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
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 7/14/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/14/25.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 4 and 6-8 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 3, 4 and 6-8 each recites various broad recitations followed by a statement beginning with a “preferably, …” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. Each of the respectively listed claims includes one or more preferably clauses that are considered indefinite (see list below) because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In claim 3 lines 3-6, beginning with “preferably, the platinum content …”
In claim 3 lines 6-8, beginning with “preferably, based on the total …”
In claim 4, lines 3-5, beginning with “preferably, the content of metal …”
In claim 6, lines 2-3, beginning with “preferably, the catalytic layer …”
In claim 6, lines 3-4, beginning with “preferably, the catalytic layer …”
In claim 6, lines 4-5, beginning with “preferably, the iridium content of …”
In claim 6, lines 5-7, beginning with “preferably, the iridium content of …”
In claim 6, lines 7-8, beginning with “preferably, the tantalum content of …”
In claim 7, lines 3-6, beginning with “preferably, the content of …”
In claim 8, lines 2-4, beginning with “preferably, the valve-type metal is …”
In claim 8, lines 4-5, beginning with “preferably, the substrate is …”
Please note, for purposes of claim interpretation with respect to each of the preferably clauses listed above, the examiner will be treating the clauses as merely setting forth a more specific option for each of the respective limitations, but not as requiring the narrower recitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2596821B2 to Shingo et al., with reference to the provided machine translation (hereinafter referred to as “SHINGO”).
Regarding claim 1, SHINGO teaches an electrode having polarity capable of being reversed (see SHINGO at Abstract teaching a layered electrode having similar coatings that has the capability of polarity reversal as claimed) comprising:
a substrate comprising a metal or an alloy thereof (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 4, lines 13-17 teaching the use of a conductive substrate made of titanium, tantalum, niobium, zirconium, or alloys thereof);
an intermediate layer arranged on the substrate and comprising a platinum group metal and a platinum group metal oxide (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 4 line 18-page 5 line 1 teaching the intermediate layer being a mixture of platinum and iridium oxide); and
a catalytic layer arranged on the intermediate layer and comprising a mixed metal oxide (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 5 lines 2-6 teaching the surface coating layer being a mixed metal oxide layer including one or more oxides of titanium, tantalum, tin, niobium, zirconium, and iridium oxide).
Regarding claim 2, SHINGO teaches the electrode wherein the intermediate layer comprises a mixture of metal platinum and iridium dioxide (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 4 line 18-page 5 line 1).
Regarding claim 3, SHINGO teaches the electrode wherein the sum of the content of platinum and iridium of the intermediate layer is between 1-30 g/m2 (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 5 lines 17-19 teaching the loading of the platinum and iridium oxide in the intermediate coating layer at amounts greater than 3 g/m2).
Regarding claim 5, SHINGO teaches the electrode wherein the platinum group metal of the intermediate layer diffuses into the substrate to form a mixed transition layer (see SHINGO at page 5 lines 9-19 teaching the method of applying the intermediate coating including thermal treatment at a temperature between 300 to 700 °C for 10 to 20 minutes which at the upper temperatures would allow for at least some diffusion as claimed).
Regarding claim 6, SHINGO teaches the electrode wherein the catalytic layer comprises a metal oxide of iridium (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 5 lines 2-6 teaching the surface coating layer being a mixed metal oxide layer including iridium oxide).
Regarding claim 7, SHINGO teaches the electrode wherein the catalytic layer further comprises any one or more of ruthenium, palladium, rhodium, titanium, niobium, zirconium, hafnium, vanadium, molybdenum, and tungsten (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 5 lines 2-6 teaching the surface coating layer being a mixed metal oxide layer including one or more oxides of titanium, tantalum, tin, niobium and zirconium).
Regarding claim 8, SHINGO teaches the electrode wherein the substrate is a valve-type metal or an alloy of valve-type metals (see SHINGO at Abstract and page 4, lines 13-17 teaching the use of a conductive substrate made of titanium, tantalum, niobium, zirconium, or alloys thereof).
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Pat. No. 4,797,182 to Beer et al., (hereinafter referred to as “BEER”).
Regarding claim 1, BEER teaches an electrode having polarity capable of being reversed (see BEER at Abstract teaching a layered electrode having similar coatings which would have the capability of polarity reversal as claimed; see also BEER at col. 4 lines 58-65) comprising:
a substrate comprising a metal or an alloy thereof (see BEER at Abstract and col. 3 lines 49-53 teaching the substrate being made of titanium, tantalum, zirconium, niobium, tungsten, and silicon);
an intermediate layer arranged on the substrate and comprising a platinum group metal and a platinum group metal oxide (see BEER at Abstract and col. 3 lines 26-40 & col. 4 line 66-col. 5 line 19 teaching the two layers as an underlayer); and
a catalytic layer arranged on the intermediate layer and comprising a mixed metal oxide (see BEER at Abstract and col. 4 line 66-col. 5 line 19 teaching the two layers as an underlayer for an electrochemically active catalytic coating of various oxides including IrO2).
Regarding claim 2, BEER teaches the electrode wherein the intermediate layer comprises a mixture of metal platinum and iridium dioxide (see BEER at Abstract and col. 3 lines 26-40 & col. 4 line 66-col. 5 line 19 teaching the two layers as an underlayer; see also BEER at col. 4 lines 58-65 teaching the underlayers of platinum and iridium oxide as providing for excellent results).
Regarding claim 3, BEER teaches the electrode wherein the sum of the content of platinum and iridium of the intermediate layer is between 1-30 g/m2 (see BEER at col. 4 lines 10-29 teaching the platinum and iridium oxide on the electrode being deposited at amounts between 4 and 4.5 g/m2).
Regarding claim 4, BEER teaches the electrode wherein the intermediate layer further comprises any one or more of ruthenium, palladium, and rhodium (see BEER at col. 4 lines 16-19 teaching the second underlayer as including one or more of iridium, rhodium, palladium, or ruthenium; see also BEER at claim 1 col. 8 lines 6-8 teaching the option of more than one of the listed oxides so as to include an iridium oxide and any one of the other oxides).
Regarding claim 5, BEER teaches the electrode wherein the platinum group metal of the intermediate layer diffuses into the substrate to form a mixed transition layer (see BEER at col. 5 lines 29-43 teaching the method of applying the first and second underlayer coatings including a heat treatment at a temperature of 500 °C for 10 minutes after each coating followed by a 30 minute treatment at 500 °C after all of the coatings were applied such that at the temperatures provided would allow for at least some diffusion as claimed).
Regarding claim 6, BEER teaches the electrode wherein the catalytic layer comprises a metal oxide of iridium (see BEER at col. 5 lines 5-13 teaching the catalytic coating layer being a mixed metal oxide layer including iridium oxide; see e.g. a IrO2/Ta2O5 coating as one option).
Regarding claim 8, BEER teaches the electrode wherein the substrate is a valve-type metal or an alloy of valve-type metals (see BEER at col. 3 lines 49-53 teaching the use of a conductive base made of titanium, tantalum, niobium, zirconium, tungsten or alloys thereof).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Pub. No. 2015/0308004 to Brichese et al., teaching a cathode for electrolytic evolution of hydrogen
US Pub. No. 2020/0032407 to Pilli teaching a current reversal tolerant multilayer electrode
US Pat. No. 8,580,091 to Niksa et al., teaching a multi-layer mixed metal oxide electrode and method of making the same
US Pub. No. 2012/0111735 to Hayashida teaching a method for a metal electrowinning
US Pat. No. 5,294,317 to Saito et al., teaching an oxygen generating electrode
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bryan D. Ripa whose telephone number is (571)270-7875. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:00PM ET.
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.
/BRYAN D. RIPA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1794