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
This Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed February 25, 2026. Claim 16 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 is maintained.
The following rejections are overcome:
Claims 1-22 & 24 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
Claim(s) 1-22 & 24 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iizuka WO 2020049884 in view of Hoshino et al. KR 20120024423.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-22 & 24 are newly rejected as follows:
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed April 15, 2026 has/have been received and complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner, and an initialed copied is attached herewith.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 15. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-22 & 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iizuka WO 2020049884 in view of Hoshino et al. KR 20120024423, and further in view of Hoshino WO-2017131051-A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Hoshino ‘051”).
With respect to claim 1, Iizuka teaches an ion recovery device (See the Abstract), comprising: an ion selective permeable membrane (See the Abstract) comprising an ion conductive layer containing a lithium ion conductor formed of an inorganic substance (lithium ion conductor; See the Abstract), and a support layer (specific polymer (B) having an anionic group; See the Abstract), wherein the ion selective permeable membrane has a configuration (I)wherein in configuration (I) the ion conductive layer is provided in contact with one principal surface side of a support layer (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1), and an electrode is provided in contact with another principal surface side opposite to the one principal surface side on which the ion conductive layer is provided (two electrodes circumscribe the ion exchange membrane and thus forming electrode/ lithium conductor A and polymer B composite film/ electrode; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1 for composite film; Fig. 2 and the Electrodialysis test; See composite film 10, circumscribed by electrodes 3& 4. Forming configuration 1 see Fig. 2, where all there components can be in direct contact); the ion conductive layer includes at least one of a particle layer containing ion conductor particles and a thin film layer which is a film of the ion conductor (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1). With respect to claim 3, the body is formed of at least one selected from the group consisting of carbon, a metal, a polymer, and a ceramic (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1). With respect to claim 5,
the ion conductive layer includes both the particle layer and the thin film layer (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1; the lithium conductor A is preferably a; particle; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section). With respect to claim 6, the limitation regarding the thin film layer being a vapor deposition film is a process limitation in a product claim. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Therefore, so long as the product of the prior art is the same as that of the claims, the limitations are satisfied. Here, the composite film is the same as set forth by Applicant. With respect to claim 8, the ion conductor contains a lithium ion conductor of at least one selected from the group consisting of a lithium-containing oxide and a lithium- containing oxynitride ((Li3PO4 or LiPON; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 9, the lithium-containing oxide is an oxide containing at least one selected from the group consisting of La, Zr, Ti, Al, and Si (LixaLayaTiO3; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 10, the lithium-containing oxide is at least one oxide selected from the group consisting of Li3PO4, Li-La-Zr-O (LLZO), Li-La-Ti-O (LLTO), and Li-Al-Si-P-Ti-Ge-O (LASiPTiGeO) ((Li3PO4 or LiPON; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 11, the lithium-containing oxynitride is an oxide containing at least one selected from the group consisting of La, Zr, Ti, Al, and Si (LiA1ON (A1 is at least one of Si, Al See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 12, the lithium-containing oxynitride is at least one oxynitride selected from the group consisting of Li3PO4-N (LiPON), LLZO-N (LLZON), LLTO-N (LLTON), and LASiPTiGeO-N, which are obtained by adding nitrogen to the lithium-containing oxide (( LiPON; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 19, the ion selective permeable membrane has another electrode on a principal surface side opposite to the principal surface side on which the electrode is provided (two electrodes circumscribe the ion exchange membrane and thus forming electrode/ lithium conductor A and polymer B composite film/ electrode; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1 for composite film; Fig. 2 and the Electrodialysis test; See composite film 10, circumscribed by electrodes 3& 4. Forming configuration 1 see Fig. 2, where all there components can be in direct contact).
Iizuka does not teach or suggest: a support layer is formed of a porous body (claim 1); the ion conductive layer extends substantially over and abuts the support layer (claim 1); the ion conductive layer film is thin (claim 1); the support layer is a porous body (claims 2 & 3); the ion selective permeable membrane has two of the support layers and the ion conductive layer is sandwiched between the two support layers (claim 7); the ion selective permeable membrane has an alkali-resistant layer provided over an entire surface of one principal surface of the ion conductive layer (claim 13); the alkali-resistant layer is a layer containing at least one selected from the group consisting of a metal oxide and a metal oxynitride (claim 14); the electrode and the catalyst provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (claim 15); the electrode and the catalyst are provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (claim 16); the catalyst is provided between the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 17); the catalyst is in contact with the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 18); the catalyst is a catalyst that inhibits an overvoltage required for gas generation (claim 20); the catalyst contains at least one selected from the group consisting of nickel, tin, platinum, gold, iridium, palladium, and ruthenium (claim 21); the ion selective permeable membrane has a porous body protective layer (claim 22); the ion selective permeable membrane has a configuration (II): wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of an electrode and a catalyst is provided on another principal surface side of the ion conductive layer opposite to the one principal surface side on which the support layer is provided (claim 24).
Hoshino teaches that it is well known in the art to employ an ion recovery device (lithium ion separation and recovery cell; See then Abstract), with a support layer is formed of a porous body (ion selective permeation membrane may porous organic diaphragms; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 8; claim 1); the support layer is a porous body (ion selective permeation membrane may porous organic diaphragms; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 8; claims 2 & 3); the electrode and a catalyst provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (platinum catalyst to both ends of a cation-permeable membrane; Example 3; claim 15); the electrode and the catalyst are provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (platinum catalyst to both ends of a cation-permeable membrane; Example 3; claim 16); the catalyst contains at least one selected from the group consisting of nickel, tin, platinum, gold, iridium, palladium, and ruthenium (platinum catalyst to both ends of a cation-permeable membrane; Example 3; claim 21); the ion selective permeable membrane has a porous body protective layer (ion selective permeation membrane may porous organic diaphragms; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 8; claim 22). The ion selective permeation membrane may be made from a polymer. See Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 9.
Hoshino ‘051 teaches that it is well known in the art to employ an ion recovery device (lithium ion separation and recovery cell; See TECHNICAL-FIELD), the ion conductive layer extends substantially over and abuts the support layer (the ion conductive layer 10A and support layer 10B are two separate distinct layers, where both layers are in extended substantial contact and abutment. See Fig. 1 below and DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS paragraph 7;claim 1);
PNG
media_image1.png
393
618
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Iizuka, Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051 are analogous art from the same field of endeavor, namely fabricating ion recovery devices with ion selective permeation membranes made of polymers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the ion selective permeable membrane support layer including a porosity as taught by Hoshino, in the ion recovery device of Iizuka , in order to improve ion permeability.
With respect to the ion conductive layer extending substantially over and abuts the support layer; it would have been obvious to employ the ion conductive layer configuration (I) of Hoshino ‘051, as the ion conductive layer configuration of Iizuka in view of Hoshino, to improve ion recovery. Iizuka teaches that the form of the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention may be any form that has film-forming properties and has lithium ion conductivity. See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Both the lithium ion conductor (A) and the polymer (B) constituting the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention have lithium ion conductivity. See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Therefore, one form of the membrane includes a form in which the lithium ion conductor (A) is dispersed in the polymer (B) (for example, a form of a composite film). See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Thus, the dispersion form may be changed and adapted, and Hoshino ‘051shows conventionality of two distinct layers. Lastly, it would have been obvious to employ two separate layers, as making separable essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961).
With respect to the ion conductive layer film being thin (claim 1); it would have been obvious ion conductive layer configuration of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051,as change in size of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
With respect to the ion selective permeable membrane having two of the support layers and the ion conductive layer is sandwiched between the two support layers (claim 7); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, in order to improve ion conductivity. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to employ two support layers, as duplication of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
With respect to the ion selective permeable membrane having an alkali-resistant layer provided over an entire surface of one principal surface of the ion conductive layer (claim 13); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, in order to improve ion conductivity, as Iizuka teaches the support may include metal oxides, such as LixaLayaTiO3; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7. The ion selective permeable membrane of lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1. The composite film may include more than one lithium conductor. See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7. It’s the examiners position that the additional lithium conductor material in the composite film may be a separate layer, as essential working parts of the device may be made separable. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). The separate layer is an alkali-resistant layer.
With respect to the alkali-resistant layer being a layer containing at least one selected from the group consisting of a metal oxide and a metal oxynitride (claim 14); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, in order to improve ion conductivity as Iizuka teaches the support may include metal oxides, such as LixaLayaTiO3; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7.
With respect to the catalyst being provided between the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 17); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to the catalyst being in contact with the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 18); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to the catalyst being a catalyst that inhibits an overvoltage required for gas generation (claim 20); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to the ion selective permeable membrane having a configuration (II): wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of an electrode and a catalyst is provided on another principal surface side of the ion conductive layer opposite to the one principal surface side on which the support layer is provided (claim 24); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and Hoshino ‘051, in order as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-22 & 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iizuka WO 2020049884 in view of Hoshino et al. KR 20120024423, and further in view of IIZUKA WO-2019189592-A1 (hereinafter referred to as “IIZUKA ‘592”).
With respect to claim 1, Iizuka teaches an ion recovery device (See the Abstract), comprising: an ion selective permeable membrane (See the Abstract) comprising an ion conductive layer containing a lithium ion conductor formed of an inorganic substance (lithium ion conductor; See the Abstract), and a support layer (specific polymer (B) having an anionic group; See the Abstract), wherein the ion selective permeable membrane has a configuration (I)wherein in configuration (I) the ion conductive layer is provided in contact with one principal surface side of a support layer (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1), and an electrode is provided in contact with another principal surface side opposite to the one principal surface side on which the ion conductive layer is provided (two electrodes circumscribe the ion exchange membrane and thus forming electrode/ lithium conductor A and polymer B composite film/ electrode; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1 for composite film; Fig. 2 and the Electrodialysis test; See composite film 10, circumscribed by electrodes 3& 4. Forming configuration 1 see Fig. 2, where all there components can be in direct contact); the ion conductive layer includes at least one of a particle layer containing ion conductor particles and a thin film layer which is a film of the ion conductor (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1). With respect to claim 3, the body is formed of at least one selected from the group consisting of carbon, a metal, a polymer, and a ceramic (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1). With respect to claim 5,
the ion conductive layer includes both the particle layer and the thin film layer (lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1; the lithium conductor A is preferably a; particle; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section). With respect to claim 6, the limitation regarding the thin film layer being a vapor deposition film is a process limitation in a product claim. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Therefore, so long as the product of the prior art is the same as that of the claims, the limitations are satisfied. Here, the composite film is the same as set forth by Applicant. With respect to claim 8, the ion conductor contains a lithium ion conductor of at least one selected from the group consisting of a lithium-containing oxide and a lithium- containing oxynitride ((Li3PO4 or LiPON; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 9, the lithium-containing oxide is an oxide containing at least one selected from the group consisting of La, Zr, Ti, Al, and Si (LixaLayaTiO3; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 10, the lithium-containing oxide is at least one oxide selected from the group consisting of Li3PO4, Li-La-Zr-O (LLZO), Li-La-Ti-O (LLTO), and Li-Al-Si-P-Ti-Ge-O (LASiPTiGeO) ((Li3PO4 or LiPON; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 11, the lithium-containing oxynitride is an oxide containing at least one selected from the group consisting of La, Zr, Ti, Al, and Si (LiA1ON (A1 is at least one of Si, Al See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 12, the lithium-containing oxynitride is at least one oxynitride selected from the group consisting of Li3PO4-N (LiPON), LLZO-N (LLZON), LLTO-N (LLTON), and LASiPTiGeO-N, which are obtained by adding nitrogen to the lithium-containing oxide (( LiPON; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7). With respect to claim 19, the ion selective permeable membrane has another electrode on a principal surface side opposite to the principal surface side on which the electrode is provided (two electrodes circumscribe the ion exchange membrane and thus forming electrode/ lithium conductor A and polymer B composite film/ electrode; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1 for composite film; Fig. 2 and the Electrodialysis test; See composite film 10, circumscribed by electrodes 3& 4. Forming configuration 1 see Fig. 2, where all there components can be in direct contact).
Iizuka does not teach or suggest: a support layer is formed of a porous body (claim 1); the ion conductive layer extends substantially over and abuts the support layer (claim 1); the ion conductive layer film is thin (claim 1); the support layer is a porous body (claims 2 & 3); the ion selective permeable membrane has two of the support layers and the ion conductive layer is sandwiched between the two support layers (claim 7); the ion selective permeable membrane has an alkali-resistant layer provided over an entire surface of one principal surface of the ion conductive layer (claim 13); the alkali-resistant layer is a layer containing at least one selected from the group consisting of a metal oxide and a metal oxynitride (claim 14); the electrode and the catalyst provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (claim 15); the electrode and the catalyst are provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (claim 16); the catalyst is provided between the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 17); the catalyst is in contact with the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 18); the catalyst is a catalyst that inhibits an overvoltage required for gas generation (claim 20); the catalyst contains at least one selected from the group consisting of nickel, tin, platinum, gold, iridium, palladium, and ruthenium (claim 21); the ion selective permeable membrane has a porous body protective layer (claim 22); the ion selective permeable membrane has a configuration (II): wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of an electrode and a catalyst is provided on another principal surface side of the ion conductive layer opposite to the one principal surface side on which the support layer is provided (claim 24).
Hoshino teaches that it is well known in the art to employ an ion recovery device (lithium ion separation and recovery cell; See then Abstract), with a support layer is formed of a porous body (ion selective permeation membrane may porous organic diaphragms; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 8; claim 1); the support layer is a porous body (ion selective permeation membrane may porous organic diaphragms; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 8; claims 2 & 3); the electrode and a catalyst provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (platinum catalyst to both ends of a cation-permeable membrane; Example 3; claim 15); the electrode and the catalyst are provided on at least one principal surface side in the configuration (I) (platinum catalyst to both ends of a cation-permeable membrane; Example 3; claim 16); the catalyst contains at least one selected from the group consisting of nickel, tin, platinum, gold, iridium, palladium, and ruthenium (platinum catalyst to both ends of a cation-permeable membrane; Example 3; claim 21); the ion selective permeable membrane has a porous body protective layer (ion selective permeation membrane may porous organic diaphragms; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 8; claim 22). The ion selective permeation membrane may be made from a polymer. See Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 9).
IIZUKA ‘592 teaches that it is well known in the art to employ an ion recovery device (lithium ion separation and recovery cell; See Abstract), the ion conductive layer extends substantially over and abuts the support layer (the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention may use a support and a substrate, but can be a “self-supporting membrane” that can be handled alone without using a support and a substrate; DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS paragraph 5; claim 1); the ion conductive layer film being thin (film thickness of the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention can be appropriately selected according to the performance test mode, the size of the apparatus to be incorporated, and the like. For example, it is 1 to 1000 μm, and may be 10 to 500 μm DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS paragraph 4; claim 1).
Iizuka, Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592 are analogous art from the same field of endeavor, namely fabricating ion recovery devices with ion selective permeation membranes made of polymers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the ion selective permeable membrane support layer including a porosity as taught by Hoshino, in the ion recovery device of Iizuka , in order to improve ion permeability.
With respect to the ion conductive layer extending substantially over and abuts the support layer; it would have been obvious to employ the ion conductive layer configuration (I) of Hoshino ‘051, as the ion conductive layer configuration of Iizuka in view of Hoshino, to improve ion recovery. Iizuka teaches that the form of the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention may be any form that has film-forming properties and has lithium ion conductivity. See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Both the lithium ion conductor (A) and the polymer (B) constituting the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention have lithium ion conductivity. See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Therefore, one form of the membrane includes a form in which the lithium ion conductor (A) is dispersed in the polymer (B) (for example, a form of a composite film). See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Thus, the dispersion form may be changed and adapted, and IIZUKA ‘592 shows conventionality of two distinct layers. Lastly, it would have been obvious to employ two separate layers, as making separable essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961).
With respect to the ion selective permeable membrane having two of the support layers and the ion conductive layer is sandwiched between the two support layers (claim 7); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, in order to improve ion conductivity. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to employ two support layers, as duplication of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
With respect to the ion selective permeable membrane having an alkali-resistant layer provided over an entire surface of one principal surface of the ion conductive layer (claim 13); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, in order to improve ion conductivity, as Iizuka teaches the support may include metal oxides, such as LixaLayaTiO3; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7. The ion selective permeable membrane of lithium conductor A and polymer B may be in any form, including a composite film; Description-Of-Embodiment, paragraph 1. The composite film may include more than one lithium conductor. See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7. It’s the examiners position that the additional lithium conductor material in the composite film may be a separate layer, as essential working parts of the device may be made separable. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). The separate layer is an alkali-resistant layer.
With respect to the alkali-resistant layer being a layer containing at least one selected from the group consisting of a metal oxide and a metal oxynitride (claim 14); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, in order to improve ion conductivity as Iizuka teaches the support may include metal oxides, such as LixaLayaTiO3; See (lithium ion conductor (A)) section paragraphs 3 & 7.
With respect to the catalyst being provided between the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 17); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to the catalyst being in contact with the ion conductive layer and the electrode (claim 18); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to the catalyst being a catalyst that inhibits an overvoltage required for gas generation (claim 20); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to the ion selective permeable membrane having a configuration (II): wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of an electrode and a catalyst is provided on another principal surface side of the ion conductive layer opposite to the one principal surface side on which the support layer is provided (claim 24); it would have been obvious in the ion recovery device of Iizuka in view of Hoshino and IIZUKA ‘592, in order as rearrangement of essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Response to Arguments
Applicant asserts that the instant claims are not obvious over Iizuka WO 2020049884 because said claims necessitate a two layer structure, wherein the ion conductive layer is in contact with a principle surface of the support layer. In contrast, Iisuka teaches intermixed layers, where the lithium ion conductive (A) is dispersed in polymer (b) the support body. This assertion is correct and the previously pending rejection is overcome. However, Iizuka teaches that the form of the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention may be any form that has film-forming properties and has lithium ion conductivity. See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Both the lithium ion conductor (A) and the polymer (B) constituting the lithium ion selective permeable membrane of the present invention have lithium ion conductivity. See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Therefore, one form of the membrane includes a form in which the lithium ion conductor (A) is dispersed in the polymer (B) (for example, a form of a composite film). See DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS, paragraph 1. Thus, the dispersion form may be changed and adapted, and IIZUKA ‘592 shows conventionality of two distinct layers. Lastly, it would have been obvious to employ two separate layers, as making separable essential working parts of a device is prima facie obvious. See In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). Alternative configurations satisfying the instant claim amendments have been provided hereinabove.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONIQUE M WILLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1309. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Tiffany Legette, may be reached at 571-270-7078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Monique M Wills/
Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights