DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the RCE with amendments and remarks filed 06/04/2026, in which claims 10, 12, 16, 18-25, 30, 32 and 36-45 are pending and ready for examination.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/04/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 04 JUNE 2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and has/have been considered. An initialed copy of Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 19, 20, 30, 32 and 36-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “wherein the graphene oxide membrane has a flux of at least 80 liters per square meter hour MPa (LMH/MPa) and a rejection rate of 93-95% of rhodamine-WT as measured with a 7.5 mg/L rhodamine-WT solution at a pressure of 50 psi”.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “wherein the graphene oxide membrane has a flux of at least 130 LMH/MPa and a rejection rate of about 90% of Na₂SO₄, as measured with a 10 mM Na₂SO₄ solution at a pressure of 50 psi”.
Claim 30 recites the limitation “wherein the graphene oxide membrane has a flux of at least 130 LMH/MPa and a rejection rate of about 90% of Na₂SO₄, as measured with a 0.1 mM Na₂SO₄ solution at a pressure of 50 psi”.
Claim 39 recites the limitation “wherein the graphene oxide membrane has a flux of at least 130 LMH/MPa and a rejection rate of 93-95% of rhodamine- WT as measured with a 7.5 mg/L rhodamine-WT solution at a pressure of 50 psi”.
However, the original disclosure only discloses that the graphene oxide membrane has:
a rejection rate of 93-95% of rhodamine-WT (claim 19 of the preliminary amendments dated 09/14/2022, and supported by Fig. 6B, [0061], [0077]),
a rejection rate of about 90% of Na2SO4 as measured with a 0.1 mM Na2SO4 solution (claim 20 of the preliminary amendments dated 09/14/2022, and as supported by Fig. 6C);
a flux of water from 80-276 LMH/MPa [0061], 130-280 [0075], Fig. 6A.
The original disclosure does not disclose:
(to claims 19 and 39) the flux and rejection rate of rhodamine-WT are measured with the conditions of “7.5 mg/L rhodamine-WT solution at a pressure of 50 psi”; as the conditions under which the rejection rate of 93-95% are not disclosed at all, and further the conditions under which the flux was measured are not disclosed.
(to claim 20) the flux and 90% rejection rate of Na₂SO₄ are “measured with a 10 mM Na₂SO₄ solution at a pressure of 50 psi”, because the rejection rate of 90% is only disclosed to be achieved with a 0.1 mM Na₂SO₄ solution (Fig. 6C), and is silent to the pressure, and further the conditions under which the flux was measured are not disclosed.
(to claim 30) the flux and rejection rate of about 90% of Na₂SO₄, as measured with a 0.1 mM Na₂SO₄ solution “at a pressure of 50 psi”, because the original disclosure is silent to the pressure, and further the conditions under which the flux was measured are not disclosed.
Claims 32, and 36-41 are rejected for depending on a claim having new matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 10, 12, 16, 18-25, 30, 32 and 36-45 remain non-obvious and allowable over the prior art for the reasons as indicated in the previous Notice Of Allowance dated 01/27/2026. However claims 19, 20, 30, 32 and 36-41 are now rejected under 112(a) for having new matter, as detailed above.
Thus claims 10, 12, 16, 18, 21-25 and 42-45 are allowed; and
Claims 19, 20, 30, 32 and 36-41 are seen to contain allowable subject matter, and would be allowed if the 112(a) rejections are overcome.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric J. McCullough whose telephone number is (571)272-8885. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00-6:00.
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, Benjamin L Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. 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.
/ERIC J MCCULLOUGH/ Examiner, Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights