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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/11/26 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 08/11/26, have been fully considered. Claim(s) 1 is/are amended; claim(s) 3–5, 8, 9, and 11–13 stand(s) as originally or previously presented; claim(s) 6, 7, 10, 14, and 16–20 remain(s) withdrawn, with claim 14 amended; and claims 2 and 15 are canceled; no new matter has been added. Examiner affirms that the original disclosure provides adequate support for the amendment.
Upon considering said amendment and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections, set forth in the Office Action mailed 05/11/26, has/have been withdrawn. Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to for the following informality: in lines 6–9, “the 2D TMD material comprises one or more of … , and cubic boron nitride” should read “the 2D TMD material comprises one or more of … , [[and]] or cubic boron nitride” to conform to the “selected from A, B, or C” Markush-group style in MPEP 2117 (I). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text forming the basis for the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 may be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim(s) 1 and 3–5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archer et al. (WO 2020220042 A1, from 05/11/26 PTO-892) (Archer) in view of Choi et al. (US 20200028149 A1) (Choi).
Regarding claim 1, Archer discloses a method (e.g., ¶ 0009 and exs.) comprising providing a zinc metal anode (e.g., ¶ 0082, exs.); and depositing at least one layer of a material directly on the zinc metal anode such that the material is in contact with the zinc metal anode (by depositing epitaxial coating directly on the Zn anode, e.g., ¶ 0009, 0083, exs.).
Archer discloses that the coating may comprise or be an organic or inorganic material (¶ 0006), which is considered sufficiently specific to read on the coating’s being an inorganic material (see also inorganic coatings like gold nanosheets embodied in ¶ 0118).
Archer discloses non-limiting examples of the inorganic material including inorganic compounds like 2D inorganics such as metal sulfides like MoS2—i.e., a 2D TMD material (see ¶ 0097 and ¶ 0099; also instant spec., ¶ 0026)—and specifies that the inorganic material may be chemically inert and/or electrochemically stable under cycling conditions (¶ 0009). More generally, Archer desires the coating to protect against dendrite growth that otherwise causes short-circuiting by growing at the metal anode (¶ 0004, 0080/0081), specifically at the Zn anode (¶ 0134). However, Archer fails to explicitly disclose depositing at least one layer of a 2D TMD material of the recited group.
Choi teaches passivating a similar Li metal anode by depositing a 2D TMD material (e.g., Title, Abstract). Choi teaches that these materials protect from Li dendrite growth—which otherwise short-circuits the battery (¶ 0004)—while allowing ion diffusivity and electric conductivity due to their unique interlayer structure (¶ 0007). Therefore, Choi is directed to a reasonably pertinent problem-solving area of selecting a suitable material to protect against metal-anode dendrite growth. Choi teaches that such TMD materials include, e.g., MoS2, MoSe2, and WSe2 (¶ 0007).
As Archer similarly desires to prevent metal-anode (i.e., Zn) dendrite growth while Choi recognizes MoS2 and WS2, MoTe2, MoSe2, and WSe2 as equally suitable passivating films, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely substitute Archer’s inorganic material of, e.g., MoS2 with Choi’s MoSe2 or WSe2 with the reasonable expectation of successfully suppressing dendrite growth via the application of a known material to a similar metal anode, as taught by Choi.
Regarding claim 3, modified Archer discloses the method of claim 1.
Archer discloses many possible deposition methods, including CVD, PVD, electrochemical deposition, or the like (¶ 0009), though modified Archer fails to explicitly disclose with sufficient specificity depositing the at least one layer of 2D TMD material by electrochemical deposition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely select electrochemical deposition from Archer’s list of finite possible deposition methods with the reasonable expectation of successfully depositing the coating.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, modified Archer discloses the method of claim 3.
Archer discloses that the coating may have various thicknesses, from a single layer to 100 μm (¶ 0101), though Archer fails to explicitly disclose controlling a deposition time of the electrochemical deposition to between 1 and 1000 seconds to control a thickness of the at least one layer of the 2D TMD material.
However, one skilled in the art would recognize that electrochemical deposition time would necessarily dictate coating thickness, further understanding that the coating must be thick enough to perform its function of suppressing dendrite growth, while a too thick coating would necessarily reduce the Zn anode’s relative active-material content and, thus, the electrode’s energy density. To balance these effects, then, it would have been obvious to control the deposition time and, thus, thickness, and, therefore, arrive at the recited time by routinely optimizing the deposition time (MPEP 2144.05 (II)).
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archer et al. (WO 2020220042 A1) (Archer) in view of Choi et al. (US 20200028149 A1) (Choi), as applied to claim 3, further in view of He (CN 111446485 A).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, modified Archer discloses the method of claim 3.
As noted in claim 3, Archer renders obvious electrochemical deposition, yet, in appearing unconcerned with the specifics of such when depositing the TMD material, modified Archer fails to explicitly disclose that the electrochemical deposition is performed in an electroless, multiple electrode system, wherein the system comprises a working electrode comprising the Zn metal anode, a reference electrode comprising a Ag or AgCl electrode, and a counter electrode comprising a platinum foil.
He teaches an analogous battery including a carbon electrode electrodeposited with MoS2—a similar 2D TMD material (Abstract), where the carbon electrode is the working electrode, a Pt sheet is the counter electrode, and Ag is the reference electrode (¶ 0016).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the claimed invention's effective filing date, that in electrochemically depositing modified Archer’s TMD material, such must necessarily be performed in some manner, and, as demonstrated by He, the skilled artisan would find it obvious to deposit using an electroless, multi-electrode system using Archer’s Zn as working electrode, a Pt sheet/foil as counter electrode, and Ag as reference electrode as an appropriate method with a reasonable expectation of forming a successful anode coating.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archer et al. (WO 2020220042 A1) (Archer) in view of Choi et al. (US 20200028149 A1) (Choi), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Teraoka et al. (JP S6164073 A, with mach. translation) (Teraoka) and Fanciulli et al. (IT 201800002349 A1, with mach. translation attached) (Fanciulli).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, modified Archer discloses the method of claim 1.
Archer further discloses that the Zn metal anode should exhibit high Coulombic efficiency (¶ 0080), i.e., a metric of battery performance, but modified Archer fails to explicitly disclose that the anode comprises a water-unstable metal.
Teraoka teaches an analogous Zn anode (Abstract), which is alloyed with an alkali metal such as Li, Na, or K (¶ 2). Teraoka teaches that such improves corrosion resistance and suppress hydrogen gas generation compared to conventional Zn anodes (¶ 1 and 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to alloy Archer’s Zn metal anode with an alkali metal such as Li—such that the anode would comprise a water-unstable metal (see instant spec., ¶ 0027)—with the reasonable expectation of improving corrosion resistance and suppressing H2 generation compared to conventional Zn anodes, as taught by Teraoka.
As noted in claim 3, Archer renders obvious electrochemical deposition, but, in being unconcerned with the specifics of such, fails to explicitly disclose that the 2D TMD material is deposited using a solution that comprises electrolytes dissolved in one or more of the recited solvents, as well as that the material is deposited from a source comprising one from the recited group.
Fanciulli teaches a method for producing TMD thin films (Title) by depositing a precursor solution on a substrate (e.g., ¶ 0039, 0040). Thus, Fanciulli pertains to a pertinent problem-solving area of selecting the precursor conditions for generating a depositable TMD composition. Fanciulli teaches that the precursor may be, e.g., (NH4)2MoSe4 or (NH4)2WSe4 dissolved in an organic solvent such as DMF (¶ 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the claimed invention's effective filing date, that modified Archer’s TMD such as WSe2 or MoSe2 must necessarily be prepared for deposition in some manner, and, as demonstrated by Fanciulli, the skilled artisan would find it obvious to prepare the TMD from, e.g., a source of (NH4)2MoSe4 or (NH4)2WSe4 dissolved in DMF as an appropriate precursor with a reasonable expectation of forming a successful coating composition and eventual coating.
Thus, modified Archer would disclose or render obvious that the 2D TMD material is deposited using a solution that comprises electrolytes dissolved in dimethylformamide (Fanciull’s (NH4)2MoSe4 or (NH4)2WSe4 in DMF, which the skilled artisan would recognize would comprise ammonium and selenomolybdate/selenotungstate ions—i.e., charge carriers and, thus, electrolytes—upon dissolution), as well as that the material is deposited from a source of (NH4)2MoSe4 or (NH4)2WSe4 (per Fanciulli).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Archer et al. (WO 2020220042 A1) (Archer) in view of Choi et al. (US 20200028149 A1) (Choi), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Chen (WO 2020176787 A1).
Regarding claim 13, modified Archer discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising providing a cathode; and disposing an aqueous electrolyte in physical contact with the at least one layer of the 2D TMD material and the cathode (e.g., via Zn-ion battery with aqueous electrolyte between cathode and anode—and, thus, necessarily in physical contact with the at least one TMD layer—¶ 0116 and 0118).
Archer exemplifies many possible cathode materials, including Mn-containing oxides (e.g., LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2), and discloses that suitable materials are known in the art (¶ 0112). Further, Archer appears to disclose that the cathode may comprise a current collector (see, e.g., Statement 18). However, in appearing unconcerned with the cathode’s specific structure, Archer fails to disclose a composite cathode comprising a carbon material having a manganese dioxide (MnO2) coating.
Chen teaches an analogous Zn-ion battery (Title), where the cathode is manganese oxide, i.e., MnO2, because, when paired with the Zn anode, such are low in cost and high in safety and energy density (¶ 0005). Chen further teaches that the cathode mixture is coated onto a current collector such as carbon foam (¶ 0026; see also ¶ 0049).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate a composite cathode of MnO2 coated onto a current collector made of a carbon material such as carbon foam into Archer’s Zn battery with the reasonable expectation of achieving high safety and energy density at low cost, as taught by Chen.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered. Applicant’s amendment overcame the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections—which, as noted above, have been withdrawn—and necessitated the new grounds of rejection citing the new reference(s) Archer, as established above.
Further, for completeness, Applicant argues that one skilled in the art would not combine Chen with Choi because Chen recognizes no issues with Zn dendrite formation, whereas Choi’s purpose is to passivate Li metal anodes with the 2D TMDs to prevent dendrites. However, the new combination of Archer and Choi appears proper because Archer recognizes that metal anodes such as Zn conventionally suffer dendrite growth and, thus, aims to dispose the epitaxial coating of, e.g., the inorganic material such as TMDs to prevent such. Thus, Examiner submits that the skilled artisan would have reasonably expected to achieve a successful, dendrite-suppressing coating in substituting Archer’s inorganic material such as a TMD like MoS2 with Choi’s TMD of WSe2 or MoSe2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN S MEDLEY whose telephone number is (703)756-4600. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00–5:00 EST M–Th and 8:00–12:00 EST F.
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, Jonathan Leong, can be reached on 571-270-192. 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.
/J.S.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 9/11/2026
Prosecution Insights