Col. 2, par. 2-pg. 168, Col. 1, par. 1). Guo further discloses increased filtration performance as a direct result of the surface modification of PAN by MXene (pg. 163, Col. 1, par. 2), and such filters can significantly improve air quality (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciou to incorporate the teachings of Gao wherein the MXene composition is comprised in a filter for increased filtration performance in order to improve air quality, as recognized by Gao (pg. 163, Col. 1, par. 2; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 2, the MXene composition of Ciou meets the limitation of claim 2, as it appears any MXene composition would meet this limitation.
Alternatively, Ciou discloses the MXene composition may be selected from Ti2C, V2C, Nb2C, etc. [0027], which meets the limitation of MXene compositions of the formula Mn+1Xn.
Regarding Claim 3, Ciou further discloses the MXene composition comprises functional groups -OH, -O-, -F (functional groups -OH, -O-, and -F meet the limitation of a surface termination that comprises halide, hydroxide, oxide; [0283]).
Regarding Claim 6, Ciou further discloses the MXene composition comprises functional groups (-OH, -O, -F) [0283].
Applicant teaches in paragraph [0011] of the Specification of the present application surface terminations like fluorination (- F) or chlorination (-Cl) for preferential rejection of high abundance clutter molecules (water and hydrocarbons).
Therefore, the MXene composition of Ciou with -F surface terminations would inherently be configured so as to preferentially reject at least one of water and a hydrocarbon.
Regarding Claim 7, Ciou further discloses the release of volatile organic compounds by resistive heating (releasing volatile organic compounds by resistive heating meets the limitation of effecting conditions so as to release at least some of the analyte adsorbed to the MXene composition; [0017]).
Regarding Claim 22, Ciou discloses a method of adsorbing an analyte, comprising [0072]: exposing a suitable material to an environment where the analyte is present, wherein the suitable material comprises MXenes ([0010]-[0011]), and wherein the analyte may be a volatile organic compound [0075], resulting in the adsorption of volatile organic compounds [0073]. Ciou further discloses the volatile organic compound may be ammonia [0113].
Regarding Claim 23, Ciou discloses a method of adsorbing an analyte, comprising [0072]: exposing a suitable material to an environment where the analyte is present, wherein the suitable material comprises MXenes ([0010]-[0011]), and wherein the analyte may be a volatile organic compound [0075], resulting in the adsorption of volatile organic compounds [0073]. Ciou further discloses the volatile organic compound may be ammonia [0113].
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ciou (US 2022/0219993) in view of Yotsuhashi (US 2012/0018311) and Gao (“Titanium carbide Ti3C2Tx (MXene) enhanced PAN nanofiber membrane for air purification”) and Bai (CN 109679146).
Regarding Claim 24, Ciou and Gao teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Ciou is silent to the MXene composition being in the form of a suspension, a gel, a fabric, or a monolith.
Bai discloses a method for preparing a MXene/cellulose composite aerogel (aerogel meets the limitation of a gel) with excellent absorbing property (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ciou to incorporate the teachings of Bai wherein the MXene composition is in the form of a gel, because an MXene gel is a known alternative for MXene thin film for sorption, as recognized by Bai.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see "Remarks", pg. , filed 26 June, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Liu (“Preparation of Ti3C2 and Ti2C MXenes by fluoride salts etching and methane adsorptive properties”) and Gao (“Titanium carbide Ti3C2Tx (MXene) enhanced PAN nanofiber membrane for air purification”), or alternatively, in view of Ciou (US 2022/0219993) and Yotsuhashi (US 2012/0018311) and Gao (“Titanium carbide Ti3C2Tx (MXene) enhanced PAN nanofiber membrane for air purification”).
Applicant’s arguments, see "Remarks", pg. , filed 2, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yotsuhashi (US 2012/0018311) as evidenced by CHEMM (“Blood/Systemic Agents”).
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 SLONE ELZABETH SIMKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-3214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/S.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights