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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 05/02/2026:
Claims 1-20 are pending in the current application wherein claim 8 stands withdrawn. Claims 1-5, 11, 14-15, and 18-19 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Page 7, filed 05/02/2026, with respect to the foreign priority have been fully considered. The foreign priority is acknowledged.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Page 7, filed 05/02/2026, with respect to the objections to the specification have been fully considered. The objections have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the specification.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Page 7, filed 05/02/2026, with respect to the objections to the claims have been fully considered. The objections have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims.
However, upon further consideration, new claim objections are set forth below.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks Pages 8-10, filed 05/02/2026, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered. The rejections have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims.
However, in view of the amended claims, new 112(b) rejections have been set forth below.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation “electrolyte in ratio” in lines 2 and 5. This should be “electrolyte in a ratio” for grammatical purposes.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein one or more inorganic transition metal salt(s) of zinc, one or more salt(s) of metal(s), and one or more Metal hydroxide(s)” in lines 25-26. This should be “wherein the one or more inorganic transition metal salt(s) of zinc, the one or more salt(s) of metal(s), and the one or more Metal hydroxide(s)” to provide consistency with the previously cited one or more inorganic transition metal salt(s) of zinc, one or more salt(s) of metal(s), and one or more Metal hydroxide(s).
Claim 10 recites the limitation “micro porous poly propylene”. The spaces between “micro porous” and “poly propylene” are erroneous.
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.
Claims 1 and 2, thus their dependents, 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation "the zinc material". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Since claims 2-7 and 9-20 depend from claim 1, they are rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 depends from claim 1.
Claim 1 recites wherein a cathode includes “a carbon material” and “a binder”.
Claim 1 recites wherein the anode includes “the carbon material” and “the binder”.
Therefore, from claim 1, “the carbon material” and “the binder” of both the anode and cathodes are the same.
However, claim 2 recites wherein the cathode comprises “a first carbon material” and “a first binder” and wherein the anode comprises “a second carbon material” and “a second binder”.
Therefore, it is unclear if the cathode includes “a carbon material” alongside a “a first carbon material” and “a binder material” alongside “a first binder material”, or if the “a carbon material” is the “a first carbon material” and the “a binder material” is the “a first binder material”.
Further, given claim 1 states the anode can include “the carbon material” and “the binder”, which refer back to the “a carbon material” and “a binder” as recited in the cathode limitations:
It is unclear if the “carbon material” of the anode is the same “a carbon material” as the cathode, which could be “a carbon material” alongside a “a first carbon material”, and then further includes the “a second carbon material”, or if the “carbon material” of the anode is meant to be only “a second carbon material”. It is unclear if the “binder material” of the anode is the same “a binder material” as the cathode, which could be “a binder material” alongside a “a first binder material”, and then further includes the “a second binder material”, or if the “binder material” of the anode is meant to be only “a second binder material”.
Appropriate correction is required.
In order to advance prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting claim 1 as if it states the cathode includes a first carbon material and a first binder and the anode includes a second carbon material, a zinc material, and a second binder. The Examiner is interpreting claim 2 as if the cathode comprises a composition of the first carbon material and the first binder at the claimed weight ratio and the anode comprises a composition of the first carbon material, the zinc material, and the second binder at the claimed weight ratio.
Since claims 3-7 depend on claim 2, they are rejected for the same reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
If the above claim objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. are overcome, Claim 1, and thus dependent claims 2-7 and 9-20, would be allowable under the interpretation set forth above by the Examiner.
In regards to the limitations of claim 1:
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 and Barchasz do not teach using electrolyte to form an electrode paste.
Previously cited 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.
Previously cited 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.
Previously cited 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.
None of the prior art made of record teaches or suggest the subject matter as described by claim 1.
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 Mary Harris 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.
/M.G.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights