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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-2, 66-68, 71 and 73-82 in the reply filed on 12/15/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 20, 107, 108 and 126 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/15/25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 79 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c).
In the present instance, claim 79 recites the broad recitation “nucleophiles, electrophiles, salts or a combination thereof”, and the claim also recites “preferably nitric acid, sulfuric acid, hydrochloric acid, potassium hydroxide, sodium hydroxide, calcium hydroxide, sodium thiosulfate, or a combination thereof” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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.
Claims 1-2, 66-68 and 76-82 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikiori et al (2019) in view of Miyamoto et al (US20180185821).
Nishikiori, 2.2, teaches the titania powder was stirred and the substrates were immersed without stirring in 20 cm3 of the 5, 10, 50, and 100 vol% ethanol solutions of TEOS in the dark or during light irradiation using a high pressure mercury lamp (SEN LIGHTS HB-100-A, 100 W). The distance between the substrate and lamp was ca. 2 cm. After the irradiation for 10 min or 3 h, the samples were washed with ethanol, then dried at 337 K.
Nishikiori, abstract, teaches silica nanolayers were formed as adsorbents on anatase-type titania particles immersed in tetraethyl orthosilicate (TEOS) solutions during UV irradiation. The concentration of the basic OH groups on the titania surface increased during the UV irradiation. The basicity promoted hydrolysis and subsequent polymerization of the TEOS on the titania surface on which the silica layers were deposited.
Nishikiori , 3.1, teaches Figure S1 shows the FTIR spectra of the powder and electrode samples prepared using 100 vol% TEOS in the dark and during UV irradiation. The FTIR spectral bands of the silica were assigned to the Si−O stretching mode of the Si−O–Si (around 1100 and 790 cm−1) and Si−OH (around 930 cm−1) [19,26–28]. The bands at around 1200 and 1100 cm−1 can be assigned to the SiO stretching vibration.
Although Nishikiori teaches washing and drying the gel, this reference does not teach a specific drying method.
Miyamoto, paragraph 93 of the PGPUB, teaches the synthesis step is further divided into a sol preparation step, a gelation step and a removal step.
Miyamoto, paragraph 100 of the PGPUB, teaches in the removal step, washing and drying is performed to remove the solvent phase containing additives, unreacted substances and the like. The space after removal of the solvent phase forms a through-hole. By washing, a surface tension during drying which is caused by additives, unreacted substances and the like remaining in the solvent phase can be eliminated to suppress distortion and cracking in the gel during drying. A washing liquid is desirably a liquid such as an organic solvent or an aqueous solution. A liquid in which an organic compound or an inorganic compound is dissolved can also be used. Sodium hydroxide can be used in the solution. For drying the wet gel, natural drying may be adopted, and for eliminating distortion and cracks generated in drying of the wet gel, it is also preferable to adopt drying that is performed after replacement of a solvent in the wet gel by a solvent having a surface tension lower than that of water, such as isopropanol, acetone, hexane and hydrofluorocarbon; drying by freezing and sublimation; supercritical drying that is performed in a non-surface-tension state after exchange of a solvent in the wet gel with supercritical carbon dioxide; or the like.
By passing through the above sol preparation step, gelation step and removal step, a monolithic porous body of dried silica gel or silica glass of three-dimensional continuous network structure which has a two-step hierarchical porous structure is obtained.
Miyamoto, paragraph 102 of the PGPUB, teaches by passing through the above sol preparation step, gelation step and removal step, a monolithic porous body of dried silica gel or silica glass of three-dimensional continuous network structure which has a two-step hierarchical porous structure is obtained.
It 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 to use the washing and drying steps as taught by Miyamoto wherein the washing step comprising using a washing liquid comprising sodium hydroxide as this washing step removes unreacted substances and the like remaining in the solvent phase can be eliminated to suppress distortion and cracking in the gel during drying.
The nanolayers were formed as adsorbents on anatase-type titania particles made by a washing step comprising using a washing liquid comprising sodium hydroxide and therefore having a monolithic porous body of a three-dimensional continuous network structure as taught by the references reads on the media as claimed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the references teaches the gel being washed and then dried at 337 K.
Regarding claim 66, the reference teaches the FTIR spectral bands of the silica were assigned to the Si−O stretching mode of the Si−O–Si (around 1100 and 790 cm−1).
Examiner interprets the silica present within the silicon-oxygen bonds is provided by another form of silica as claimed in claim 66.
Regarding claims 67-68, Miyamoto teaches the liquid in which an organic compound or an inorganic compound is dissolved can also be used. Sodium hydroxide can be used in the solution.
Regarding claims 76-77, Nishikiori teaches TEOS.
Regarding claim 78, the reference teaches the FTIR spectral bands of the silica were assigned to the Si−O stretching mode of the Si−O–Si (around 1100 and 790 cm−1).
Examiner interprets the silica present within the silicon-oxygen bonds is provided by another form of silica as claimed in claim 66.
Regarding claim 79, it 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 that residual NaOH from the washing step would be present in the pores of the final product.
Regarding claims 80-81, Miyamoto teaches TiO2.
Regarding claim 82, it 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 to dope the TiO2 with a precious metal such as Au or Pt to improve the photocatalytic activity of the final product.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 71 and 73-75 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Although the references teach the media as claimed in claim 1, the references do not teach a porosity, tortuosity, an overall size distribution or internal pore size distribution as claimed in claim 71 and 73-75.
There is no motivation in these references to modify the media to obtain the the porosity, the tortuosity, the overall size distribution or the internal pore size distribution as claimed in claim 71 and 73-75.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20040202602 teaches a porous material.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE J COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5836. The examiner can normally be reached 10am- 6pm M-F.
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, Coris Fung can be reached at (571) 270-5713. 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.
/STEFANIE J COHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1732 2/5/26