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 .
DETAILED ACTION
All the references cited in the International Search Report have been considered. None is anticipatory. The most pertinent of these references have been applied below.
Election/Restrictions
The applicant has elected Group I (claims 17-25) with traverse by arguing unexpected results of the claimed application. Applicant’s election in the reply is acknowledged. The argument appears irrelevant to the restriction requirement, which has been applied based on the principal lack of unicity. The examiner asserts the common technical feature, the process of claim 17, has been met by prior arts. See below rejections.
This restriction is made FINAL. See previous action for the reasons of applying restriction.
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 of this title, 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) 17, 20, and 23-25 is (are) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maletzco et al. (US 20190077919) in view of Troxler et al. (US 20080144431/WO2006066421, listed on IDS and ISR).
As to claims 17, 20, and 23-25, Maletzco (abs., claims, examples) discloses a manufacturing process (148-150) of producing a sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone (141-142) that meets the formulae of claims 17 and 23-25:
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
via at least one sulfonating agent, such as sulfuric acid (16, 124). Maletzco (27-41) discloses the polyarylene(ether) sulfone may contain sulfonic cation (Li, Na, etc.) during the sulfonation process. Maletzco (50) teaches dispersing the sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone including unconverted polyarylene(ether) sulfone and sulfonation residuals with further precipitation (61-67, 164) into precipitates for separation and purification via water and stirring devices with temperature control (159-160). The sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone is applied for producing membrane (164).
Maletzco is silent on the claimed tooth rim dispersion machine for dispersion of claim 17.
Solving the same problem of dispersing solid/liquid phases (2), Troxler (abs., claims, examples, figures) discloses a dispersion device (claims 13-14) that distributes liquid and fine powder homogeneously in a simplified and improved manner (2, 7, 39, 44-45). The device is the same tooth rim dispersion machine, as acknowledged by instant pgpub [0031] (referred to WO2006066421). The device includes recirculation (36, figures 1-7) mode and pumping (27, figures 1-7).
Therefore, as to claims 17, 20, and 23-25, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the process disclosed by Maletzco and utilized the tooth rim dispersion machine for dispersing/precipitating the resultant sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone in view of Troxler, because the resultant dispersing/precipitating process would be simplified and improved due to homogeneous dispersion at manufacturing scale.
Claim(s) 18-19 is (are) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maletzco et al. (US 20190077919) in view of Troxler et al. (US 20080144431, listed on IDS and ISR) and further in view of Matsunaga et al. (US 20070264551).
Disclosure of Maletzco and Troxler is adequately set forth in ¶1 and is incorporated herein by reference.
Maletzco and Troxler are silent on nitric acid and the temperature range of the liquid of claims 18-19.
In the same area of endeavor of producing membrane for fuel cell using sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone (abs., claims, examples), Matsunaga (161-162) discloses using nitric acid to treat sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone at room temperature (falling within the claimed range of 10-25 °C) to further increase the proton conductivity.
Therefore, as to claims 18-19, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the process disclosed by Maletzco and Troxler and further added nitric acid to water for dispersion and precipitation, because the resultant dispersing/precipitating process would yield a sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone with improved proton conductivity.
Claim(s) 21-22 is (are) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Maletzco et al. (US 20190077919) in view of Troxler et al. (US 20080144431, listed on IDS and ISR) and further in view of Tecklenborg et al. (US 20090306279).
Disclosure of Maletzco and Troxler is adequately set forth in ¶1 and is incorporated herein by reference.
Maletzco and Troxler are silent on the claimed gear pump and viscosity range for transporting.
Solving the same problem of producing aqueous powder dispersions (abs., claims, examples), Tecklenborg (8-12, 118) discloses using gear pump as a suitable device to circulate powder/liquid (slurry) to obtain desirable particle size. The viscosity range of slurry for circulation is 150 to 8,000 mPas at a shear rate of 10 s-1 (implied measured at room temperature). One of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize the range would be lower than 150 to 8,000 mPas at a shear rate of 10 s-1 if the viscosity is measured at the claimed 65°C, overlapping with the claimed range of at least 200 mPas. It has been found that where claimed ranges overlap ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists - see MPEP 2144.05.
Therefore, as to claims 21-22, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the process disclosed by Maletzco and Troxler and further replaced Troxler’s pump with Tecklenborg’s gear pump, because the resultant dispersing/precipitating process would yield a sulfonated polyarylene(ether) sulfone with desirable particle size by using the suitable circulation gear pump for circulation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHANE FANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7378. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thurs. 8am-6pm. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski can be reached on 571.572.1302. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SHANE FANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766