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 Amendments
This is a final office action in response to applicant's arguments and remarks filed on
06/22/2026.
Status of Rejections
The objection to claim 4 is withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendment.
All previous rejections are maintained.
The rejection of claim 1 has been updated in response to the Applicant’s amendments. No new art is cited.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al (“Single-Atom Engineering to Ignite 2D Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Based Catalysis: Fundamentals, Progress, and Beyond”, Chem. Rev. Nov 2021, 122, 1, 1273–1348) in view Zhang (“Understanding of the effect of synthesis temperature on the crystallization and activity of nano-MoS2 catalyst”, Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, Volume 165, April 2015, Pages 537-546, cited in previous Office Action) and Yu et al (“High phase-purity 1T′-MoS2- and 1T′-MoSe2 layered crystals”, Nature Chemistry, Vol 10, June 2018, 638–643).
Claim 1: Wang discloses a single-atomically dispersed metal / two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet hybrid (TMD NS hybrid) (see e.g. abstract; page 1279, col 2, paragraph starting with “By means”: “…Rh atoms were introduced into MoS2 nanosheets …”) comprising a plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms disposed on at least one surface of a transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet (TMD NS) (see e.g. page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”; page 1279, Fig 1) and configured to adsorb on a top site of the transition-metal (see e.g. page 1277, Scheme 1, “Protrusion” f and “Assembly” m; page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”: “”most kinds of single atoms prefer to be fixed at the hollow or Mo top sites”), and the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms are not disposed in a chalcogen vacancy in the TMD NS (see e.g. page 1277, col 2, 2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”).
Wang does not explicitly teach that the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet is uniformly crystalline. Zhang teaches the following regarding transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheets (see e.g. abstract and page 545, col 1, paragraph starting with “In the development”) on page 545:
Crystallinity is essential to provide suitable structure to create active sites and high surface areas, which can be illustrated by the low hydrotreating performance of CAT-20-200 that does not have a crystal structure. It is also observed that the activity is increased with the improvement of crystallinity after crystal structure is generated… Crystal size and morphology play an important role in generating sufficient amount of active site.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang to be uniformly crystalline because Zhang teaches that crystal morphology plays an important role in generating sufficient amount of active site and to a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to reduce the amount of non-crystalline transition-metal dichalcogenides.
Wang does not explicitly teach that the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet is uniformly of the 1T'phase. Wang teaches that “MoS2 nanosheets tend to change from the semiconducting trigonal prismatic phase (2H phase) to the metallic octahedral phase (1T phase) when single Pd/Ru/Cu atoms are introduced into the lattice” (see e.g. page 1277, connecting paragraph of col 1 and 2) and that the catalyst can be used for HER (see e.g. page 1297, col 1, paragraph starting with “By utilizing”). Yu teaches the following regarding the phases of MoS2 (see e.g. page 638 and page 641):
The octahedral coordinated TMDs (1T phase) exhibit metallic properties, whereas the trigonal prismatic coordinated TMDs (2H phase) are typically semiconductors with a bandgap of 1–2 eV (ref. 7). Importantly, the 1T-phase TMDs, when compared to the 2H-phase TMDs, show superior performance for catalytic hydrogen evolution and energy storage, because the charge transfer resistance is dramatically reduced in the metallic phase8–10. In the past, several strategies have been used to synthesize metallic-phase group-VI TMDs, such as the flux method, alkali metal intercalation, electron-beam irradiation, plasma hot electron transfer, mechanical strain, colloidal synthesis and hydrothermal reaction. However, the 1T phase of MX2 (M = Mo, W; X = S, Se) is metastable and easily converted to the stable 2H phase10. Except for the thermodynamically stable 1T′ -MoTe2 and 1T′ -WTe2 (ref. 11), the aforementioned methods can only produce a mixture of metallic and semiconducting phase TMD nanomaterials with lateral size less than 10 μ m (refs 10,14,19), severely limiting exploration of the electrical properties of metallic-phase MX2 and their applications…
A remarkable HER performance on the basal plane of 1T′-MoS2 was observed, with an onset overpotential of 65 mV and a current density of 607 mA cm−2 at 400 mV (versus RHE), which is among the best in MoS2-based electrocatalysts. This excellent HER performance originates from the higher catalytic activity on the basal plane and better charge transport ability of 1T′-MoS2 compared to 2H-MoS2.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the product of Wang to convert the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet to be 1T’ because Yu teaches that 1T’ has superior HER performance due to its unique basal plane.
Claim 2: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms can be ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, osmium, silver, platinum, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, tin, or other metal atoms (see e.g. page 1285, Table 1, “main products” column). KSR rationale E states that choosing “from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a suitable rationale for obviousness. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang by selecting one of the metals from the list above.
Claim 3: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that each of the plurality of single- atomically dispersed metal atoms is platinum, nickel, silver, tin, or copper (see e.g. Wang - page 1285, Table 1, “main products” column). KSR rationale E states that choosing “from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a suitable rationale for obviousness. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang by selecting one of the metals from the list above.
Claim 4: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that the TMD NS comprises MoS2, MoSe2, MoTe2, WS2, or WSe2 (see e.g. Wang - page 1283, col 1, paragraph starting with “Regarded”). KSR rationale E states that choosing “from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a suitable rationale for obviousness. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang by selecting one of the TMDs from the list above.
Claim 6: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that the TMD NS comprises 1T'-MoS2, 1T'-MoSe2, or 1T'-WS2 (see e.g. Wang - page 1283, col 1, paragraph starting with “Regarded”). KSR rationale E states that choosing “from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a suitable rationale for obviousness. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang by selecting one of the TMDs from the list above.
Claim 7: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that the TMD NS comprises 1T'-MoS2 (see e.g. Wang - page 1283, col 1, paragraph starting with “Regarded”). KSR rationale E states that choosing “from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a suitable rationale for obviousness. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang by selecting one of the TMDs listed in Wang.
Claim 8: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that the each of the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms is platinum, nickel, silver, tin, or copper (see e.g. Wang - page 1285, Table 1, “main products” column).and the TMD NS comprises 1T'-MoS2, 1T'-MoSe2, or 1T'-WS2 (see e.g. page 1283, col 1, paragraph starting with “Regarded”). KSR rationale E states that choosing “from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success” is a suitable rationale for obviousness. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang by selecting single-atomically dispersed metal atoms and one of the TMDs listed in Wang.
Claim 9: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that each of the plurality of single- atomically dispersed metal atoms is platinum and the TMD NS comprises 1T'-MoS2 (see e.g. Wang - page 1306, col 1: “In consistence, after substituting Mo lattice atoms with 1.7 wt % single Pt atoms in MoS2 nanosheets (Pt−MoS2)”).
Claim 10: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that is present in the TMD NS hybrid at a weight percentage of less than 12.2 wt% (see e.g. page 1306, col 1: “In consistence, after substituting Mo lattice atoms with 1.7 wt %single Pt atoms in MoS2 nanosheets (Pt−MoS2)”).
Claim 11: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that is present in the TMD NS hybrid at a weight percentage of less than 10.0 wt% (see e.g. Wang - page 1306, col 1: “In consistence, after substituting Mo lattice atoms with 1.7 wt %single Pt atoms in MoS2 nanosheets (Pt−MoS2)”).
Claim 12: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that each of the plurality of single- atomically dispersed metal atoms is platinum; the TMD NS comprises 1T'-MoS2; and the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms are present in the TMD NS hybrid at a weight percentage of less than 10.0 wt% (see e.g. Wang - page 1306, col 1: “In consistence, after substituting Mo lattice atoms with 1.7 wt %single Pt atoms in MoS2 nanosheets (Pt−MoS2)”).
Claim 22: Wang in view of Zhang and Yu teaches that the product comprises Pt/1T'-MoS2 (see e.g. Wang - page 1306, col 1: “In consistence, after substituting Mo lattice atoms with 1.7 wt %single Pt atoms in MoS2 nanosheets (Pt−MoS2)”), wherein the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms are disposed on at least one surface of the TMD NS by substituting the site of a transition-metal, adsorb on the top site of the chalcogen, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Wang - page 1306, col 1: “In consistence, after substituting Mo lattice atoms with 1.7 wt %single Pt atoms in MoS2 nanosheets (Pt−MoS2)”; pages 1277-1278, sections 2.31. and 2.3.2).
Claim(s) 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (KR 20210127527 A) in view of Wang, Zhang, and Yu.
Claim 19: Park discloses an electrode comprising a base electrode and a TMD (see e.g. abstract and page 14, paragraph starting with “As a working…”), wherein the base electrode is a planar electrode, including the glassy carbon electrode (see e.g. page 14, paragraph starting with “As a working…”).
Park teaches that the TMD is a crystalline MoS2 nanosheet (see e.g. abstract) having 1T’ crystalline phase (see e.g. page 4, paragraph starting with “The crystalline phase”) for use in water electrolysis (see e.g. abstract). Additionally, Park is aimed at addressing issues with conventional expensive catalysts like platinum (see e.g. abstract).
Park does not explicitly teach that the TMD is the TMD NS hybrid of claim 1.
Wang discloses a single-atomically dispersed metal / two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet hybrid (TMD NS hybrid) (see e.g. abstract; page 1279, col 2, paragraph starting with “By means”: “…Rh atoms were introduced into MoS2 nanosheets …”) comprising a plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms disposed on at least one surface of a transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet (TMD NS) (see e.g. page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”; page 1279, Fig 1) and configured to adsorb on a top site of the transition-metal (see e.g. page 1277, Scheme 1, “Protrusion” f and “Assembly” m; page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”: “”most kinds of single atoms prefer to be fixed at the hollow or Mo top sites”), and the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms are not disposed in a chalcogen vacancy in the TMD NS (see e.g. page 1277, col 2, 2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”).
The catalyst of Wang “excellent HER performance was realized, yielding an overpotential at the current density of 10 mA cm−2 (η10) 60 mV lower than that of pristine MoS2 in 0.1 M H2SO4. And the long-term service stability of Pt−MoS2 was also high, showing no obvious overpotential increase after 5000 CVs at different current densities. Moreover, in contrast to the slow and moderate activity decrease of Pt−MoS2, the Pt supported on MoS2 nanosheets (denoted as Pt/MoS2) showed instant and substantial HER activity decay once methanol was added into the electrolyte, indicating the stronger anti-poisoning property of Pt substitutions than that of Pt protrusions” (see e.g. page 1360, col 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the electrode of Park by using the TMD is a crystalline MoS2 nanosheet taught in Wang because the catalyst of Wang has superior properties to the MoS2 catalyst of Park.
Park in view of Wang does not explicitly teach that the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet is uniformly crystalline. Zhang teaches the following regarding transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheets (see e.g. abstract and page 545, col 1, paragraph starting with “In the development”) on page 545:
Crystallinity is essential to provide suitable structure to create active sites and high surface areas, which can be illustrated by the low hydrotreating performance of CAT-20-200 that does not have a crystal structure. It is also observed that the activity is increased with the improvement of crystallinity after crystal structure is generated… Crystal size and morphology play an important role in generating sufficient amount of active site.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang to be uniformly crystalline because Zhang teaches that crystal morphology plays an important role in generating sufficient amount of active site and to a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to reduce the amount of non-crystalline transition-metal dichalcogenides.
Park in view of Wang does not explicitly teach that the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet is uniformly of the 1T'phase. Wang teaches that “MoS2 nanosheets tend to change from the semiconducting trigonal prismatic phase (2H phase) to the metallic octahedral phase (1T phase) when single Pd/Ru/Cu atoms are introduced into the lattice” (see e.g. page 1277, connecting paragraph of col 1 and 2) and that the catalyst can be used for HER (see e.g. page 1297, col 1, paragraph starting with “By utilizing”). Yu teaches the following regarding the phases of MoS2 (see e.g. page 638 and page 641):
The octahedral coordinated TMDs (1T phase) exhibit metallic properties, whereas the trigonal prismatic coordinated TMDs (2H phase) are typically semiconductors with a bandgap of 1–2 eV (ref. 7). Importantly, the 1T-phase TMDs, when compared to the 2H-phase TMDs, show superior performance for catalytic hydrogen evolution and energy storage, because the charge transfer resistance is dramatically reduced in the metallic phase8–10. In the past, several strategies have been used to synthesize metallic-phase group-VI TMDs, such as the flux method, alkali metal intercalation, electron-beam irradiation, plasma hot electron transfer, mechanical strain, colloidal synthesis and hydrothermal reaction. However, the 1T phase of MX2 (M = Mo, W; X = S, Se) is metastable and easily converted to the stable 2H phase10. Except for the thermodynamically stable 1T′ -MoTe2 and 1T′ -WTe2 (ref. 11), the aforementioned methods can only produce a mixture of metallic and semiconducting phase TMD nanomaterials with lateral size less than 10 μ m (refs 10,14,19), severely limiting exploration of the electrical properties of metallic-phase MX2 and their applications…
A remarkable HER performance on the basal plane of 1T′-MoS2 was observed, with an onset overpotential of 65 mV and a current density of 607 mA cm−2 at 400 mV (versus RHE), which is among the best in MoS2-based electrocatalysts. This excellent HER performance originates from the higher catalytic activity on the basal plane and better charge transport ability of 1T′-MoS2 compared to 2H-MoS2.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the product of Wang to convert the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet to be 1T’ because Yu teaches that 1T’ has superior HER performance due to its unique basal plane.
Claim 20: Park discloses an electrochemical cell (see e.g. page 14, paragraph starting with “Electrochemical experiments…”) comprising
a cathode comprising a TMD (see e.g. abstract; page 9, paragraph starting with “Then an actual…”; page 14, paragraph starting with “As a working…”);
an anode (counter electrode, see e.g. page 14, paragraph starting with “Electrochemical experiments…”); and
an electrolyte (water, see e.g. page 9, paragraph starting with “In addition, the catalytic…”).
Park teaches that the TMD is a crystalline MoS2 nanosheet (see e.g. abstract) having 1T’ crystalline phase (see e.g. page 4, paragraph starting with “The crystalline phase”) for use in water electrolysis (see e.g. abstract). Additionally, Park is aimed at addressing issues with conventional expensive catalysts like platinum (see e.g. abstract).
Park does not explicitly teach that the TMD is the TMD NS hybrid of claim 1.
Wang discloses a single-atomically dispersed metal / two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet hybrid (TMD NS hybrid) (see e.g. abstract; page 1279, col 2, paragraph starting with “By means”: “…Rh atoms were introduced into MoS2 nanosheets …”) comprising a plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms disposed on at least one surface of a transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet (TMD NS) (see e.g. page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”; page 1279, Fig 1) and configured to adsorb on a top site of the transition-metal (see e.g. page 1277, Scheme 1, “Protrusion” f and “Assembly” m; page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”: “”most kinds of single atoms prefer to be fixed at the hollow or Mo top sites”), and the plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms are not disposed in a chalcogen vacancy in the TMD NS (see e.g. page 1277, col 2, 2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”).
The catalyst of Wang “excellent HER performance was realized, yielding an overpotential at the current density of 10 mA cm−2 (η10) 60 mV lower than that of pristine MoS2 in 0.1 M H2SO4. And the long-term service stability of Pt−MoS2 was also high, showing no obvious overpotential increase after 5000 CVs at different current densities. Moreover, in contrast to the slow and moderate activity decrease of Pt−MoS2, the Pt supported on MoS2 nanosheets (denoted as Pt/MoS2) showed instant and substantial HER activity decay once methanol was added into the electrolyte, indicating the stronger anti-poisoning property of Pt substitutions than that of Pt protrusions” (see e.g. page 1360, col 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the electrode of Park by using the TMD is a crystalline MoS2 nanosheet taught in Wang because the catalyst of Wang has superior properties to the MoS2 catalyst of Park.
Park in view of Wang does not explicitly teach that the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet is uniformly crystalline. Zhang teaches the following regarding transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheets (see e.g. abstract and page 545, col 1, paragraph starting with “In the development”) on page 545:
Crystallinity is essential to provide suitable structure to create active sites and high surface areas, which can be illustrated by the low hydrotreating performance of CAT-20-200 that does not have a crystal structure. It is also observed that the activity is increased with the improvement of crystallinity after crystal structure is generated… Crystal size and morphology play an important role in generating sufficient amount of active site.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the material of Wang to be uniformly crystalline because Zhang teaches that crystal morphology plays an important role in generating sufficient amount of active site and to a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to reduce the amount of non-crystalline transition-metal dichalcogenides.
Park in view of Wang does not explicitly teach that the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet is uniformly of the 1T'phase. Wang teaches that “MoS2 nanosheets tend to change from the semiconducting trigonal prismatic phase (2H phase) to the metallic octahedral phase (1T phase) when single Pd/Ru/Cu atoms are introduced into the lattice” (see e.g. page 1277, connecting paragraph of col 1 and 2) and that the catalyst can be used for HER (see e.g. page 1297, col 1, paragraph starting with “By utilizing”). Yu teaches the following regarding the phases of MoS2 (see e.g. page 638 and page 641):
The octahedral coordinated TMDs (1T phase) exhibit metallic properties, whereas the trigonal prismatic coordinated TMDs (2H phase) are typically semiconductors with a bandgap of 1–2 eV (ref. 7). Importantly, the 1T-phase TMDs, when compared to the 2H-phase TMDs, show superior performance for catalytic hydrogen evolution and energy storage, because the charge transfer resistance is dramatically reduced in the metallic phase8–10. In the past, several strategies have been used to synthesize metallic-phase group-VI TMDs, such as the flux method, alkali metal intercalation, electron-beam irradiation, plasma hot electron transfer, mechanical strain, colloidal synthesis and hydrothermal reaction. However, the 1T phase of MX2 (M = Mo, W; X = S, Se) is metastable and easily converted to the stable 2H phase10. Except for the thermodynamically stable 1T′ -MoTe2 and 1T′ -WTe2 (ref. 11), the aforementioned methods can only produce a mixture of metallic and semiconducting phase TMD nanomaterials with lateral size less than 10 μ m (refs 10,14,19), severely limiting exploration of the electrical properties of metallic-phase MX2 and their applications…
A remarkable HER performance on the basal plane of 1T′-MoS2 was observed, with an onset overpotential of 65 mV and a current density of 607 mA cm−2 at 400 mV (versus RHE), which is among the best in MoS2-based electrocatalysts. This excellent HER performance originates from the higher catalytic activity on the basal plane and better charge transport ability of 1T′-MoS2 compared to 2H-MoS2.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the product of Wang to convert the transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet to be 1T’ because Yu teaches that 1T’ has superior HER performance due to its unique basal plane.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page(s) 6, the Applicant argues that “At least Wang does not disclose the configuration of single-atomically dispersed metal adsorbed on the top site of the transitional-metal as recited in amended claim 1. This is not considered persuasive. Wang discloses a plurality of single-atomically dispersed metal atoms disposed on at least one surface of a transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet (TMD NS) (see e.g. page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”; page 1279, Fig 1) and configured to adsorb on a top site of the transition-metal (see e.g. page 1277, Scheme 1, “Protrusion” f and “Assembly” m; page 1278, col 2, “2.3.2 Single-Atom Protrusions”: “”most kinds of single atoms prefer to be fixed at the hollow or Mo top sites”).
On page(s) 6, the Applicant argues that the configuration of claim 1 has the unexpected success in “improving HER performance”. It is noted that the burden of Applicant to provide data displaying comparative data displaying the alleged unexpected result is unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance. See MPEP 716.02(b). It is further noted that in order to establish unexpected results over a claimed range, applicants should compare a sufficient number of tests both inside and outside the claimed range to show the criticality of the claimed range. In re Hill, 284 F.2d 955, 128 USPQ 197 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP 716.02(d) II. Additionally, the claims must be commensurate in scope with the proffered data to provide a nexus between the claims and the data establishing evidence of unexpected results. See MPEP 716.02(d).
On page(s) 7, the Applicant argues that Wang contradicts itself because the reference discusses that the introduction single metal atoms into a 2H TMD changes it to 1T but the reference also discloses that introducing Rh into MoS2 is 2H, not 1T. This is not a contradiction as Wang states the phases “tend” to change, not that they always do.
The applicant also argues that the prior art rejection is incorrect because “Wang actually teaches a 2H-TMD NS and a single dispersed metal atom/1T-TMD NS in certain embodiments, but not 1T TMD NS itself”. This is not considered persuasive. It appears based on this argument and the one in the paragraph below that the Applicant is arguing about a method of forming the 1T’ phase TMD. However, that is not required by the claim. Additionally, the prior art rejection was based on the teaching of Yu that states 1T’ has “remarkable HER performance on the basal plane” relative to the 2H phase. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to convert the TMD nanosheet of Wang to be 1T’.
On page(s) 7-8, the Applicant argues that neither Wang nor Yu teaches that unexpectedly unchanged 1T’ phase after introduction of single metal atoms into the TMD NS. This is not considered persuasive because the claim does not require an unchanged 1T’ phase after introduction of single metal atoms into the TMD NS.
On page(s) 8, the Applicant argues the invention of claim has an unexpectedly improved performance. However, Wang discloses that single-atomically dispersed metal / two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenide nanosheet hybrid has improved HER performance (see e.g. page 1277, col 1; 1306, col 1) and Yu teaches that using 1T’ phase further improves HER performance. Therefore, the results do not appear to be unexpected in view of the prior art teachings.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALEXANDER W KEELING whose telephone number is (571)272-9961. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM. 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, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. 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.
/ALEXANDER W KEELING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights