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 .
Status of the Rejection
All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendments. New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102, and under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are necessitated by the amendments as outlined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ide et al. ("Merging cation exchange and photocatalytic charge separation efficiency in an anatase/K2Ti4O9 nanobelt heterostructure for metal ions fixation." Inorganic Chemistry 57.10 (2018): 6045-6050) as evidenced by Acar et al. ("2.17 Photoactive Materials." Comprehensive Energy Systems (2018): 524-572).
Ide et al. teaches a catalyst layer comprising: a carrier that is a nanosheet (i.e., nanobelt; Title and Abstract) made of K2Ti4O9 (Abstract); and a catalyst (i.e., anatase TiO2; see Fig. 1; Acar et al. teaches that TiO2 is a photocatalyst, see Table 1) supported on the carrier.
Ide et al. teaches that TiO2 (anatase)-modified layered titanate (K2Ti4O9) is a photocatalyst for hydrogen production from water (Abstract) and thus would have photo-reducing ability.
Regarding the limitation “included in a water electrolysis cell”, the catalyst layer of Ide et al. would be capable of being incorporated in a water electrolysis cell. In addition, Ide et al. teaches that photocatalyst is used for hydrogen production from water and thus would necessarily be incorporated in water electrolysis cell.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ide et al. in view of Townsend et al. (Townsend, Troy K., et al. "Photocatalytic water splitting with nano-K4Nb6O17." Solar Hydrogen and Nanotechnology V. Vol. 7770. SPIE, 2010).
Ide et al. teaches the catalyst layer of claim 1 above. Ide et al. does not explicitly teach the catalyst includes iridium oxide or ruthenium oxide.
Townsend et al. teaches functionalizing a niobate nanosheet photocatalyst for water splitting (Abstract). Townsend et al. teaches incorporating iridium oxide complexes in the niobate photocatalyst (Abstract). Townsend et al. further teaches that selective cocatalyst deposition reduce overpotentials for water splitting, and that using different combinations of catalysts/co-catalysts can be optimized to locate efficient and cost-effective catalysts for sustainable energy production (Conclusion).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the catalyst Ide et al. by incorporating the iridium oxide co-catalyst of Townsend et al. to reduce the overpotentials and optimize the efficiency of the water splitting process.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ide et al. in view of Price et al. (US 20200099061).
Ide et al. teaches the catalyst of claim 1 above. Ide et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the proportion of the carrier in the catalyst layer is 50 mass% or less.
Price et al. teaches a catalyst for water electrolysis. Price et al. teaches a supported catalyst wherein small nanoparticles of metal are dispersed on high surface area electrically conducting support (paragraph 87). In some embodiments, the metal nanoparticles have a weight proportion in the range of 10-90 weight % (paragraph 91).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the catalyst of Ide et al. by optimizing the proportion of catalyst particles on a support to be greater than 50 mass%, i.e., the carrier and the catalyst being 50 mass% or less, as taught by Price et al. in order to optimize the catalytic activity of the electrode. Since the catalyst provides the catalytic activity in an electrode, one having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the amount of catalyst to improve the catalytic activity of the electrode.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davidson et al. (US 4333805) in view of Ide et al.
Davidson et al. teaches a membrane electrode assembly for water electrolysis (column 6, lines 15-16), comprising: a solid polymer electrolyte membrane 13 (Fig. 1, column 9 lines 41-47); an anode catalyst layer stacked on one surface of the solid polymer electrolyte membrane (column 5, lines 48-51; the anode catalyst comprising ruthenium oxide and manganese oxide); and a cathode catalyst layer stacked on the other surface of the solid polymer electrolyte membrane (column 5, lines 51-57).
Davidson et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the anode catalyst layer is the catalyst layer according to claim 1.
Ide et al. teaches a catalyst layer comprising: a carrier that is a nanosheet (i.e., nanobelt; Title and Abstract) made of K2Ti4O9 (Abstract); and a catalyst (i.e., anatase TiO2; see Fig. 1) supported on the carrier. Ide et al. teaches that TiO2 (anatase)-modified layered titanate (K2Ti4O9) is a photocatalyst for hydrogen production from water (Abstract) and thus would have photo-reducing ability.
Davidson et al. and Ide et al. are in the analogous art of hydrogen production from water using a catalyst. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrode of Davidson et al. with the support and catalyst of Ide et al., because the photocatalyst layer of Ide et al. is efficient for photocatalytic hydrogen production (Abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments in the Remarks filed on 6/8/2026 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure. Hattori et al. (CN 107408743) teaches using electrode for water electrolysis having a hydrogen ion-conducting material to improve the conductivity (paragraph 49). This includes KLaNb2O7 (paragraph 50).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAN V VAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00.
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, Patricia Mallari can be reached at (571) 272-4729. 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.
LUAN V. VAN
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights