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 of Group I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 03/06/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 10-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/06/2026.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (WO 2013/093044 Al) (Wang).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a perovskite type transition metal oxide with the formula (A1-xA’x)(B1-yB’y)O3 wherein A and A’ are different from each other and each independently comprises at least one element selected from the group consisting of cerium (Ce) and calcium (Ca); and wherein B and B’ are different from each other, and B and B’ each independently comprises at least one element selected from the group consisting of titanium (Ti) and manganese (Mn); and wherein x is between 0 and 1 and y is between 0 and 1 (Wang, p. 13, lines 21-28; p. 14, lines 1-6).
The perovskite type transition metal oxide of Wang overlaps with the claimed metal-oxide perovskite material when A is calcium, A’ is cerium, B is manganese, B’ is titanium, and x is about 0.3 to about 0.35 and y is about 0.25 to about 0.35.
As set forth in MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed range “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”, a prima facie case of obviousness exists, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claims 2-9, Wang teaches the metal-oxide perovskite material of claim 1, wherein as the perovskite of Wang is substantially identical to the claimed perovskite, it would inherently:
yield a reduced metal-oxide perovskite material having a general formula Ca1-xCexTiyMn1-yO3-δr in a reducing environment after heating to a reduction temperature, wherein 0.5 > δr > 0 (i.e., claim 2); wherein the reduction temperature is in a range of about 1600K to about 2000K (i.e., claim 3);
wherein the reduced metal-oxide perovskite material yields a re-oxidized metal-oxide perovskite material having a general formula Ca1-xCexTiyMn1-yO3-δr and hydrogen when contacted with water at a re-oxidation temperature, wherein 0 < δo <δr (i.e., claim 4); and wherein the re-oxidation temperature is in a range of about 900K to about 1500K (i.e., claim 5);
wherein the reduced metal-oxide perovskite material yields a re-oxidized metal-oxide perovskite material having a general formula Ca1-xCexTiyMn1-yO3-δr and carbon dioxide when contacted with carbon dioxide at a re-oxidation temperature, wherein 0 < δo <δr (i.e., claim 6); and wherein the re-oxidation temperature is in a range of about 900K to about 1500K (i.e., claim 7); and
wherein the reduced metal-oxide perovskite material yields a re-oxidized metal-oxide perovskite material having a general formula Ca1-xCexTiyMn1-yO3-δr and syngas when contacted with a re-oxidizing fluid comprising water and carbon dioxide at a re-oxidation temperature, wherein 0 < δo <δr (i.e., claim 8); and wherein the re-oxidation temperature is in a range of about 900K to about 1500K (i.e., claim 9).
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01 (I).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Catriona Corallo whose telephone number is (571)272-8957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.
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, Ching-Yiu 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.
/C.M.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1732
/CORIS FUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1732