DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to communication received on 11/14/25.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The text of those sections of AIA 35 U.S.C. code not present in this action can be found in previous office actions dated 5/23/25 and 8/14/25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The claim rejection(s) under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 2nd Paragraph or AIA 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter on claims 11 and 12 are withdrawn because the claims have been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The claim rejection(s) under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Van Engelen US PGPub 2014/0305863 hereinafter ENGELEN in view of Verduzco et al. US PGPub 2020/0071200 hereinafter VERDUZCO on claims 10-12 are withdrawn because the independent claim 1 has been amended.
Claim(s) 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Engelen US PGPub 2014/0305863 hereinafter ENGELEN in view of Verduzco et al. US PGPub 2020/0071200 hereinafter VERDUZCO and Van Der Wal et al. US PGPub 2013/0186761 hereinafter VANDERWAL.
As for claim 10, ENGELEN teaches "A process for making a composite membrane comprising the steps: (i) providing a moving poriferous support (1) impregnated with a curable composition, wherein the composition is present in the pores of the support and on a surface of the support" (abstract, lines 1-5), "Ion permeable membranes are useful in a number of applications, including ... capacitive deionisation used in e.g. flow through capacitors (FTC) for the purification of water" (paragraph 183, lines 1-6), "Polar solvents, especially aqueous solvents, are preferred because these are particularly good at dissolving component" (paragraph 88, lines 19- 21) i.e. a method of manufacturing a capacitive deionization electrode laminate comprising: an impregnation step of impregnating a porous substrate layer with a hydrophilic polymer solution comprising a hydrophilic polymer.
ENGELEN further teaches "(iii) after performing step (ii), irradiating the support, thereby curing the composition present therein" (abstract, lines 7-9) and "The curable composition preferably comprises a compound comprising at least two curable groups, i.e. a crosslinking agent" (paragraph 37), i.e. wherein the crosslinking solution comprising one or more cross-linking agents is mixed into the curable composition prior to the application to the composition to the surface of the porous substrate.
Therefore, ENGELEN is silent on wherein the cross-linking solution is different from the hydrophilic polymer solution.
VANDERWAL teaches “The invention relates to an apparatus to remove ions ( e.g., to purify an aqueous solution), such an apparatus comprising an ion exchange membrane, an ion exchange membrane comprising a polymer and a method for preparing such a polymer” (paragraph 1) and “A method for water purification is by capacitive deionization” (paragraph 3, line 1-2).
VANDERWAL also teaches “The crosslinking reaction may be performed in a coating or a film, such that a sheet of crosslinked HBP is formed. The reactive film may be prepared by any processing technique feasible, such as for example by spraying a solution that contains both the HBP and the crosslinker onto a surface, or by applying such a solution onto a substrate by any coating technique, e.g. by a so-called doctor blading technique. The crosslinking reaction may be performed directly onto the surface or substrate of choice, for example onto a specific support layer or onto an electrode” (paragraph 115, lines 2-11) and “The crosslinking step may also at first instance be done in a reactor, and may subsequently be transferred to the object, substrate or surface of choice, where the reaction may be completed” (paragraph 116, lines 1-4).
In summation, VANDERWAL establishes that the crosslinking of a polymer and a crosslinker can take place on the substrate as desired, either totally or partially, as part of a solution that is applied mid-reaction or even after the reaction is completed. VANDERWAL is silent on providing the crosslinking agent after the application of the polymer to the surface, but does establish that switching the order of the steps was well within the skill of the ordinary artisan in this art and produced equivalent results.
With that in mind, Examiner also notes that in general, the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959). See MPEP 2144 IV.
In this case, the transposition of steps such that the mixing of the polymer and crosslinker happens on the desired substrate instead of in a container prior to application, such that ENGELEN’s process includes a crosslinking step of coating the hydrophilic polymer-coated porous substrate layer with a crosslinking solution comprising one or more cross-linking agents… wherein the cross-linking solution is different from the hydrophilic polymer solution, was within the skill of the ordinary artisan, as established by VANDERWAL.
ENGELEN is silent on an ion exchange layer formation step of coating one or both surfaces of the porous substrate layer filled with the crosslinked hydrophilic polymer with an ion exchange resin solution.
However, as noted above, ENGELEN teaches "Ion permeable membranes are useful in a number of applications, including ... capacitive deionisation used in e.g. flow through capacitors (FTC) for the purification of water" (paragraph 183, lines 1-6).
VERDUZCO teaches "A method of forming an electrode for capacitive deionization includes ... depositing an solution comprising an ion-exchange material, a second crosslinkable hydrophilic polymer, and a crosslinker for the second crosslinkable hydrophilic polymer onto the crosslinked porous layer; and optionally annealing and/or drying the solution on the crosslinked porous layer" (abstract), i.e. an ion exchange layer formation step of coating one or both surfaces of the porous substrate layer filled with the crosslinked hydrophilic polymer with an ion exchange resin solution
VERDUZCO further teaches "One or more embodiments herein relate to a fabrication process that is scalable and involves the deposition of multi-layer coatings based on cross-linkable polymers. As disclosed herein, the composition of the electrode and binder can be varied to increase electrode capacity, target specific ions, and improved energy efficiency. Additionally, the fabrication techniques disclosed herein do not require organic solvents in the fabrication of the device" (paragraph 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include an ion exchange layer formation step of coating one or both surfaces of the porous substrate layer filled with the crosslinked hydrophilic polymer with an ion exchange resin solution in the process of ENGELEN because VERDUZCO teaches that such a step allows for the formation of capacitive deionization membrane and further allows for control of the electrode capacity, target specific ions, and improved energy efficiency.
As for claim 11, ENGELEN is silent on wherein the hydrophilic polymer includes a vinyl alcohol based polymer.
ENGELEN does teach "A preferred curable composition comprises: (i) 2.5 to 80 wt% of crosslinking agent(s) comprising at least two ethylenically unsaturated groups" (paragraph 42-43).
VERDUZCO teaches "In one or more embodiments, the first and second crosslinkable hydrophilic polymer may be, independent from each other, selected from the group consisting of polyvinyl alcohol" (paragraph 60, lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the hydrophilic polymer comprises polyvinyl alcohol in the process of ENGELEN because VERDUZCO teaches that such a polyvinyl alcohol polymer allows for the production of an anion selective electrode.
As for claim 12, ENGELEN teaches crosslinking agents but is silent on wherein in the crosslinking step, any one or more crosslinking agents are selected from the group consisting of glutaraldehyde (GA), diallylamine and triallylamine.
VERDUZCO teaches “In one or more embodiments, the cross-linker for the first and second cross-linkable hydrophilic polymers may be, independent from each other, at least one of sulfosuccinic acid, formaldehyde, glyoxal, adipic aldehyde, a dicarboxylic acid, a tricarboxylic acid, a polycarboxlic acid, anhydrides, acid chlorides, a silane, 3-glycidyloxypropyl) trimethoxysilane (GOPS), polyethylene glycol (PEG) and glutaraldehyde” (paragraph 64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein in the crosslinking step, any one or more crosslinking agents are selected from the group consisting of glutaraldehyde (GA) in the process of ENGELEN because VERDUZCO teaches that such a crosslinker was known as a crosslinker and was able to be used in concert with other crosslinkers.
As for claim 13, ENGELEN Is silent on the weight of the polymer.
VANDERWAL teaches “The hyperbranched ( co )polymer according to an embodiment has a number average molecular weight (Mn) in the range of 250 Dalton to 100,000 Dalton, from 500 Dalton to 50,000 Dalton, from 750 Dalton to 25,000 Dalton, or a molecular weight of 1000 Dalton to 10,000 Dalton” (paragraph 40, lines 1-5). It is expected that a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention could have converted the Dalton to a g/mol, which overlap with the instant claimed range of wherein a weight average molecular weight of the hydrophilic polymer is 3000g/mol or less. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d, 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
VANDERWAL also teaches “The preparation methods and reactants ( e.g. branching monomer, co-monomer, initiator and/or chain transfer agent) described herein are versatile in the sense that the HBP can be prepared from readily available monomers and reactants, and that it can be tailored with respect to its properties by simply varying the used amounts of the branching monomer, the co-monomer(s), the initiator and the chain transfer agent. The extent of branching of the hyperbranched (co) polymer may be controlled by adjusting the amount of branching monomer in the polymerization reaction, while the use of the types and amounts of co-monomers may determine the type and amount of ion exchange groups and/or reactive groups in the HBP. Care may be taken to select a ratio between the chain transfer agent and the branching monomer such that gelation is prevented during the polymerization reaction, while still generating a HBP of a substantial molecular weight” (paragraph 93, lines 1-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skil in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein a weight average molecular weight of the hydrophilic polymer is 3000g/mol or less in the process of ENGELEN because VANDERWAL teaches that such a molecular weight polymer is provides proper gelation while maintaining other properties.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 10-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 KRISTEN A DAGENAIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1114. The examiner can normally be reached 8-12 and 1-5.
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, Dah Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/KRISTEN A DAGENAIS/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717