DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 102 that forms 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 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yi et al. (CN 111641009A, with attached machine translation), as evidenced by “Lauryl Glucoside” and Jiang et al. (CN 102786560A, with attached machine translation).
With regard to claims 1 and 4, Yi et al. teach an aluminum-air battery electrolyte solution including lauryl glucoside (abstract, claims 1 and 4), and an aluminum-air battery comprising the electrolyte solution (claim 6).
The battery anode is aluminum (par.0004), which meets the limitations of claim 1 for “a negative electrode”, and the limitations of claim 4.
The aluminum-air battery also comprises an air cathode, which is the “air electrode” in claim 1.
The electrolyte solution is “an electrolyte solution disposed between the air electrode and the negative electrode” in claim 1.
Lauryl glucoside is an alkyl glucoside represented by the formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
190
194
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(C18H36O6)(see the attached “Lauryl Glucoside”), and meets the limitations of claim 1 for “an alkyl glucoside with 18 carbon atoms”.
Lauryl glucoside (C18H36O6) has a hydrophilic lipophilic balance (HLB) of 9, as evidenced in par.0005 of Jiang et al.
Therefore, the aluminum-air battery of Yi et al. anticipates the metal-air batteries in claims 1 and 4 of the instant application.
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.
Claims 2, 3, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al. (CN 111641009A, with attached machine translation), as evidenced by “Lauryl Glucoside” and Jiang et al. (CN 102786560A, with attached machine translation) in view of Sata et al. (JP 2015-220024 A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025).
With regard to claim 2, Yi et al. as evidenced by “Lauryl Glucoside” and Jiang et al. teach the metal-air battery of claim 1 (see paragraph 4 above), but fail to teach the claimed membrane.
Sata et al. teach a metal-air battery comprising a metal anode, a porous electrode as cathode, and the electrolyte solution (3) (par.0002 and par.0018).
Sata et al. further teach that the separator (18) may be provided between the air electrode (9) and the metal electrode (5):
PNG
media_image2.png
488
630
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(par.0025 and fig.14).
By providing the separator (18) it is possible to prevent the electrolyte (3) from leaking to the outside of the metal-air battery (30) through the pores of the air electrode (9), thereby improving the safety of the metal-air battery (30)(Sata et al., par.0025).
Sata et al. further teach that the separator (18) may be an ion exchange membrane (par.0026).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to include an ion exchange membrane between the air cathode and the aluminum anode in the aluminum-air battery of Yi et al., in order to prevent the leaking of electrolyte and to improve the safety of the battery.
Fig.14 of Sata et al. shows that an ion exchange membrane (18) divides the electrolytic solution into an air electrode (positive electrode) side and a metal electrode (negative electrode) side.
The electrolyte of Yi modified by Sata comprises lauryl glucoside, so the electrolyte on the aluminum anode side comprises lauryl glucoside (alkyl glucoside with 18 carbon atoms).
With regard to claim 3, Sata et al. teach that the ion exchange membrane may be perfluorosulfonic acid-based and perfluorocarboxylic acid-based (par.0026).
A perfluorosulfonic acid-based polymer electrolyte membrane comprises sulfur atoms and oxygen atoms, and a perfluorocarboxylic acid-based polymer electrolyte membrane comprises carbon and oxygen atoms.
With regard to claims 6 and 7, Yi et al. teach that the aluminum-air battery has an aluminum anode (par.0004).
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al. (CN 111641009A, with attached machine translation), as evidenced by “Lauryl Glucoside” and Jiang et al. (CN 102786560A, with attached machine translation) in view of Nohara et al. (US 2019/0237834).
With regard to claims 1 and 5, Yi et al. as evidenced by “Lauryl Glucoside” and Jiang et al. teach the aluminum-air batteries of claims 1 and 4 (see paragraph 4 above), but fail to teach the claimed air electrode.
Nohara et al. teach a battery including a cathode (101), an anode (102), and an electrolyte (103). The cathode (101) is made of a bicontinuous body having a three-dimensional network structure having a plurality of nanostructures integrated by non-covalent bonds, and it functions as air electrode. The anode (102) may be aluminum (abstract, par.0023, par.0050).
The bicontinuous body having a three-dimensional network structure in which a plurality of nanostructures is integrated by non-covalent bonds has a flexible structure and it is deformable (par.0065). Therefore, the battery is easy to handle (Nohara et al., par.0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to use the bicontinuous body having a three-dimensional network structure in which a plurality of nanostructures is integrated by non-covalent bonds as the air electrode in the aluminum-air battery of Yi et al., in order to take advantage of the flexibility and deformability of the bicontinuous body.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al. (CN 111641009A, with attached machine translation), as evidenced by “Lauryl Glucoside” and Jiang et al. (CN 102786560A, with attached machine translation) in view of Sata et al. (JP 2015-220024 A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025) as applied to claims 2 and 3 above, and further in view of Nohara et al. (US 2019/0237834).
With regard to claims 8 and 9, Yi modified by Sata teach the metal-air batteries of claims 2 and 3 (see paragraph 6 above) but fail to teach the claimed air electrode.
Nohara et al. teach a battery including a cathode (101), an anode (102), and an electrolyte (103).
Nohara et al. teach a battery including a cathode (101), an anode (102), and an electrolyte (103). The cathode (101) is made of a bicontinuous body having a three-dimensional network structure having a plurality of nanostructures integrated by non-covalent bonds, and it functions as air electrode. The anode (102) may be aluminum (abstract, par.0023, par.0050).
The bicontinuous body having a three-dimensional network structure in which a plurality of nanostructures is integrated by non-covalent bonds has a flexible structure and it is deformable (par.0065). Therefore, the battery is easy to handle (Nohara et al., par.0060).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to use the bicontinuous body having a three-dimensional network structure in which a plurality of nanostructures is integrated by non-covalent bonds as the air electrode in the aluminum-air battery of Yi modified by Sata, in order to take advantage of the flexibility and deformability of the bicontinuous body.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The examiner would like to notice that:
-the objection to the specification is withdrawn after the applicant’s amendments to the specification;
-the rejection of claims 1 and 4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tang et al. (CN 110137613A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025), as evidenced by the attached “Alkyl Polyglucoside APG 1214” is withdrawn following the amendment to claim 1;
-the rejection of claims 2, 3, 6, and 7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (CN 110137613A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025), as evidenced by the attached “Alkyl Polyglucoside APG 1214” and in view of Sata et al. (JP 2015-220024 A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025) is withdrawn following the amendment to claim 1;
-the rejection of claims 5 and 10 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (CN 110137613A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025), as evidenced by the attached “Alkyl Polyglucoside APG 1214” and in view of Nohara et al. (US 2019/0237834) is withdrawn following the amendment to claim 1; and
-the rejection of claims 8 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (CN 110137613A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025), as evidenced by the attached “Alkyl Polyglucoside APG 1214” and in view of Sata et al. (JP 2015-220024 A, with machine translation made of record on November 14, 2025) as applied to claims 2 and 3 above, and further in view of Nohara et al. (US 2019/0237834) is withdrawn following the amendment to claim 1.
However, new grounds of rejection for claims 1-10 are presented in paragraphs 3-8 above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ANCA EOFF whose telephone number is (571)272-9810. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am-6:30pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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.
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722