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 .
Foreign Priority
Applicant notes in their Remarks, filed 12/17/2025, on Page 6 that the foreign priority documents have been re-uploaded along with the required figures. However, no re-upload of the foreign priority documents can be found in the file wrapper of the instant application.
Response to Amendment
Support for the amendments to claim 1 can be found in Applicant’s specification on Pages 9-10 and 13.
The amendments to the claims have been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Pages 6-7, filed 12/17/2025, with respect to the objections to claim 9 have been fully considered. The objections have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims.
Applicant’s further arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot due to the amendment to the claims.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 13 states “clay like” when it should state “clay-like”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-4, 14, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “…or more Metal hydroxide(s) in molar concentration range…” when it should state “…or more Metal hydroxide(s) in a molar concentration range…”
Claim 2 recites “…are mixed to a eutectic solvent…” when it should state “…are mixed with a eutectic solvent…”
Claim 2 should have an “and” between “ascorbate;” and “one or more Metal hydroxide(s)”.
Claim 2 states “wherein the molar ratio of derivative(s) of methanesulfonic acid” when it should state “wherein a molar ratio of derivative(s) of methanesulfonic acid”.
Claim 3 states “wherein the first current collector is selected from” and “the second current collector is selected from” when it should state “wherein a material of the first current collector is selected from” and “wherein a material of the second current collector is selected from”.
Claims 4, 14, and 18 state “micro porous” when it should state “microporous” or “micro-porous”.
Claims 4, 14, and 18 state “poly propylene” when it should state “polypropylene”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 1, and thus claims 2-7 and 9-20, and claims 2, 5, 11, 15, and 19 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the carbon material and binder" and “the carbon material, zinc material, and binder”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. A carbon material, a zinc material, and a binder material have not been set forth in the claim.
Following this, in claim 1, “the carbon material” is noted for both the cathode and anode, and, in claim 2, the cathode includes “a first carbon material” and the anode includes “a second carbon material”. It is unclear if “the carbon material” for each electrode of claim 1 is meant to be the first and second carbon materials, respectively, or if there is an additional carbon material shared between the two electrodes that is not the claimed first and second carbon materials. Further, in claim 1, “the…binder” is noted for both the cathode and anode, and, in claim 2, the cathode includes “a first binder” and the anode includes “a second binder”. It is unclear if “the … binder” for each electrode of claim 1 is meant to be the first and second binders, respectively, or if there is an additional binder shared between the two electrodes that is not the claimed first and second binder. Even further, in claim 1, “the…zinc material” is noted for anode, and, in claim 2, the anode includes “a Zinc material”. It is unclear if “the … zinc material” is meant to be the “Zinc material”, respectively, or if there is an additional zinc material that is not the claimed Zinc material (the Examiner also notes that “zinc material” in claim 1 is not capitalized as it is in claim 2 (“a Zinc material”)).
Further, the term “clay-like” and “clay-kind” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The Examiner notes that Applicant’s specification at pages 9-10 utilize the word “clay-kind” in regards to the paste of both the cathode and the anode but do not define what “clay-kind” means. Further, Applicant’s specification at page 13 states “clay-like” in regards to an example, however, no definition is given.
Given claims 2-7 and 9-20 depend from claim 1, they are rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 5, 11, 15, and 19 recite the limitation "the thickness ratio”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1, and thus dependent claims 2-7 and 9-20, includes allowable subject matter, however, the above objections and rejections must be addressed.
Claim 1 recites “A zinc based rechargeable redox static energy storage device comprising: a cathode pre-infused with a eutectic electrolyte in ratio ranging between 0.5-1.5:2-5, wherein the cathode is formed from a homogeneous clay-like paste obtained by mixing the carbon material and binder with the eutectic electrolyte; an anode pre-infused with the eutectic electrolyte in ratio ranging between 0.5-1.5:2-5, wherein the anode is formed from a homogeneous clay-kind paste obtained by mixing the carbon material, zinc material and binder with the eutectic electrolyte; a first current collector connected to the cathode; a second current collector connected to the anode; and a separator separating the cathode and anode, wherein the separator is configured so that an ion exchange carries in between the cathode and anode through ionic permeability”.
Previously cited Carter discloses a rechargeable redox static energy storage device (redox fluid energy storage device 100 in Fig. 1A; “The rechargeable battery can be constructed using cathode/electrolyte and anode/electrolyte static media”, see entire disclosure and especially P8; P84, 215, 221) comprising: a cathode (cathode active material 140 in Fig. 1A, see entire disclosure and especially P84-85), an anode (anode active material 150 in Fig. 1A, see entire disclosure and especially P84-85), a first current collector connected to the cathode, a second current collector connected to the anode (positive current collector 110 and negative current collector 120 in Fig. 1A, see entire disclosure and especially P84), and a separator separating the cathode from the anode with so that an ion exchange carries in between the cathode and the anode through ionic permeability (ion permeable separator 130 in Fig. 1A).
However, as Applicant correctly stated on Pages 8-9 of the Remarks filed 12/17/2025, Carter’s electrode materials are deliberately fluid or semi-fluid such that they can remain mobile during operation (see Carter Abstract and P11, 19-23).
Therefore, Carter would not describe Applicant’s cathode and anodes formed into a paste. Further, Carter does not disclose or suggest mixing carbon material, binder material, and a eutectic electrolyte to prepare a paste-type electrode.
Further, previously cited Adamson teaches a secondary static zinc halide electrochemical cell including a eutectic electrolyte (see entire disclosure and especially P152, 230-231). Adamson teaches their eutectic electrolyte in combination with a zinc-halide storage batteries provides a battery with improved stability and durability (see entire disclosure and especially P8).
However, Adamson does not teach using their disclosed eutectic electrolyte to form electrode pastes.
Even further, previously cited Chiang teaches electrodes can include an open porosity for electrolyte to be infused therein to facilitate ion transport throughout the electrode (see entire disclosure and especially P3), and previously cited Barchasz teaches a quantity of electrolyte ensuring the wetting of a positive electrode, negative electrode, and separator corresponds to the sum of the volume of the pores of the positive electrode, negative electrode, and separator (see entire disclosure and especially P36).
However, Chiang does not teach using electrolyte form electrode paste.
Further search was applied to the amended claims and Kisdarjono et al (US 20140370401 A1), Pecherer et al (US 5599637 A), and Cheiky et al (US 20020177040 A1).
Firstly, Kisdarjono teaches a zinc-air battery includes a zinc slurry anode (Abstract). Kisdarjono teaches the zinc slurry anode includes zinc particles, an alkaline electrolyte, with a complexing agent and carbon additives in the alkaline electrolyte (Abstract).
Given the electrolyte of Kisdarjono is an alkaline electrolyte, not a eutectic electrolyte, and the disclosure of Adamson is drawn to a zinc halide battery, it would not be obvious to modify the alkaline electrolyte of Kisdarjono using the teaching of Adamson.
Further, Kisdarjono does not describe a binder utilized within their zinc slurry anode, therefore, the “slurry” could not be considered the claimed anode paste.
Secondly, Pecherer teaches a zinc battery anode wherein the active anode component is formed of a slurry of porous granules comprising zinc, impregnated with and suspended in an electrolyte, and compacted under pressure to a skeletal frame (Abstract, C5 / L16-36).
Pecherer does not describe a binder utilized within their active anode component and also describes that the granules are suspended in the electrolyte (implying a lower viscosity than a skilled artisan would believe a paste may have), therefore, the component could not be considered the claimed anode paste.
Thirdly, Cheiky teaches an anode paste material for use in zinc-based batteries (Abstract). Cheiky teaches their anode paste comprises cellulose particles, grains of zinc material, and hydrocarbon beads (P10-11 and 19-21).
There is no suggestion in Cheiky that the anode paste is formed with the addition of electrolyte mixed with the other components. Further, there is no suggestion in Cheiky that the anode paste might also lead one to use a similar paste for a cathode.
None of the prior art made of record teaches or suggest the subject matter as described by claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mary Byram whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm EST.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/MARY GRACE BYRAM/Examiner, Art Unit 1729