A CORAL-LIKE COMPOSITE MATERIAL AND A METHOD OF PREPARING THE SAME
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/10/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to communication filed on 4/10/2026:
Claim 1 has been amended; no new matter has been entered.
Previous rejections under 35 USC 103 of Huang in view of Zhang have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot based on grounds of new rejection necessitated by amendment.
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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (J. Mater. Chem. A, 7, 6507-6513, (2019)) and further in view of Zhang et al. (InfoMat, 2, 613-638, (2020)).
Regarding claims 1 and 3-6, Song et al. teach a coral-like composite material comprising highly dispersed conductive metal nitride, metal carbide or metal carbonitride nanoparticles on mesoporous carbon nanosheets (Abstract; Figs. 2b, 2c disclose metal carbide materials, MXenes, supported on a reduced graphene oxide, rGO, hybrid aerogel wherein the highly conductive MXene and rGO are integrated into a 3D interconnected porous aerogel structure.), wherein the metal element from the metal nitride, metal carbide or metal carbonitride nanoparticles is scandium, titanium, vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, yttrium, zirconium, niobium, molybdenum, technetium, ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, silver, cadmium, hafnium, tantalum, tungsten, rhenium, osmium, iridium, platinum, or their combinations thereof; wherein the metal carbide can comprise niobium carbide, titanium carbide, tungsten carbide, molybdenum carbide, vanadium carbide, hafnium carbide, niobium titanium carbide, chromium carbide, niobium tungsten carbide, niobium molybdenum carbide, niobium vanadium carbide, niobium hafnium carbide, titanium tungsten carbide, titanium molybdenum carbide, titanium vanadium carbide, titanium vanadium chromium carbide, titanium hafnium carbide, tungsten molybdenum carbide, tungsten vanadium carbide, tungsten hafnium carbide, molybdenum vanadium carbide, molybdenum hafnium carbide, vanadium hafnium carbide or their mixtures thereof (Abstract discloses Ti3C2, or titanium carbide.)
wherein the metal carbide, metal nitride or metal carbonitride nanoparticles further comprise surface metal oxides (Page 6508, left column, 1st paragraph discloses Ti3C2Tx wherein “T” stands for the surface terminal functional groups such as -O, -OH, and/or -F.). However, while Song et al. teach the metal carbide being used in a Li-S battery, they do not teach wherein the coral-like composite material is configured for use in a modified separator for a Li-S battery.
Zhang et al. two-dimensional transition metal carbides, carbonitrides and nitrides, so-called MXenes (Abstract). Further, they comprise formula Mn + 1X nTx -wherein M is a transition metal, X is carbon and/or nitrogen, and Tx stands for a surface termination (Page 614). Finally, Zhang et al. discloses using a Ti3C2Tx-modified separator in a lithium-sulfur battery (Section 4.2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the material disclosed in Song to be used in a modified separator as disclosed in Zhang in order to improve cycling retention and reversibility.
Regarding claim 8, Song and Zhang et al. teach the coral-like composite material of claim 1. Further, Song teaches wherein the coral-like composite material has:
a) a surface area larger than 100 m2/g (Page 6509, right column, 2nd paragraph discloses a surface area of 261.1 m2/g.);
b) a pore volume in the range of about 0.5 cm3/g to about 2 cm3/g; or
c) a pore size in the range of about 2 nm to about 50 nm.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (J. Mater. Chem. A, 7, 6507-6513, (2019)) and Zhang et al. (InfoMat, 2, 613-638, (2020)) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Barsoum et al. (WO 2017/044262 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Song and Zhang et al. teach the coral-like composite material of claim 1. However, they do not teach wherein the metal nitride, metal carbide or metal carbonitride nanoparticles have a size in a range of about 2 nm to about 20 nm.
Barsoum et al. disclose a method of preparing a MXene material such as Ti3C2 (Claim 1; paragraphs 0044-0045) as an intermediate product (Claim 1). Further, the method discloses reducing the particle size of the intermediate product to less than 50 nm (Claim 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Song and Zhang with Barsoum in order to improve consistency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S GATEWOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-7958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
Daniel S. Gatewood, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1729
/DANIEL S GATEWOOD, Ph. D/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729 July 20th, 2026
Prosecution Insights