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. 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. Specification The specification and drawings have been reviewed and no clear informalities or objections have been noted. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Group I in the reply filed on 2/6/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In claim 27, Applicant claims alkali earth metals (Mg2+, Ca2+) . It is not clear if the metals in the parentheses are being claimed or if they are examples of alkali earth metals. The same is true for the transition metals and other metals of the claim. Clarification is required. For purposes of this examination, the elements in the parentheses will not be interpreted as being limiting. 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. Claim(s) 1- 7 and 24-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Sauvage (US 2018/0175463) . Regarding claim s 1 and 2 , Sauvage discloses a photo rechargeable electrochemical energy storage device (see abstract) comprising: a photoanode (TiO2/semiconductor that is placed on the transparent conductive carrier as described in paragraph 75) . a cathode (in this embodiment, it is referenced as the negative electrode, see paragraph 13) ; an electrolyte between the photoanode and the cathode (paragraph 14) ; and a light-transmissive electrode or window arranged to admit light to the photoanode to charge the device (see paragraph 69-70 which give several examples of transparent layers that allow light to pass to the photoanode) . Regarding claim 3 , Sauvage further discl os es the oxide of titanium is titanium dioxide (TiO2), and the photoanode is at least 90% titanium dioxide (TiO2) after casting and sintering (see paragraphs 101- 10 3 which teaches that the TIO2 film comprises ONLY TiO2, after it is cast and sintered/ calcined) . Regarding claim 4 , Sauvage further discloses the photoanode is fabricated with anatase, rutile, brookite, amorphous, and/or other crystal structures of titanium dioxide (TiO2) (see Example in paragraph 98 which discloses that the TiO2 is of the anatase morphology) . Regarding claim 5 , Sauvage further discloses the photoanode is fabricated with stacked nanoparticles, hollow-shell structures, nanowires, nanorods, thin-films, and/or any other morphology (see paragraph 100 which discloses nanoparticles of TiO2 and to generate the thickness of the photoanode described in paragraph 106, the nanoparticles necessarily were stacked) . Regarding claim 6 , Sauvage further discloses the photoanode is made of TiO 2. Regarding claim 7 , Sauvage further discloses the x in the perovskite (M1M2Ox) is 2.5 to 3.5 (see paragraph 65 which discloses that the photoanode/semiconductor can be SrTiO3) . Regarding claims 24-27, Sauvage further discloses a Li+ charge carrier (see paragraph 115 which discloses the intercalation and deintercalation of Li+) and teaches that the photoanode comprises a Claim(s) 1 , 2, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Segawa (US 2009/0078307) . Regarding claims 1 and 2, Segawa discloses a photo rechargeable electrochemical energy storage device (see abstract) comprising: a photoanode (TiO2/semiconductor layer 4d which is titanium oxide, see paragraph 37 ) . a cathode ( 5, common electroe see paragraph 99 ) ; an electrolyte between the photoanode and the cathode ( electrolyte 7 positioned between electrodes 4 and 5, see Fig. 1 ) ; and a light-transmissive electrode (4c) or window (4b) arranged to admit light to the photoanode to charge the device ( see paragraph 100 which discloses light passing through layers 4b and 4c to expose the semiconductor layer 4d to the light ) . Regarding claim 8 , Segawa further discloses a laminated planar stack (see abstract which discloses a laminated structure) comprising a back substrate (8) , a current collector (5a) , the cathode (5) , the electrolyte (7) , the photoanode (4d) , a transparent electrode (4c) , and a light-transmissive substrate (4b) . Regarding claim 9 , Segawa further discloses the cathode contains an alkali metal ion, a non-alkali ion, or a proton (the cathode, 5 contains protons) . 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. Claim (s) 12 , 14 , 15 , 18 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Segawa (US 2009/0078307) as applied to claim 8 above and further in view of Fathy (US 2019/0181646) . Regarding claim s 12 , 1 4, 15 and 28 , Segawa discloses a photo-rechargeable electrochemical cell (recharged by light) comprising a dye-sensitized photoanode (see abstract) that is connected to a load (see Fig. 1) that is connected to the current collector (5a) and teaches recharging the energy storage device when exposed to sufficient light (as described in the abstract) but does not go into details regarding a micro-power conversion controller configured to : ( i ) control delivery of power to a load and convert direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC ). Fathy also discloses a photovoltaic/hybrid system of power production (see abstract). Fathy teaches a system which comprises a control system which controls delivery of power produced by a photovoltaic cell, and stored in a battery, to a grid (170) after converting the DC current to AC current via an inverter (160) . Fathy teaches a controller that manages the output of the photovoltaic generation units and the battery unis to optimize an output to the load/grid (in AC current, as that is what the grid utilizes) and optimize a voltage output of each of the hybrid cells (paragraph 54). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add the micro-control system/control system of Fathy to the system of Segawa in order to optimize an output to the load/grid and optimize a voltage output of each of the hybrid cells. Regarding claim 18 , while Segawa , as modified above, does not teach a display and web-connected devices to interact with the micro-power conversion controller, such a modification would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention as data display and data reception at locations other than the data display (web-connected) are well known features in the art in order to observe the operating status of the system from any location. CN 106785243 A – Discloses a photo-rechargeable battery that comprises a TiO2 containing photoanode that is dye-sensitized but is silent regarding the crystal structure of the photoanode. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MATTHEW J MERKLING whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9813 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Thursday 8am-6pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Basia Ridley can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1453 . 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. /MATTHEW J MERKLING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725