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
The Request for Continued Examination and amendments filed on November 26, 2025 in response to Final Office Action mailed on September 18, 2025 were received and entered. Claim 1 was amended. Claims 1-18 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Regarding claim 1 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation), applicant argues that Zhang do not discloses the feature where the carbonaceous material comprises graphite. It is further argued that a modification of Zhang carbonaceous material would not have been obvious because Zhang relies on carbon nanotubes solely as its base structure for growing a metal organic framework [Remarks p. 2].
Applicant’s arguments, see page 2, filed on November 26, 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Because of the direct or indirect dependency of claims 2-18 on claim 1, the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections applied to claims 2, 3, 6, 7, 15 and 16, and the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections applied to claims 4, 5, 8-14, 17 and 18 has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation) and Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation) and Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 1, Mah teaches an anode for a lithium battery comprising a porous anode active material, which have enhanced charge/discharge efficiency and effective charge/discharge capacity [0012 and 0013]. The porous anode active material comprises fine particles of metallic substance capable of forming a lithium alloy, a crystalline carbonaceous substance and a porous carbonaceous material coating and binding the fine particles of metallic substance and the crystalline carbonaceous substance (self-bound to a surface of the carbonaceous material) [0016-0018]. The crystalline carbonaceous substance may be graphite, among other candidates [0052]. The graphite particles may be pretreated with an acid to have an acidic functional group, such as -COOH, etc. on its surface [0087]. The porous carbonaceous material coating is taught to be a sintered product of a carbon precursor [0085].
Mah does not teach the feature “wherein the porous carbon coating layer self-bound to the surface of the carbonaceous material is obtained by binding of carbon grown through chemical binding induced between a surface of activated carbonaceous material and a carbon coating precursor”.
Zhang teaches the preparation of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks (ZIF8)-carbon nanotubes (CNTs) hybrid structures as Li-ion battery anodes (same field of endeavor of Mah) [p. 37814; par. 2 and 7]. The CNTs were pretreated to have oxidized carboxylic groups on its surface (carbonaceous material preparation) and dispersed in in 2-methylimidazole (Hmim) (organic compound) and methanol, followed by adding Zn(NO3)2·6H2O (metal compound) methanol solution in a dropwise manner. The mixture was magnetically stirred for 15 min [p. 37814; par. 4]. By this process the ZIF8 growth on the CNTs was performed [p. 37814; par. 4, p. 37815; par. 1 and Fig. 1]. The obtained ZIF8-CNT composites were suction-filtrated into a thin film and dried at 40 °C under vacuum [p. 37814; par. 4]. After this step the thin films were pyrolyzed at 500 °C under an argon atmosphere with a heating rate of 5 °C/min for 2, 3, and 4 h [pag.37814; par. 5]. As a product of the pyrolysis, porous hybrid structures consisting of ZnO NPs coated on CNTs and carbon coated layer coated on ZnO NPs were obtained (porous carbon coating) [p. 37815; par. 1, p. 37817; par. 1, Fig. 1 and 6b]. It is taught that by this method it is possible to perform a tailored pyrolysis period which offers an important way to optimize metal organic framework−CNT hybrid structures and develop high performance energy storage systems [p. 37820; conclusions].
The invention of Zhang is based on CNTs as its base structure; however Chen teaches that is a common practice to select carriers with excellent conductivity and stability to protect ZIFs materials (analogous to Zhang ZIF8) from being destroyed during pyrolysis. Among other materials, graphitized carbon materials (which include graphite) are frequently used as promising carriers [p. 6015; col. 1; par. 2 and col. 2; par. 1].
From Chen’s teachings it would be possible to employ the taught methodology of Zhang to grow the ZIF8 (carbon precursor) on the crystalline carbonaceous substance material taught by Mah which may be graphite. Following the methodology, after the pyrolysis, a porous carbon coating layer self-bound to the surface of the carbonaceous material would be obtained.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the negative active material of Mah to include the feature “wherein the porous carbon coating layer self-bound to the surface of the carbonaceous material is obtained by binding of carbon grown through chemical binding induced between a surface of activated carbonaceous material and a carbon coating precursor”, because by applying Zhang methodology, evidenced by Chen, to the graphite crystalline carbonaceous substance material taught by Mah, the metal organic framework structures can be optimized and protected from being destroyed during pyrolysis and high performance energy storage systems can be developed.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the surface of the modified negative active material contains a porous structure comprising Zn.
Regarding claim 5, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Mah further teaches on Example 4 the employment of graphite particles having an average diameter of 6 µm on the preparation of its anodes.
Regarding claim 6, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion the recited feature of claim 6 is met.
Regarding claim 7, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the features recited on claim 7 were covered.
Regarding claim 15, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. From claim 1 discussion (on which claim 7 depends), Zhang teaches that the obtained ZIF8 composites (ZIF8-graphite from Mah’s modified teachings) were suction-filtrated into a thin film and dried at 40 °C under vacuum [p. 37814; par. 4].
Regarding claim 16, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. Mah further teaches that its carbon precursor (modified by Zhang and Chen) may be sintered at a temperature ranging from a carbonization temperature of the carbon precursor to 1400°C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the sintering temperature range disclosed by Mah because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obvious. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation) and Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Cho et al. (US 20140234714 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein a content of the porous carbon coating layer is 50 wt% or less based on a total weight of the negative electrode active material”.
Cho teaches a negative active material including a composite core, and a coating
layer disposed on at least part of the composite core, wherein the coating layer (porous carbon coating layer analogous) comprises a metal oxide coating layer and an amorphous (which can be porous) carbonaceous coating layer (same field of endeavor of Mah) [0028]. In some embodiments the amount of the amorphous carbonaceous (which can be porous) coating layer may be from about 0.1 wt% to about 30 wt% (50 wt% or less) based on the total weight of the negative active material [0042]. It is taught that when the amount of the amorphous carbonaceous (which can be porous) coating layer of the coating layer (porous carbon coating layer analogous) is within these ranges, the initial efficiency and battery life characteristics of a lithium battery are effectively improved [0037 and 0042].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the negative electrode active material of Mah, Zhang and Chen to include the feature “wherein a content of the porous carbon coating layer is 50 wt% or less based on a total weight of the negative electrode active material”, because Cho teaches that when the amount of the amorphous carbonaceous (which can be porous) coating layer of the coating layer is within these ranges, the initial efficiency and battery life characteristics of a lithium battery are effectively improved.
Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation) and Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 7 above, further in view of Park et al. (US 20120244334 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7. From claim 1 discussion (on which claim 7 depends), Zhang teaches a step of preparing the ZIF8-CNTs films where the CNTs (modified to employ graphite) were dispersed in 2-methylimidazole (Hmim) (organic compound) and methanol, followed by adding Zn(NO3)2·6H2O (metal compound) methanol solution in a dropwise manner. The mixture was magnetically stirred for 15 min [p. 37814; par. 4]. This procedure is analogous to claim 8(a) features.
Mah, Zhang and Chen do not teach the employment of hydrogen peroxide as part of the MOF growing directly on the surface of the carbonaceous material step.
Park teaches a method for prepare a complex of an electrode-active transition metal compound and a fibrous carbon material [0013 and 0014], which can be used in making lithium secondary batteries, therefore negative electrode active materials can be done by its method (same field of endeavor of Mah) [0093]. A complex according to the present invention can be made by preparing a mixture wherein non-functionalized fibrous carbon materials, surface-functionalized fibrous carbon materials, and transition metal compounds are dispersed. It is taught that the surface functionalization could be achieved by employing hydrogen peroxide to oxidize the surface of the carbon material [0070 and 0073]. Because of this teaching, it can be advantageous to include hydrogen peroxide within the precursor solution in order to facilitate the surface functionalization (MOF growing) on the carbonaceous material surface.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for preparing the negative electrode active material of Mah, Zhang and Chen to include the feature where “hydrogen peroxide” is employed as part of the MOF growing directly on the surface of the carbonaceous material step, because Park teaches its employment could facilitate the surface functionalization of the carbonaceous material by oxidizing its surface, thereby contributing on the MOF growing directly on the surface of the carbonaceous material.
Regarding claims 9-11, Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 8. From claim 1 discussion (on which claims 7 and 8 depends) was taught that the metal compound employed for the ZIF8 composite structures preparation was Zn(NO3)2·6H2O (zinc nitrate hexahydrate) [p. 37814; par. 3].
Regarding claim 12, Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 8. From claim 1 discussion (on which claims 7 and 8 depends) was taught that the organic compound employed for the ZIF8 composite structures preparation was 2-methylimidazole (Hmim) [p. 37813; par. 1, p. 37814; par. 3].
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation), Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation) and Park et al. (US 20120244334 A1) as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Chang et al. (US 20050287440 A1) and Biemmi, E. et al. (High-throughput screening of synthesis parameters in the formation of the metal-organic frameworks MOF-5 and HKUST-1. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials 117 (2009) 111–117, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 13, Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 8, except “wherein the metal compound is at least one of Zn acetate or Co acetate, and the organic compound is 2-methyl imidazole”.
Chang teaches a anode active material comprising a carbonaceous material comprising a metal/metalloid-carbide coating layer (same field of endeavor of Mah), where the metal carbide is cobalt acetate [Abstract, 0034 and 0053]. Biemmi teaches that for synthesis of metal organic frameworks (MOF 5) the employment of metal acetates (which can be Zn or Co acetate) lead to a higher nucleation rate which usually results on an increased number of crystals with limited size and that the change in the pH of the reaction medium due to the presence of acetate does not lead to by-products. These two advantages propitiate a purer and more crystalline MOF structures [p. 116; par. 4].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for preparing a negative
electrode active material of Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park to include the feature: “wherein the metal compound is at least one of Zn acetate or Co acetate”, because Chang teaches the referenced limitation and Biemmi teaches that the employment of metal acetates propitiates a purer and more crystalline MOF structures due to a higher nucleation rate and because the change in the pH of the reaction medium due to the presence of acetate does not lead to by-products.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation), Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation) and Park et al. (US 20120244334 A1) as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Chu, X., et al. (Excellent catalytic performance of graphite oxide in the selective oxidation of glutaraldehyde by aqueous hydrogen peroxide. RSC Advances 2.18 (2012): 7135-7139, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 14, Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 8, except wherein hydrogen peroxide is used in an amount of 1 wt% to 50 wt% in the precursor solution.
Chu teaches the preparation of graphite oxide in a process where 4.0 g of graphite powder (carbonaceous material) was put into a solution containing NaNO3 (2.0 g) and concentrated H2SO4 (98%, 92 ml) (~165.89 g). Then, 12.0 g of KMnO4 was added gradually to the above solution. In a further step, 56 mL (~56 g) of distilled water and 15 mL of 50% H2O2 solution (~10.88 g) were employed [p. 7136; par. 2]. From description above the employed H2O2 weight amount was (10.88 g/250.77 g)x 100 = 4.38 wt%. The process taught by Chu is on the same field of endeavor of the method for preparing the negative electrode active material of Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park where on the step of preparing a precursor solution hydrogen peroxide is employed (claim 8). Chu teaches that by its method, therefore by employing the specified amount of H2O2 (within the claimed range) a complete oxidation (activation) of the graphite (carbonaceous material) can be achieved [p. 7137; par. 2]. This advantage could induce the direct growth of the MOF on the surface of the carbonaceous material based on the teachings of Mah, Zhang and Park where the carbonaceous material may be pretreated with an acid.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for preparing a negative electrode active material of Mah, Zhang, Chen and Park to include the feature: “wherein hydrogen peroxide is used in an amount of 1 wt% to 50 wt% in the precursor solution”, because Chu teaches that employing the specified amount of H2O2 (within the claimed range) a complete oxidation (activation) of the graphite (carbonaceous material) can be achieved, which can help to induce the MOF growth on the surface of the carbonaceous material.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation) and Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation) as applied to claim 7 above, further in view of Pham, H. T. T. et al. (Robust Design of Dual‐Phasic Carbon Cathode for Lithium–Oxygen Batteries. Advanced Functional Materials 29.31 (2019): 1902915, see NPL documents for citation) and Jo et al. (US 20170309902 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Mah, Zhang and Chen teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 7, except the method comprising a chemical etching step for removing the metal element, after the step of forming a porous carbon coating layer.
Pham teaches a similar procedure for preparing a MOF/CNT material (same field of endeavor of the modified method of Mah, Zhang and Chen), where after the carbonization process (porous carbon coating layer formation) a chemical etching of Zn was performed with H2SO4 [p. 2; par. 1]. Jo further teaches an example of an acid treatment for a porous negative electrode active material, employing a 0.5 M hydrochloric acid aqueous solution [Example 1 and 0087]. It is evidenced that an acid treatment (chemical etching) on a negative electrode active material could serve to remove metal impurities present on the material and further create pores on the previously metal occupied sites [0051 and Example 1].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for preparing a negative electrode active material of Mah, Zhang and Chen to include the feature: [where the method] “further comprises a chemical etching step for removing the metal element, after the step of forming a porous carbon coating layer” because Pham teaches the referenced feature and Jo teaches that an acid treatment (chemical etching) on a negative electrode active material could serve to remove metal impurities present on the material and further create pores on the previously metal occupied sites.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mah et al. (US 20080145757 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (MOF-Derived ZnO Nanoparticles Covered by N-Doped Carbon Layers and Hybridized on Carbon Nanotubes for Lithium-Ion Battery Anodes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 37813-37822, see NPL documents for citation), Chen et al. (Carbon thin-layer-protected active sites for ZIF-8-derived nitrogen-enriched carbon frameworks/expanded graphite as metal-free catalysts for oxygen reduction in acidic media. Chemistry of Materials 30.17 (2018): 6014-6025, see NPL documents for citation), Pham, H. T. T. et al. (Robust Design of Dual‐Phasic Carbon Cathode for Lithium–Oxygen Batteries. Advanced Functional Materials 29.31 (2019): 1902915, see NPL documents for citation) and Jo et al. (US 20170309902 A1) as applied to claim 17 above, further in view of Chen, Q. and Liao, J. (CN 108649210 A, see machine translation for citation) and Cech, O. et al. (The effect of post-treatment on the composition of formed negative electrode mass in lead acid batteries studied by XRD. Journal of Energy Storage 14 (2017) 378–382, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 18, Mah, Zhang, Chen, Pham and Jo teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 17, except the method comprising a chemical etching step for removing the metal element, after the step of forming a porous carbon coating layer.
Chen and Liao teach several examples of calcinated carbon nanotubes treated with acid for a period of 2-4 h with an acid mixture (Example 1-6) [32-36]. The agitation feature could be considered a general practice to maximize the acid treatment (chemical etching) step.
Cech teaches about the effect of post treatment on negative electrode materials after its extraction from electrolyte (sulfuric acid). The negative electrode materials were washed with water or ethanol to completely remove the acid prior to be dried at 50 oC (analogous to washing and drying the negative electrode active material after the chemical etching) [p. 378; par. 3, p. 379 par. 5-7 and p. 381; par. 1].
Despite the chemical etching limitations of claim 18, the motivation for this procedure still being aligned with Jo teachings about the acid treatment on a negative electrode active material serving to remove metal impurities present on the material and further create pores on the previously metal occupied sites, as stated for claim 17 [0051 and Example 1]. In addition, from general knowledge, the claimed temperature range (25°C to 120°C ) for post-etching drying can be suitable for removing water or alcohols after the sample washing to remove the employed acid solution.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for preparing a negative electrode active material of Mah, Zhang, Chen, Pham and Jo to include the feature: “wherein the chemical etching step is carried out by agitating the negative electrode active material in an acid solution at a concentration of 0.5M to 3 M for 1 hour to 10 hours, followed by drying at 25°C to 120°C” because Jo, Chen and Liao and Cech teaches the cited elements and Jo teaches that an acid treatment (including the claimed one) serve to the purpose of metal impurities removal from the material and further creates pores on the previously metal occupied sites. In addition, from general knowledge, the temperature range claimed (25°C to 120°C ) can be suitable for removing water or alcohols after the sample washing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERTO RAMOS RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)272-2740. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/G.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JAMES M ERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 01/06/2026