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
Claims 7-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on November 11, 2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-6 in the reply filed on November 11, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 3 lists the that each polycarboxylate can come from a fumaric or mesaconic acid. However, claim 1, on which claim 3 depends, excludes Zr-MOFs with a fumarate and mesaconate group. Therefore, the dependent claim fails to include the limitations that the independent claim requires.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 [Furukawa]
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furukawa, Hiroyasu, et al. “Water Adsorption in Porous Metal–Organic Frameworks and Related Materials.” Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 136, no. 11, 11 Mar. 2014, pp. 4369–4381, https://doi.org/10.1021/ja500330a.
Regarding claim 1, Furukawa discloses a Zr-MOF that has a formula of Zr6O4(OH)4(BCD)6 (Furukawa [Scheme 1 Ref. 16]). Therefore, this disclosure fulfils the limitations set in the instant claim requiring the Zr-based metal organic framework to comprise of a formula of Zr6O4(OH)4(polycarboxylate)6 where the Zr MOF is not Zr6O4(OH)4(fumarate)6 nor a Zr6O4(OH)4(mesaconate)6.
Regarding claim 2, Furukawa discloses the presence of a polycarboxylate in the Zr-MOF in the form of H2-BDC (Furukawa [Scheme 1 Ref. 16]), which is an aromatic dicarboxylic acid. This disclosure fulfills the limitations set in the instant claim requiring the polycarboxylate to be a part of the aromatic polycarbonate group.
Regarding claim 3, Furukawa discloses the presence of a polycarboxylate in the Zr-MOF in the form of BDC, also known as terephthalic acid (Furukawa [Pg. 4371 ¶7]). This disclosure fulfills the limitations set in the instant claim requiring the polycarboxylate to be a terephthalic acid.
Regarding claim 4, Furukawa discloses the presence of many Zr-MOFs in a single crystal form (Furukawa [Abstract]). This disclosure fulfils the limitations set in the instant claim requiring the Zr-MOF to be in a crystalline form.
Regarding claim 5, Furukawa discloses a Zr-MOF known as UiO-66 (Zr) (Furukawa [Scheme 1 Ref. 16]). UiO-66 possesses multiple types of pores. The value that represents the longest linear dimension perpendicular to a long axis of pores is called the window width, which in the case of UiO-66 (Zr) is 6 Å. Therefore, this disclosure would fulfill the expectations set in the instant claim requiring the Zr-based metal organic framework to comprise a plurality of pores, wherein the pores have a longest linear dimension perpendicular to a long axis of pores from about 0.1 Å to about 200 Å.
Regarding claim 6, Furukawa discloses that the zirconium MOF (UiO-66) has a Langmuir surface are of 1390 m2/g (Furukawa [Table 1 Row 4]). This disclosure fulfills the limitations set in the instant claim requiring Zr-MOF to comprise of a Langmuir Surface area between 0-1400 m2/g.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 [Reinsch]
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reinsch (US 10450330 B2) as evidenced by Furukawa, Hiroyasu, et al. “Water Adsorption in Porous Metal–Organic Frameworks and Related Materials.” Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 136, no. 11, 11 Mar. 2014, pp. 4369–4381, https://doi.org/10.1021/ja500330a.
Regarding claim 1, Reinsch discloses a zirconium metal organic framework comprising of a cluster with a formula of Zr6O4(OH)4 (Reinsch [C3 ¶17-19]). The prior art also teaches that the zirconium structure would include various organic linkers which include 1,4-benzene dicarboxylic acid (BDC), a terephthalic (polycarboxylate) acid(Reinsch [C5 ¶41]). By combining the zirconium cluster with the BDC, the MOF that forms will be UiO-66(Zr) (Reinsch [C5 ¶42]) which has a structural formula of Zr6O4(OH)4(BCD)6 (see evidentiary document Furukawa at [Scheme 2 Ref. 16]) . Therefore, this disclosure would fulfill the expectations set in the instant claim requiring the Zr-based metal organic framework to comprise of a formula of Zr6O4(OH)4(polycarboxylate)6 where the Zr MOF is not Zr6O4(OH)4(fumarate)6 nor a Zr6O4(OH)4(mesaconate)6.
Regarding claim 2, Reinsch discloses that for Zr6O4(OH)4, the organic linkers comprise of multiple carboxylates (polycarboxylate) (Reinsch [C4 ¶34-39]). The prior art notes the usage of BCD which is an aromatic dicarboxylic acid. (Furukawa [Scheme 1 Ref. 16]). Therefore, the prior art meets the limitations set in the instant claim requiring the polycarboxylate to be a part of the aromatic polycarbonate group.
Regarding claim 3, Reinsch discloses that for Zr6O4(OH)4 the organic linkers that can be used include terephthalic acid (Reinsch [C5 ¶1-15]). Therefore, the prior art meets the limitations set in the instant claim requiring the polycarboxylate to be a terephthalic acid.
Regarding claim 4, Reinsch discloses a process of forming Zr-MOF where the product is completely crystalline (Reinsch [C8 ¶3-4]). Therefore, this disclosure would fulfill the expectations set in the instant claim requiring the Zr-based metal organic framework to be completely crystalline.
Regarding claim 5, Reinsch discloses a Zr-MOF known as UiO-66 (Zr) (Reinsch [C5 ¶42]). UiO-66 possesses multiple types of pores. The value that represents the longest linear dimension perpendicular to a long axis of pores is called the window width, which in the case of UiO-66 (Zr) is 6 Å. Therefore, this disclosure would fulfill the expectations set in the instant claim requiring the Zr-based metal organic framework to comprise a plurality of pores, wherein the pores have a longest linear dimension perpendicular to a long axis of pores from about 0.1 Å to about 200 Å.
Regarding claim 6, Reinsch discloses that the zirconium MOF has a BET surface area of 797 m2/g and a Langmuir surface are of 914 m2/g (Reinsch [C10 ¶1-3]). This disclosure fulfills the limitations set in the instant claim requiring Zr-MOF to comprise of a BET surface area between 0-1000 m2/g and a Langmuir Surface area between 0-1400 m2/g.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNETTE H PHAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-6:30 EST.
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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 5712703591. 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.
/ANNETTE PHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736