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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-15, 23, 27-29, 34-36 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krause et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2020/0131649).
Regarding claim 1, Krause discloses a gas diffusion electrode suitable for use in a carbon dioxide electrolyzer (paragraphs 2, 40-41), the gas diffusion electrode comprising:
(a) a gas diffusion layer (paragraph 144), the gas diffusion layer comprising a porous hydrophobic structure (47) having a pair of opposing sides (abstract; paragraphs 41, 48-49, 254; figure 9);
the gas diffusion layer comprising a set of one or more pores designed for gas transport through the gas diffusion layer (hydrophobic pores; paragraphs 49-50), and
a set of one or more openings designed for water/electrolyte drainage (hydrophilic pores/channels) through the gas diffusion layer (the hydrophilic layer 46 is reached by electrolyte 45 while hydrophobic layer 47 is reacted by the reaction gas; paragraphs 123, 217, 254);
wherein the one or more pores are comparatively smaller in size (hydrophobic pores can range between 0.1-40 µm; paragraph 100), and the one or more hydrophilic channels/openings are comparatively larger in size (the pores/channels in the electrolyte direction can have a diameter between 10nm to 100 µm – paragraph 146. The pores and/or channels can be adjusted to enhance the passage of gas and/or electrolyte and hence the catalytic reaction; paragraphs 100, 236, 237); and
(b) a catalyst layer (40), the catalyst layer being disposed on one of the pair of opposing sides (as shown in figure 9; paragraph 254).
Regarding claim 2, the catalyst layer (40) of Krause does not cover the one or more openings of the gas diffusion layer (figure 9; paragraph 254).
Regarding claim 3, the gas diffusion layer of Krause is electron conductive (paragraphs 96, 140).
Regarding claim 4, the gas diffusion layer of Krause comprises a material selected from a metal mesh or carbon paper (paragraphs 25, 148, 266-267).
Regarding claim 5, the gas diffusion layer of Krause further comprises a hydrophobic coating (paragraphs 41, 48-49, 99, 100, 123).
Regarding claim 6, the gas diffusion layer (47) of Krause is electron non-conductive, the gas diffusion electrode further comprising an electron conductive layer (paragraphs 96, 140).
Regarding claim 7, Krause further teaches wherein the gas diffusion layer comprises a hydrophobic porous polymer membrane (paragraph 99).
Regarding claim 8, the gas diffusion layer of Krause comprises a porous PVDF (polyvinylidene difluoride) membrane (paragraphs 99, 130).
Regarding claim 9, the electron conductive layer of Krause is a porous structure made of at least one of carbon and a metal (paragraphs 30, 148).
Regarding claim 10, Krause discloses wherein each opening of the set of one or more openings extends entirely through the gas diffusion layer in a direct fashion from one of the opposing sides to the other of the opposing sides paragraphs 68, 78, 123, 146, 217, 254. The pores and/or channels can be adjusted to enhance the passage of gas and/or electrolyte and hence the catalytic reaction; paragraphs 100, 236, 237).
Regarding claim 11, the pores and/or channels of Krause can be adjusted as desired to enhance the passage of gas and/or electrolyte and hence the catalytic reaction (paragraphs 100, 176, 236, 237 – the one or more openings may be uniformly arranged).
Regarding claim 12, the pores and/or channels of Krause can be adjusted as desired to enhance the passage of gas and/or electrolyte and hence the catalytic reaction (paragraphs 100, 176, 236, 237 – the one or more openings may be randomly arranged).
Regarding claims 13-14, Krause discloses wherein the set of one or more openings comprises a plurality of regularly-shaped openings, i.e. circular openings (the pores and/or channels have a diameter between 10nm to 100 µm; paragraph 146).
Regarding claim 15, the circular openings of Krause have a diameter that is larger than about 30 µm (the pores and/or channels have a diameter between 10nm to 100 µm; paragraph 146).
Regarding claim 23, the gas diffusion layer of Krause may consist of a single piece of material (paragraphs 145, 202).
Regarding claim 27, Krause discloses a membrane electrode assembly suitable for use in a carbon dioxide electrolyzer (paragraphs 40-41; 67; 71-72; 291 – figures 11-14; 30-31), the membrane electrode assembly comprising:
(a) an ion exchange membrane, the ion exchange membrane having an anode side and a cathode side (paragraphs 51-52, 133, 197-198);
(b) an anode (A) coupled to the anode side of the ion exchange membrane (paragraphs 51, 52, 133, 190; figures 11-14); and
(c) the gas diffusion electrode/GDE of claim 1 (discussed in detail above) coupled to the cathode side (K) of the ion exchange membrane (paragraphs 51, 52, 133, 190; figures 11-14).
Regarding claim 28, the gas diffusion layer of Krause is electron conductive (paragraphs 6, 96, 140), the membrane electrode assembly further comprising a water barrier layer/hydrophobic coating positioned between the catalyst layer and the ion exchange membrane (paragraphs 14, 82, 119).
Regarding claim 29, the water barrier layer of Krause is a porous structure comprising hydrophobic polymer particles (paragraphs 12, 99).
Regarding claim 34, the gas diffusion layer (47) of Krause is electron non-conductive, the gas diffusion electrode further comprising an electron conductive layer positioned between the catalyst layer and the ion exchange membrane (paragraphs 96, 140).
Regarding claim 35, the electron conductive layer of Krause is a porous structure comprising one or more materials selected from the group of copper, silver, or gold (paragraph 96).
Regarding claim 36, it has been held by courts that limitations relating to the size of an element is not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art, if the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. MPEP 2144.04. IV.A.
Regarding claim 38, Krause discloses a carbon dioxide electrolyzer, the carbon dioxide electrolyzer (paragraphs 2, 40, 187) comprising:
(a) the membrane electrode assembly as claimed in claim 27 (discussed in detail above); and
(b) a voltage source, the voltage source operatively coupled to the membrane electrode assembly (paragraphs 108, 111, 187, 189).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 16-22, 24-26 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krause as applied to claims 13 and 1 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2023/0047140).
Regarding claim 16, Krause teaches all the features discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the regularly-shaped openings are square openings.
Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes in order to provide structures that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites (paragraph 63).
One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would have found it obvious to use regularly-squared shaped openings in the gas diffusion layer of Krause because as taught by Zhang, by selecting and manufacturing a desired shape provides gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites.
Regarding claim 17, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated/engineered as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 18, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated/engineered as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 19, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated/engineered as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 20, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated/engineered as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 21, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 22, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 24, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 25, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites). MPEP 2144.04.IV.B – the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant.
Regarding claim 26, Zhang discloses methods and devices for fabricating membrane electrode assemblies including gas diffusion layers (abstract) wherein the pore shapes of the gas diffusion layers can be selected as desired, i.e. circular, rectangular, square and any other polygonal shapes (paragraph 63 – the shape and size can be fabricated as desired to provide gas diffusion layers that exhibit well-controlled pore structures and much thinner thicknesses to improve electron and heat conductivity as well as mass transport at the reaction sites).
Regarding claim 30, it has been held by courts that limitations relating to the size of an element is not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art, if the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. MPEP 2144.04. IV.A. In the instant case, the claimed hydrophobic layer of the modified Krause would not perform differently than the claimed hydrophobic layer and thus, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 31-33 and 37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art made of record fails to teach or fairly suggest wherein the membrane electrode assembly further comprises a water capillary membrane positioned between the catalyst layer and the ion exchange membrane; nor a water capillary membrane positioned between the ion exchange membrane and the electron conductive layer.
This arrangement acts as a buffer between the catalyst layer and the ion exchange membrane, facilitates water flow and removal in a horizontal direction, enabling the excess water to then circumvent the reaction zone and to avoid flooding the catalyst layer. There was not found a teaching in the prior art suggesting modification of the conventional membrane electrode assemblies in order to obtain the features of the present invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZULMARIAM MENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9805. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30p.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/ZULMARIAM MENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794