DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-9 were rejected in Office Action mailed on 03/04/2025.
Applicant filed a response, amended claims 1 and 6, on 06/04/2025.
Claims 1-9 are pending.
Claims 1-9 are rejected.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, lines 6-7, are amended to recite “wherein the at least one basic solution comprises basic cations, and one of the basic cations is identical to the at least one co-precipitating cation”. However, the specification only provides support for “the present invention directly uses an alkali salt containing lithium (Li2CO3 or LiOH) as a precipitant for precipitating cations, so there is no need for post-treatment processes such as washing and/or filtration to remove alkali ions such as sodium and potassium in the manufacturing process.”, therefore the specification does not provide such support for “wherein the at least one basic solution comprises basic cations, and one of the basic cations is identical to the at least one co-precipitating cation”.
Regarding dependent claims 2-9, these claims does not remedy the deficiencies of parent claim 1 noted above, and are rejected for the same rationale.
Response to Arguments
In response to the amended claims, the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections are withdrawn. However, the amended necessitates a new set of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection(s) as set forth above.
In response to the amended claim 1, which recites, “wherein the at least one basic solution comprises basic cations, and one of the basic cations is identical to the at least one co-precipitating cation”, it is noted that Von Bulow, Von Bulow in view of Nelson, Von Bulow in view of Kelper, Von Bulow in view of Tan, would not meet the present claims. Therefore, the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/103 rejections over Von Bulow, Von Bulow in view of Nelson, Von Bulow in view of Kelper, and Von Bulow in view of Tan are withdrawn from the 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 Coris Fung whose telephone number is (571)270-5713. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m..
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 director, Alexa Neckel can be reached at (571)272-2450. 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.
/CORIS FUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1732
Prosecution Insights