ELECTROCHEMICAL OXYGEN REDUCTION CATALYST, AIR ELECTRODE, FUEL CELL AND METAL-AIR CELL
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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to communication filed on 2/20/2026:
Claim 1 has been amended; claims 21-31 have been added. Claims 3, 4, 7-12, and 17-20 have been canceled. No new matter has been entered.
Previous 35 USC 102 rejections under Yamazaki, Yoshida, and Ugawa have been withdrawn due to amendment.
Previous 35 USC 102 rejections under Asahi have been upheld.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant discloses: “Asahi discloses an electrochemical oxygen reduction catalyst comprising platinum- containing nanoparticles and a melamine compound supported on platinum-containing nanoparticles (see claims 1 and 2 of US 2021/0384524 A1). Asahi discloses that the platinum- containing nanoparticles contains cobalt, and the melamine compound is melamine. See paragraphs [0049], [0066] of US 2021/0384524 Al. Further, Asahi discloses that the coverages of the melamine supported on the platinum particles of Examples 1 and 2 were 40% and 46% respectively. See paragraphs [0123] and [0130] of US 202 1/0384524 Al. Asahi discloses that the coverages of the other compounds were 37%, 62%, 34%, and 28%. See paragraphs [0135], [0137], [0139], and [0141] of US 2021/0384524 Al. Thus, all the coverages of Asahi are greater than the upper limit "20%" as recited in amended claim 1.”
The Examiner respectfully traverses. Asahi et al. disclose 10-70% of the electrochemical active surface area (ECSA) of the platinum-containing nanoparticles can be covered with the melamine compound (Paragraph 0090). MPEP 2123 I. PATENTS ARE RELEVANT AS PRIOR ART FOR ALL THEY CONTAIN
"The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain." In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)).
A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc. 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-6, 13-15, and 21-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asahi et al. (WO 2019/221156 A1 using US 2021/0384524 A1 as an English language translation.).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 21, 22, and 24-31, Asahi et al. teach an electrochemical oxygen reduction catalyst (Abstract) comprising:
metal particles having oxygen reduction activity (Abstract discloses an oxygen reduction catalyst comprising platinum-containing nanoparticles. Paragraph 0049 discloses platinum alloy nanoparticles such as platinum-cobalt.); and
an additive (Abstract), wherein:
the metal particles are at least one of platinum particles or platinum cobalt alloy particles (Paragraphs 0048-0049 disclose platinum alloy nanoparticles wherein the alloy of platinum can be cobalt. Further, the content of platinum in the platinum alloy is preferably 50-95 mass%.)
the additive is 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine or a polymer of 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine (Abstract; claim 1 discloses the additive comprises a member selected from the group consisting of a melamine compound. Melamine is 1,3,5-triazine-2,4,6-triamine.); and
a ratio of a weight of the additive to a weight of the metal particles is 0.01 or more and 0.23 or less (Paragraph 0090 discloses amount of the melamine compound, the thiocyanuric acid compound, or the polymer containing a melamine compound or a thiocyanuric acid compound as a monomer is not particularly limited. For example, it is preferable to contain (particularly support) the melamine compound, thiocyanuric acid compound, or polymer containing a melamine compound or a thiocyanuric acid compound as a monomer in an amount of 0.1 to 50 parts by mass, and particularly preferably 1 to 30 parts by mass, relative to 100 parts by mass of the platinum-containing nanoparticles. Therefore, at 0.1 to 50 parts by mass relative to 100 parts by mass of the platinum nanoparticles, this is within the claimed range.), and a surface modification rate of the metal particles with the additive is 5% or more and 20% or less (Paragraph 0090 discloses it is preferable that 10 to 70%, and particularly 20 to 50% of the electrochemical active surface area (ECSA) of platinum-containing nanoparticles, which is evaluated from the electricity amount resulting from hydrogen desorption from the platinum surface is covered with the melamine compound.)
Regarding claim 5, Asahi et al. teach the electrochemical oxygen reduction catalyst according to claim 1, further comprising a carrier, wherein the metal particles are supported on the carrier (Paragraph 0092 discloses the platinum nanoparticles are supported on a conductive carrier such as carbon black.).
Regarding claims 6 and 13-15, Asahi et al. teach an air electrode comprising: the electrochemical oxygen reduction catalyst according to claim 1 (Paragraphs 0102-104 disclose the oxygen reduction catalyst being used in an air electrode (which is also a cathode) for a fuel cell.); and a polymer electrolyte having an ion exchange group (Paragraph 0109 discloses usable examples of the polymer electrolyte membrane include various perfluorocarbon-based, styrene-divinylbenzene copolymer-based, or polybenzimidazole-based ion exchange resin membranes; inorganic polymer ion exchange membranes; organic-inorganic composite polymer ion exchange membranes; etc.).
Regarding claim 23, Asahi et al. teach the electrochemical oxygen reduction catalyst according to claim 22, wherein the surface modification rate of the metal particles with the additive is 5% or more and 8.8% or less (Paragraph 0133 discloses an ECSA of 6%.). MPEP 2123 II. NONPREFERRED AND ALTERNATIVE EMBODIMENTS CONSTITUTE PRIOR ART
Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971). "A known or obvious composition does not become patentable simply because it has been described as somewhat inferior to some other product for the same use." In re Gurley, 27 F.3d 551, 554, 31 USPQ2d 1130, 1132 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DANIEL S GATEWOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-7958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
Daniel S. Gatewood, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1729
/DANIEL S GATEWOOD, Ph. D/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729 March 9th, 2026