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 Amendments
This is a final office action in response to applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 03/30/2026.
Status of Rejections
The objections to the claims are withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
The rejection(s) of claim(s) 30 is/are obviated by applicant’s cancellation.
All other previous rejections are maintained and modified only in response to the amendments to the claims.
Claims 24-29 and 31-37 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim 24 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 24 has been amended and should therefore have the status identifier “(Currently Amended)” instead of “(Previously Presented)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 24-25, 27, 29, 31-34 and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Berlinguette et al. (WO 2019051609 A1); claim 37 evidenced by McCleskey (“Electrical Conductivity of Electrolytes Found In Natural Waters from (5 to 90) °C”, J Chem & Eng Data, 2011).
Regarding claim 24, Berlinguette discloses a hydrogen producing apparatus comprising an enclosed volume (see e.g. Fig. 1B, electrochemical cell 110 in which hydrogen is produced; Paragraph 0058, line 2, and Paragraph 0025), wherein the enclosed volume comprises:
an assembly (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, membrane electrode assembly 11; Paragraph 0065, lines 1-2) comprising:
at least one layer of a porous matrix material with hygroscopic properties and having ionic conductivity (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, support layer 18 comprising a porous matrix/mat of materials such as silica, which is hygroscopic, and also comprising a hygroscopic coating, the support layer also providing a pathway for protons, i.e. being ion conductive; Paragraph 0080, Paragraph 0081, lines 1-3, and Paragraph 0083, lines 1-2); and
an oxygen producing electrode (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, anode 14 at which oxygen is evolved; Paragraph 0095, line 1) and a hydrogen producing electrode (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, cathode 12 at which hydrogen is generated; Paragraph 0065, line 3, and Paragraph 0025), positioned on opposite sides of a gas-impermeable separator (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, anode 14 and cathode 12 separated by bipolar membrane (BPM) 16 which is impermeable to the gaseous carbon products; Paragraph 0065, line 3, and Paragraphs 0077 and 0124);
at least one inlet coupled to the oxygen producing electrode form outside the enclosed volume (see e.g. Figs. 1B and 3B, anode feed inlet 45, e.g. port 245, for delivering anode feed to anode 14/214 from outside cell volume; Paragraph 0074 and 0104);
connections for connecting the oxygen producing electrode and the hydrogen producing electrode to a power source (see e.g. Fig. 1B, connections from power supply 112 to respective anode 14 and cathode 12; Paragraph 0058, lines 4-6); and
at least one outlet for hydrogen produced by the hydrogen producing electrode (see e.g. Fig. 2, cathode outlet 26 for collecting cathode products such as hydrogen; Paragraph 0096, lines 2-3, and Paragraph 0025).
The inlet coupled to the oxygen producing electrode being a “gas” inlet is a statement of intended use. MPEP § 2114 states “"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does."…A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.”. The inlet of Berlinguette is described as a port, i.e. hole, which would be capable of allowing entrance to gas as well as liquid (see e.g. Paragraphs 0104 and 0105). Therefore, Berlinguette discloses all the structural limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 25, Berlinguette discloses the oxygen producing electrode and the hydrogen producing electrode being positioned on opposite sides of a layer of the porous matrix material (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, support layer 18 provided between anode 14 and cathode 12; Paragraph 0065).
Regarding claim 27, Berlinguette discloses the assembly comprising a gas impermeable separator and the oxygen producing electrode and the hydrogen producing electrode being positioned on opposite sides of the gas-impermeable separator (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, BPM 16 provided between anode 14 and cathode 12; Paragraph 0065).
Regarding claim 29, Berlinguette discloses a layer of the porous matrix material positioned between the gas-impermeable separator and the hydrogen producing electrode (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, support layer 18 between BPM 16 and cathode 12; Paragraph 0065).
Regarding claim 31, Berlinguette discloses the gas-impermeable separator being a membrane (see e.g. Figs. 1A-1B, bipolar membrane (BPM) 16; Paragraph 0053).
Regarding claim 32, Berlinguette discloses the porous matrix material comprising solutes providing conductive properties (see e.g. Paragraphs 0016-0017 and 0079, aqueous solution of dissolved sodium bicarbonate as an electrolyte, i.e. conductive component, contained in support layer).
Regarding claim 33, Berlinguette discloses the oxygen producing electrode and the hydrogen producing electrode being connected directly to a device for solar energy conversion (see e.g. Fig. 1B, power for power supply 112 connected to cathode 12 and anode 14 supplied from solar cells; Paragraph 0058, lines 5-8).
Regarding claim 34, Berlinguette discloses the device for solar energy conversion being a photovoltaic device (see e.g. Paragraph 0058, lines 6-8, solar cells).
Regarding claim 36, Berlinguette discloses the porous matrix material having a thickness of at least 300 µm (see e.g. Paragraph 0087, lines 4-6, support layer thickness of 300 µm to 1.5 mm).
Regarding claim 37, Berlinguette discloses the porous matrix material containing a hydrophilic polymer (see e.g. Paragraph 0081, lines 1-2, support layer comprising hydrophilic polytetrafluoroethylene) and a solute that provides an ionic conductivity of greater than 2.6 Siemens/m (see e.g. Paragraphs 0016-0017 and Paragraph 0126, lines 5-6, aqueous solution with 1.0 M NaHCO3; which has an ionic conductivity of greater than 2.6 S/m, as evidenced by McCleskey, see e.g. McCleskey Table 3a on Page 320, 0.7226 mol/kg NaHCO3 having conductivity of 26.34-113.9 mS/cm, so the higher concentration 1.0 M would have a conductivity above that).
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.
Claims 26, 28, 30 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berlinguette in view of Baets et al. (WO 2017190202 A1).
Regarding claim 26, Berlinguette teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 25 as stated above. Berlinguette does not teach, in addition, a further porous matrix material being positioned at one or both outer sides of the assembly, but does teach the desire to maintain hydration at the cathode side of the membrane forming the separator (see e.g. Paragraph 0080, lines 1-2) as well as the anode side of the membrane (see e.g. Paragraph 0095, lines 2-4).
Baets teaches a hydrogen producing apparatus (see e.g. Abstract) comprising a membrane electrode assembly formed by a cathode and anode on either side of an ion exchange component (see e.g. Fig. 2, cathode 7 and anode 9 on either side of ion exchange component 8 forming membrane electrode assembly; Page 7, lines 18-19, and Page 21, lines 7-9), wherein a layer of porous water sorption, i.e. hygroscopic, material may be placed in contact with the outer side of the anode or cathode not in contact with the ion exchange component, i.e. at the outer sides of the assembly (see e.g. Page 7, lines 10-29, Page 10, lines 23-28, and Page 18, lines 10-12), this water sorption layer contributing to hydration of the membrane (see e.g. Page 17, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Berlinguette to comprise a further layer of the porous matrix material at one or both outer sides of the assembly in contact with the anode and/or cathode as taught by Baets as an additional suitable means of facilitating hydration of the membrane separator. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 28, Berlinguette teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 27 as stated above. Berlinguette does not teach a layer of the porous matrix material being positioned at one or both outer sides of the assembly, the desire to maintain hydration at the cathode side of the membrane forming the separator (see e.g. Paragraph 0080, lines 1-2) as well as the anode side of the membrane (see e.g. Paragraph 0095, lines 2-4).
Baets teaches a hydrogen producing apparatus (see e.g. Abstract) comprising a membrane electrode assembly formed by a cathode and anode on either side of an ion exchange component (see e.g. Fig. 2, cathode 7 and anode 9 on either side of ion exchange component 8 forming membrane electrode assembly; Page 7, lines 18-19, and Page 21, lines 7-9), wherein a layer of porous water sorption, i.e. hygroscopic, material may be placed in contact with the outer side of the anode or cathode not in contact with the ion exchange component, i.e. at the outer sides of the assembly (see e.g. Page 7, lines 10-29, Page 10, lines 23-28, and Page 18, lines 10-12), this water sorption layer contributing to hydration of the membrane (see e.g. Page 17, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Berlinguette to comprise a further layer of the porous matrix material at one or both outer sides of the assembly in contact with the anode and/or cathode as taught by Baets as an additional suitable means of facilitating hydration of the membrane separator. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 30, Berlinguette teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 27 as stated above. Berlinguette does not teach an additional layer of the porous matrix material positioned at one or both outer sides of the assembly, but does teach the desire to maintain hydration at the cathode side of the membrane forming the separator (see e.g. Paragraph 0080, lines 1-2) as well as the anode side of the membrane (see e.g. Paragraph 0095, lines 2-4).
Baets teaches a hydrogen producing apparatus (see e.g. Abstract) comprising a membrane electrode assembly formed by a cathode and anode on either side of an ion exchange component (see e.g. Fig. 2, cathode 7 and anode 9 on either side of ion exchange component 8 forming membrane electrode assembly; Page 7, lines 18-19, and Page 21, lines 7-9), wherein a layer of porous water sorption, i.e. hygroscopic, material may be placed in contact with the outer side of the anode or cathode not in contact with the ion exchange component, i.e. at the outer sides of the assembly (see e.g. Page 7, lines 10-29, Page 10, lines 23-28, and Page 18, lines 10-12), this water sorption layer contributing to hydration of the membrane (see e.g. Page 17, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus of Berlinguette to comprise a further layer of the porous matrix material at one or both outer sides of the assembly in contact with the anode and/or cathode as taught by Baets as an additional suitable means of facilitating hydration of the membrane separator. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 35, Berlinguette teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 24 as stated above. Berlinguette does not explicitly teach the porous matrix material containing pores having a diameter of at least 10 nm, but does generally teach the pore sizes being set to allow the accumulation of liquid water in the layer containing the porous matrix material (see e.g. Paragraph 0083, lines 6-8).
Baets teaches a hydrogen producing apparatus (see e.g. Abstract) comprising a porous water sorption, i.e. hygroscopic, material component (see e.g. Page 10, lines 23-28, and Page 18, lines 10-12), an exemplary such material having a pore size of 10.25 nm (see e.g. Page 21, lines 16-19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the porous matrix material of Berlinguette to have a pore size of 10.25 nm as taught by Baets as a pore size suitable for sorption, i.e. accumulation, of water in a porous hygroscopic material. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8, Applicant argues that Berlinguette fails to disclose at least one gas inlet coupled to the oxygen producing electrode, instead teaching a configuration in which only liquid is supplied to the anode. This is not considered persuasive. Berlinguette discloses an inlet coupled to the oxygen producing electrode from outside the enclosed volume (see e.g. Figs. 1B and 3B, anode feed inlet 45, e.g. port 245, for delivering anode feed to anode 14/214 from outside cell volume; Paragraph 0074 and 0104). This inlet being a “gas” inlet is a statement of intended use. MPEP § 2114 states “"[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does."…A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.”. Though only liquid is exemplified entering the inlet of Berlinguette (see e.g. Paragraph 0074), it is described as a port, i.e. hole, which would be capable of allowing entrance to gas as well as liquid (see e.g. Paragraphs 0104 and 0105). Therefore, Berlinguette discloses all the structural limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Spurgeon et al. (U.S. 2013/0092549) discloses an electrolytic cell in which gaseous, rather than liquid, water is used as an anode feedstock to avoid the disadvantageous effects of bubble formation during electrolysis.
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 MOFOLUWASO S JEBUTU whose telephone number is (571)272-1919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/M.S.J./Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights