BIPOLAR MEMBRANE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
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 1-16) in the reply filed on 12/23/2025 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/27/2023 and 10/23/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 13, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rusch et al. (US 6,130,175 A) and further in view of Oener et al. (US 2020/0370188 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Rusch et al. a bipolar membrane (Col. 1, lines 8-10; Figs. 1-3, element 10 disclose a composite membrane having multiple layers.), comprising:
a porous support material, having opposing first and second sides (Figs. 1-3, element 11 disclose a microporous polymeric film having opposing first and second sides.);
a cation exchange membrane, disposed on the first side of the porous support material (Figs. 1-3, element 12 disclose an ion exchange resin. Further, col. 2, lines 45-60 disclose one ion exchange resin can be cationic.), wherein a material of the cation exchange membrane penetrates into pores of the first side and combines with the porous support material (Col. 3, line 62-Col. 4, line 5 disclose how both of the ion exchange resin materials completely penetrate into the pores of the microporous polymeric film.); and
an anion exchange membrane, disposed on the second side of the porous support material (Figs. 1-3, element 13 disclose an ion exchange resin. Further, col. 2, lines 45-60 disclose one ion exchange resin can be anionic.), wherein a material of the anion exchange membrane penetrates into pores of the second side and combines with the porous support material (Col. 3, line 62-Col. 4, line 5 disclose how both of the ion exchange resin materials completely penetrate into the pores of the microporous polymeric film.).
However, Rusch do not specifically teach the cation exchange membrane is not in contact with the anion exchange membrane.
Oener et al. teach a bipolar membrane (Abstract; Fig. 1) comprising a first member comprising at least one anion exchange material (Paragraph 0027; Fig. 1, element 3 discloses an anionic exchange membrane or AEM.); a second member comprising at least one cation exchange material (Paragraph 0027; Fig. 1, element 2 discloses a cation exchange membrane or CEM.). Further, the AEM and the CEM are not in physical contact with each other (Paragraph 0025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Rusch with Oener in order to improve fuel cell performance.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. Further, Rusch et al. teach wherein the porous support material includes a glass fiber cloth, an electrospun polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) nanofiber membrane, a non-woven graphite cloth, or a polymer fabric (Claims 1, 21, and 27 disclose the porous support is a porous polymeric fabric.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. Further, Rusch et al. teach wherein a distance between the cation exchange membrane and the anion exchange membrane is less than 30 µm (Col. 4, lines 50-52 disclose the porous microstructure has a thickness of less than 0.05 millimeters, or 50 microns.).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. Further, Oener et al. teach wherein the material of the cation exchange membrane includes a polymer represented by formula 1,
PNG
media_image1.png
180
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in formula 1, n is 5-14, m is 1-2, and x is 200-100 (Paragraph 0036 and Table 1 disclose Nafion being used for the CEM. Nafion, as well known in the art, has the chemical structure of
PNG
media_image2.png
303
723
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Rusch with Oener in order to improve fuel cell performance.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. Further, Rusch et al. teach wherein the material of the cation exchange membrane includes a polymer having repeating units represented by formula 2, formula 3, and formula 4,
PNG
media_image3.png
343
578
media_image3.png
Greyscale
in formula 2, R1 represents C1-C8 alkyl group, C1-C8 cycloalkyl group, C1-C8 alkoxy group or C1-C8 alkoxyalkyl group, and n is 0 or an integer of 1-5 (Col. 4, lines 25-37 disclose the use of polystyrenes for ionic polymers, reading on formula 2.); and
in formula 3, R2 represents C6-C16 arylene group, C1-C8 alkylene group, C1-C8 cycloalkylene group or C1-C8 alkoxy alkylene group, A1- represents SO3-, NO3- or COO-, and R1+represents H+, Li+, Na+, K+ or NH4+.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. Further, Oener et al. teach wherein the anion exchange membrane includes a polymer polymerized by a styrene-based monomer, an ammonium- containing heterocyclic monomer and a monomer having conjugated double bonds or an acrylate ester monomer (Paragraphs 0036; 0044 and Table 1 disclose the AEM comprises Sustainion® which comprises a styrene backbone.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Rusch with Oener in order to improve fuel cell performance.
Claims 3 and 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rusch et al. (US 6,130,175 A) and Oener et al. (US 2020/0370188 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Huo et al. (US 2021/0207275 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. However, they do not teach wherein a ratio of the thickness of the anion exchange membrane to a thickness of the cation exchange membrane is 0.3 to 1.
Huo et al. teach an ion-conducting layer (Fig. 2, element 260) having a polymer electrolyte membrane (Fig. 2, element 265) and a cathode buffer layer (Fig. 2, element 225) on one side of the membrane and an anode buffer layer (Fig. 2, element 245) on the opposite side of the membrane. Both the cathode and anode buffer layers comprise ion conducting polymers (Paragraphs 0068-0069). Further, the cathode buffer layer can comprise an anion conducting polymer (e.g. Sustainion) (Paragraph 0133) and the anode buffer layer can comprise a cation exchange polymer (Paragraph 0138). Finally, the ratio of thickness between the cathode buffer layer and the anode buffer layer can be 0.3-1 (Paragraph 0336 discloses the cathode buffer layer has a thickness ranging from 5-50 µm. Paragraph 0329 discloses the anode buffer layer has a thickness ranging from 10-30 µm.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Rusch and Oener with Huo in order to decrease or block unwanted reactions that produce undesired products and decrease the overall efficiency of the cell.
Regarding claims 5-8, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. However, they do not teach further comprising a first interface additive disposed in the cation exchange membrane and located on the first side of the porous support; wherein the first interface additive includes acidified conductive carbon material or metal oxide powder, wherein the specific surface area of the acidified conductive carbon is above 390 m2/g; and wherein a surface of the acidified conductive carbon material has a carbonyl group, a carboxyl group, or a nitrate group.
Huo et al. teach an ion-conducting layer (Fig. 2, element 260) having a polymer electrolyte membrane (Fig. 2, element 265) and a cathode buffer layer (Fig. 2, element 225) on one side of the membrane and an anode buffer layer (Fig. 2, element 245) on the opposite side of the membrane. Both the cathode and anode buffer layers comprise ion conducting polymers (Paragraphs 0068-0069). Further, the cathode buffer layer can comprise an anion conducting polymer (e.g. Sustainion) (Paragraph 0133) and the anode buffer layer can comprise a cation exchange polymer (Paragraph 0138). Finally, the anode buffer layer and the cathode buffer lay can have inert filler particles combined with the polymers in these layers. The inert filler particles can comprise titanium dioxide, silica, zirconia, and alumina which are all metal oxides (Paragraph 0250).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Rusch and Oener with Huo in order to achieve porosity which allow gas/liquid transport and improve ionic transport.
Regarding claims 9-12, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. However, they do not teach further comprising a second interface additive disposed in the anion exchange membrane which includes acidified conductive carbon material or metal oxide powder, wherein the specific surface area of the acidified conductive carbon is above 390 m2/g; and wherein a surface of the acidified conductive carbon material has a carbonyl group, a carboxyl group, or a nitrate group.
Huo et al. teach an ion-conducting layer (Fig. 2, element 260) having a polymer electrolyte membrane (Fig. 2, element 265) and a cathode buffer layer (Fig. 2, element 225) on one side of the membrane and an anode buffer layer (Fig. 2, element 245) on the opposite side of the membrane. Both the cathode and anode buffer layers comprise ion conducting polymers (Paragraphs 0068-0069). Further, the cathode buffer layer can comprise an anion conducting polymer (e.g. Sustainion) (Paragraph 0133) and the anode buffer layer can comprise a cation exchange polymer (Paragraph 0138). Finally, the anode buffer layer and the cathode buffer lay can have inert filler particles combined with the polymers in these layers. The inert filler particles can comprise titanium dioxide, silica, zirconia, and alumina which are all metal oxides (Paragraph 0250).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Rusch and Oener with Huo in order to achieve porosity which allow gas/liquid transport and improve ionic transport.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rusch et al. (US 6,130,175 A) and Oener et al. (US 2020/0370188 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tsai (US 2017/0183464 A1).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Rusch and Oener et al. teach the bipolar membrane of claim 1. However, they do not teach wherein the material of the anion exchange membrane includes a polymer having repeating units represented by formula 6 and formula 7,
PNG
media_image4.png
233
609
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
367
620
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Tsai et al. teach an ion exchange membrane is provided for use as an anion exchange membrane in a fuel cell (Abstract; paragraphs 0003-0004). Further, the material can comprise a first and second repeat unit comprising. The first repeat unit can comprise
PNG
media_image6.png
182
261
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and the second repeat unit can comprise
PNG
media_image7.png
175
286
media_image7.png
Greyscale
X represents
PNG
media_image8.png
24
279
media_image8.png
Greyscale
wherein k, i and j are either independently 0 os an integer from 1-6, Y, is is —O—, —S—, —CH2—, or —NH—; A is F-, Cl-, Br-, I-, OH-, HCO3-, HSO4-, SbF6-, BF4-, H2PO4-, H2PO3-, H2PO2-, R1 is a C1-8 alkyl group (Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the anion exchange membrane of Rusch and Oener with Tsai in order to improve mechanical strength.
Conclusion
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 January 13th, 2026
Prosecution Insights