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 .
Claims 1-10 are pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 3, 5 and 6 objected to because of the following informalities: because of an informal expression. Specifically, the unit "mol/i" appears to be typographical error and should be corrected to "mol/L" to denote the molarity in liters. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a(1) as being anticipated by Heping et al. (CN114122571 A).
Regarding claim 1, 2, 4 and 7, Heping et al. discloses a metal-air battery (aluminium-air battery, n0007) with aluminum as anode (para. n0003, n0007), an air electrode as cathode (para. n0007) and an ion conducting alkaline electrolyte solution interposed therebetween (ref. 3, figure 1, para. n0026). Heping et al. further discloses the alkaline electrolyte comprises of polyethylene glycol (polyethylene oxide) and potassium hydroxide (para. n 0026).
Regarding claim 3, Heping et al. discloses the potassium hydroxide is present in a concentration of 0.1~8 mol/L (para. n0026).
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) (a)(2) as being anticipated by Guha et al. (U.S. PG PUB 2017/0237134 A1).
Regarding claim 1, 2, 4, and 7, Guha et al. discloses a metal-air battery (zinc-air battery) with a zinc anode (para. 0003, 0106), an air cathode (para. 0003, 0051) and an ion conducting alkaline electrolyte (para. 0007) between the electrodes. Guha et al. further discloses the electrolyte comprises of potassium hydroxide (para. 0007, 0091) and polyalkylene glycol containing ethylene oxide - poly ethylene glycol (para. 0009 – 0010).
Regarding claim 8, Guha et al. further discloses in an embodiment the anode is an alloy which contains silicon (para. 0106).
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.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heping et al. (CN114122571 A) in view of Inoue et al. (U.S. PG PUB 2021/0126290 A1).
Heping et al. is relied upon as above.
Regarding claim 5 and 6, Heping et al. discloses polyethylene glycol in the electrolyte is in a concentration range of 0.1~100 g in each liter (para. n 0026).
Heping et al. fails to disclose the average molecular weight of the polyethylene glycol being used as the electrolyte additive.
Inoue et al. discloses an alkaline secondary battery containing zinc-based negative electrode and an alkaline electrolyte solution comprising of potassium hydroxide concentration preferably 38 mass% or less (less than 9.3 mol/L) and polyethylene glycol (para. 0022, 0094, 0102-103). Inoue et al. further discloses the preferable average molecular weight of polyethylene glycol used is 200 or more (para. 0092). The calculation for the amount of polyethylene glycol as disclosed by Heping et al. when the average molecular weight of polyethylene glycol is 200 g/mol is as shown below and it falls within the claimed range.
0.1
g
o
f
P
E
G
200
i
n
1
l
i
t
e
r
=
0.1
g
200
g
/
m
o
l
=
500
µ
m
o
l
/
L
100
g
o
f
P
E
G
200
i
n
1
l
i
t
e
r
=
100
g
200
g
/
m
o
l
=
0.5
m
o
l
/
L
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to include an electrolyte containing polyethylene glycol in the claimed concentration range and to use polyethylene glycol whose average molecular weight is 200 g/mol or above as taught by Inoue et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include use polyethylene glycol whose average molecular weight is 200 g/mol or above to reduce zinc dendrite formation and improve cycle characteristics.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heping et al. (CN114122571 A) in view of Ein-Eli et al. (WO 2011061728 A1). For purpose of prior art discussion refer to US PG Pub 2012/0299550 A1 for WO 2011061728 A1.
Heping et al. is relied upon as above.
Regarding claims 8, 9, and 10, Heping et al. fails to disclose a metal-air battery where in the anode contains Silicon – amorphous silicon, silicon wafer and silicon in the form of a powder.
Ein-Eli et al. discloses a silicon-air battery (ref. 10, figure 1 para. 0061) where in anode is a silicon wafer (ref.12, figure 1, para. 0061, 0086) and nickel mesh air cathode (ref. 14, figure 1, para. 0061). Ein-Eli et al. further discloses in an embodiment the anode comprises of amorphous silicon (para. 0016, 0079) and another embodiment where silicon powder is used as the anode material (para. 0023, 0092).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to have an anode containing amorphous silicon, or silicon wafer or silicon in a powder form as taught by Ein-Eli et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include a silicon anode as a chemical fuel due to their high energy density and electrochemical performance.
Claims 3, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guha et al. (U.S. PG PUB 2017/0237134 A1) in view of Heping et al. (CN114122571 A).
Guha et al. are relied upon as described above.
Regarding claim 3, Guha et al. fails to disclose the concentration of potassium hydroxide present in the electrolyte.
Heping et al. discloses a metal-air battery (aluminium-air battery, n0007) with aluminum as anode (para. n0003, n0007), an air electrode as cathode (para. n0007) and an ion conducting electrolyte solution interposed therebetween (ref. 3, figure 1, para. n0026). Heping et al. further discloses the alkaline electrolyte comprises of polyalkylene glycol containing polyethylene oxide and potassium hydroxide (para. n 0026). The concentration of potassium hydroxide is 0.1~8 mol/L (para. n0026).
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guha et al. (U.S. PG PUB 2017/0237134 A1) in view of Inoue et al. (U.S. PG PUB 2021/0126290 A1).
Guha et al. are relied upon as described above.
Regrading claim 5 and 6, Guha et al. discloses using polyethylene glycol (corrosion inhibitor) present in the electrolyte from about 100 ppm to about 25000 ppm (para. 0072).
Guha et al. fails to disclose the average molecular weight of the polyethylene glycol used as the electrolyte additive. Inoue et al. discloses an alkaline secondary battery containing zinc-based negative electrode and an alkaline electrolyte solution comprising of potassium hydroxide concentration preferably 38 mass% or less (concentration less than 9.3 mol/L) and polyethylene glycol (para. 0022, 0094, 0102-103). Inoue et al. further discloses the preferable average molecular weight of polyethylene glycol used is 200 or more (para. 0092). The calculation for the amount of polyethylene glycol as disclosed by Guha et al. when the average molecular weight of polyethylene glycol is 200 g/mol is as shown below and it falls within the claimed range.
100
p
p
m
o
f
P
E
G
200
i
n
1
K
g
=
1
L
=
0.1
g
200
g
/
m
o
l
=
500
µ
m
o
l
/
L
25000
p
p
m
o
f
P
E
G
200
i
n
1
K
g
=
1
L
=
25
g
200
g
/
m
o
l
=
0.13
m
o
l
/
L
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to include an electrolyte containing polyethylene glycol in the claimed concentration range and to use polyethylene glycol whose average molecular weight is above 200 as taught by Inoue et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include use of polyethylene glycol whose average molecular weight is above 200 to reduce zinc dendrite formation and improve cycle characteristics.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guha et al. (U.S. PG PUB 2017/0237134 A1) in view of Ein-Eli et al. (WO 2011061728 A1). For purpose of prior art discussion refer to US PG Pub 2012/0299550 A1 for WO 2011061728 A1.
Guha et al. is relied upon as above.
Regarding claim 9 and 10, Guha et al. fails to disclose a metal-air battery where in the anode contains amorphous silicon, silicon in the form wafer and powder.
Ein-Eli et al. discloses a silicon-air battery (ref. 10, figure 1 para. 0061) where in anode is a silicon wafer (ref.12, figure 1, para. 0061, 0086) and nickel mesh air cathode (ref. 14, figure 1, para. 0061). Ein-Eli et al. further discloses in an embodiment the anode comprises of amorphous silicon (para. 0016, 0079) and another embodiment where silicon powder is used as the anode material (para. 0023, 0092).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to have an anode containing amorphous silicon, or silicon wafer or silicon in a powder form as taught by Ein-Eli et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include a silicon anode as a chemical fuel due to their high energy density and electrochemical performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISWARYA MATHEW whose telephone number is (571)272-9515. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/I.M./
Iswarya MathewExaminer, Art Unit 1788 04/03/2026
/Alicia Chevalier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights