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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 4 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, the phrase “saturated or unsaturated” is missing in the description for R5.
In Claim 2, the term “[Cu(I) o Cu(II)]” in line 2 of said claim should be “[Cu(I) or Cu(II)]”.
In Claim 3, the phrase “wherein R4 e n” in line 8 of said claim should be “wherein R4 and n”.
In Claim 4, the term “methyltrifluoromethanesulfonate (LiCF3SO3)” in line 5 of said claim is missing lithium. Suggested correction is “lithium methyltrifluoromethanesulfonate (LiCF3SO3)”.
In Claim 6, the term “polytetrafluoethylene” in line 9 of said claim should be “polytetrafluoroethylene”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 4 and 5 are 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.
Claims 2 and 4-5 recite alternative limitations in form of improper Markush group, and therefore said claims are indefinite. Proper Markush group recites its members as being "selected from the group consisting of: A, B, and C". See MPEP 2173.05(h).
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Nakanishi et al. (JP2014234495A, see machine translation).
PNG
media_image1.png
239
346
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Nakanishi teaches a benzothiadiazole (4,7-bis(2-methoxyphenyl)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazole compound 1, see [0081] and annotated Figure 1 below);
wherein R1 and R2 equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom or represent an alkyl group C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated; or represent a -O-R3 group wherein R3 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated (R1 is -O-R3 wherein R3 is an C1 alkyl group and R2 is a hydrogen atom, see annotated Figure 1 and [0081]) provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (R1 is a -O-CH3- and R2 is a hydrogen atom; R1 is in position 2 of the phenyl, see annotated Figure 1).
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.
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 nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tacca (WO 2018007991 A1), in view of Nakanishi et al. (JP2014234495A, see machine translation).
Regarding Claims 1 and 3 , Tacca discloses a non-aqueous redox flow battery (1) comprising a positive compartment (6a) in which a positive electrode (6) is placed and in which a non-aqueous liquid positive electrolyte (positive non-aqueous liquid electrolyte) is made to flow (see lines 1-4 of page 13 and Figure 1); a negative compartment (8a) in which a negative electrode (8) is placed and in which a non- aqueous liquid negative electrolyte (negative non-aqueous liquid electrolyte) is made to flow (see lines 4-6 of page 13 and Figure 1); an ion exchange membrane (7) placed between the positive compartment (6a) and the negative compartment (8a) (see lines 6-7 of page 13 and Figure 1); wherein said non-aqueous liquid positive electrolyte (positive non-aqueous liquid electrolyte) comprises a solution of copper triflate or tetrafluoroborate complexes [Cu(I) or Cu(II)] in at least one organic solvent (see lines 9-10 of page 13); said non-aqueous liquid negative electrolyte (negative non-aqueous liquid electrolyte) comprises a solution of at least one benzothiadiazole (see lines 14-15 of page 14) but is silent on one benzothiadiazole having general formula
PNG
media_image2.png
258
154
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein R1 and R2, equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom; or represent a C1-C20 alkyl group, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated; or represent a -O-R3 group wherein R3 is selected from C1-C20 alkyl groups, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCOOR4 groups wherein R4 is selected from C1-C20 alkyl groups, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nOR4 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2CH2O)nR4 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCN groups wherein n has the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nNR4R5 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above and R5 is selected from C1-C20 alkyl groups, linear or branched, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCONR4R5 groups wherein R4, R5 and n have the same meanings reported above, saturated or unsaturated, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nSi(R4)3 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nSi(OR4)3 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above; provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl; in at least one organic solvent” (as required by Claim 1) and wherein R1 and R2, equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom; or represent a group -O-R3 wherein R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCOOR4 groups wherein R4 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10, or R3 is selected from -(CH2CH2O)nR4 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above; provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (as required by Claim 3).
Regarding Claim 1 Nakanishi teaches a benzothiadiazole (4,7-bis(2-methoxyphenyl)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazole compound 1, see [0081] and annotated Figure 1 below);
PNG
media_image1.png
239
346
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R1 and R2 equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom or represent an alkyl group C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated; or represent a -O-R3 group wherein R3 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated (R1 is -O-R3 wherein R3 is a C1 alkyl group and R2 is a hydrogen atom, see annotated Figure 1 and [0081]) provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (R1 is a -O-CH3- and R2 is a hydrogen atom; R1 is in position 2 of the phenyl, see annotated Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Nakanishi teaches a benzothiadiazole general formula as depicted in annotated Figure 2 below having -O-R1 and -O-R2 groups wherein R1 and R2 each independently represent an optionally substituted alkyl group having 1 to 18 carbon atoms wherein non-adjacent carbon atoms in the alkyl group may be substituted with oxygen atoms (see [0028]) which reads on a -O-R3 group where R3 is selected from -(CH2CH2O)nR4 wherein R4 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20 linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10. Nakanishi further teaches that and n(Y) group wherein Y represents an optionally substituted alkoxy group having 1 to 18 carbon atoms (non-adjacent carbon atoms in the alkoxy group may be substituted with oxygen atoms), a fluoro group, a cyano group, a —COOR— group, a —NHCOR— group, or a hydroxyl group and n represents an integer of 0 to 4 (see [0030]) and further discloses that the -COOR- group of the above Y can be exemplified by those having an alkyl ester structure not limited to a methyl ester group, an ethyl ester group, a 1-propyl ester group, a 2-propyl ester group, and a phenyl ester group, which read on a group -O-R3 wherein R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCOOR4 groups wherein R4 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10 and provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (R1 and R2 are different from hydrogen and R1 is in position 2 of the phenyl, see annotated Figure 2 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
242
491
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Nakanishi further teaches that the above benzothiadiazole derivatives exhibits good chemical stability and processability (see [0027]) which are desirable properties for various energy systems such as in solar battery cell devices (see [0001]-[0002]).
Nakanishi and Tacca are analogous art as both references are in the field of application of benzothiadiazole derivatives in energy-harvesting technologies (see [0002] of Nakanishi). It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the benzothiadiazole of Tacca with the benzothiadiazole of Nakanishi which exbibits chemical stability and high processability.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Tacca recites all of the said limitations as set forth above and further Tacca recites copper triflate or tetrafluoroborate complexes (see lines 17-18 of page 7) and wherein said copper triflate or tetrafluoroborate complexes [Cu(I) or Cu(II)] are selected from the group consisting of: tetrakisacetonitrile copper (I) triflate [Cu(NCCH3)4CF3SO3], copper (II) trifluoromethanesulfonate [Cu(CF3SO3)2], tetrakisacetonitrile copper (I) tetrafluoroborate [Cu(NCCH3)4 BF4], or mixtures thereof (see lines 17-21 of page 7).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Tacca recites all of the said limitations as set forth above and further Tacca recites electrolytes (see line 18 of page 10) wherein the aforesaid electrolytes comprise at least one supporting electrolyte selected from the group consisting of: lithium tetrafluoroborate (LiBF4), lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6), lithium perchlorate (LiClO4), methyltrifluoromethanesulfonate (LiCF3SO3), lithium bis(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)imide [Li(CF3SO2)2N], tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEABF4), tetrabutylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TBABF4), or mixtures thereof (see lines 18-23 of page 10).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Tacca recites all of the said limitations as set forth above and further Tacca recites organic solvent (see line 1 of page 11) and wherein said organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of acetonitrile, dimethyl acetamide, diethyl carbonate, dimethyl carbonate, y-butyrolactone (GBL), propylene carbonate (PC), ethylene carbonate (EC), N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), fluoroethylene carbonate, N,N-dimethylacetamide, or mixtures thereof (see lines 1-5 of page 11).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Tacca recites all of the said limitations as set forth above and further Tacca recites wherein said ion exchange membrane is selected from polymeric membranes such as: - ion exchange membranes such as membranes based on a styrene-divinylbenzene copolymer or a chloromethylstyrene-divinylbenzene copolymer containing amino groups, membranes based on poly (ether ether ketones), membranes based on a divinylbenzene-vinylpyridine copolymer containing a quaternary pyridine group; membranes based on an aromatic polysulfonic copolymer containing a chloromethyl group and amino groups, membranes based on polytetrafluoethylene (PTFE); - cation exchange membranes such as membranes based on a fluoropolymer- copolymer based on tetrafluoroethylene sulfonate, membranes based on poly (ether ether ketones), membranes based on polysulfones, membranes based on polyethylene, membranes based on polypropylene, membranes based on ethylene-propylene copolymers, membranes based on polyimides, membranes based on polyvinyl fluorides (see line 14-24 of page 11 to line 4 of page 12 ).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-2 and 5-7 of U.S. Patent No. 10,804,558 B2 in view of Nakanishi et al. (JP2014234495A, see machine translation).
Conflicting claim 1 of USP 10,804,558 recites all the limitations as recited in instant Claim 1 and Claim 3. It further recites that said non-aqueous liquid negative electrolyte comprises a solution of at least one organic solvent but does not explicitly recite that said at least one benzothiadiazole has general formula:
PNG
media_image2.png
258
154
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein R1 and R2, equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom; or represent a C1-C20 alkyl group, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated; or represent a -O-R3 group wherein R3 is selected from C1-C20 alkyl groups, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCOOR4 groups wherein R4 is selected from C1-C20 alkyl groups, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nOR4 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2CH2O)nR4 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCN groups wherein n has the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nNR4R5 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above and R5 is selected from C1-C20 alkyl groups, linear or branched, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCONR4R5 groups wherein R4, R5 and n have the same meanings reported above, saturated or unsaturated, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nSi(R4)3 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above, or R3 is selected from -(CH2)nSi(OR4)3 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above; provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl; in at least one organic solvent” (as required by Claim 1) and wherein R1 and R2, equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom; or represent a group -O-R3 wherein R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCOOR4 groups wherein R4 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10, or R3 is selected from -(CH2CH2O)nR4 groups wherein R4 and n have the same meanings reported above; provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (as required by Claim 3).
Regarding Claim 1, Nakanishi teaches a benzothiadiazole (4,7-bis(2-methoxyphenyl)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazole compound 1, see [0081] and annotated Figure 1 below);
PNG
media_image1.png
239
346
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R1 and R2 equal or different from each other, represent a hydrogen atom or represent an alkyl group C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated; or represent a -O-R3 group wherein R3 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated (R1 is -O-R3 wherein R3 is an C1 alkyl group and R2 is a hydrogen atom, see annotated Figure 1 and [0081]) provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (R1 is a -O-CH3- and R2 is a hydrogen atom; R1 is in position 2 of the phenyl, see annotated Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Nakanishi teaches a benzothiadiazole general formula as depicted in annotated Figure 2 below having -O-R1 and -O-R2 groups wherein R1 and R2 each independently represent an optionally substituted alkyl group having 1 to 18 carbon atoms wherein non-adjacent carbon atoms in the alkyl group may be substituted with oxygen atoms (see [0028]) which reads on a -O-R3 group where R3 is selected from -(CH2CH2O)nR4 wherein R4 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20 linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10. Nakanishi further teaches that and n(Y) group wherein Y represents an optionally substituted alkoxy group having 1 to 18 carbon atoms (non-adjacent carbon atoms in the alkoxy group may be substituted with oxygen atoms), a fluoro group, a cyano group, a —COOR— group, a —NHCOR— group, or a hydroxyl group and n represents an integer of 0 to 4 (see [0030]) and further discloses that the -COOR- group of the above Y can be exemplified by those having an alkyl ester structure not limited to a methyl ester group, an ethyl ester group, a 1-propyl ester group, a 2-propyl ester group, and a phenyl ester group, which read on a group -O-R3 wherein R3 is selected from -(CH2)nCOOR4 groups wherein R4 is selected from alkyl groups C1-C20, linear or branched, saturated or unsaturated, and n is an integer comprised between 1 and 10 and provided that at least one of R1 and R2 is different from hydrogen and at least one of R1 and R2 is in position 2 of the phenyl (R1 and R2 are different from hydrogen and R1 is in position 2 of the phenyl, see annotated Figure 2 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
242
491
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Nakanishi further teaches that the benzothiadiazole derivative exhibits good chemical stability and processability (see [0027]) which are desirable properties for various energy systems such as in solar battery cell devices (see [0001]-[0002]).
Nakanishi and Tacca are analogous art as both references are in the field of application of benzothiadiazole derivatives in energy-harvesting technologies (see [0002] of Nakanishi). It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the benzothiadiazole of Tacca with the benzothiadiazole derivative of Nakanishi which exbibits chemical stability and high processability.
Conflicting claim 2 of USP 10,804,558 in view of Nakanishi, as set forth above, recites all the limitations as recited in instant Claim 2 and further recites copper triflate or tetrafluoroborate complexes and wherein said copper triflate or tetrafluoroborate complexes [Cu(I) or Cu(II)] are selected from the group consisting of: tetrakisacetonitrile copper (I) triflate [Cu(NCCH3)4CF3SO3], copper (II) trifluoromethanesulfonate [Cu(CF3SO3)2], tetrakisacetonitrile copper (I) tetrafluoroborate [Cu(NCCH3)4 BF4], or mixtures thereof (see lines 38-44 of col 13).
Conflicting claim 5 of USP 10,804,558 in view of Nakanishi, as set forth above, recites all the limitations as recited in instant Claim 4 and further recites electrolytes and wherein the aforesaid electrolytes comprise at least one supporting electrolyte selected from the group consisting of: lithium tetrafluoroborate (LiBF4), lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6), lithium perchlorate (LiClO4), methyltrifluoromethanesulfonate (LiCF3SO3), lithium bis(trifluoromethylsulfonyl)imide [Li(CF3SO2)2N], tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TEABF4), tetrabutylammonium tetrafluoroborate (TBABF4), or mixtures thereof (see lines 22-30 of col 14).
Conflicting claim 6 of USP 10,804,558 in view of Nakanishi, as set forth above, recites all the limitations as recited in instant Claim 5 and further recites organic solvent and wherein said organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of acetonitrile, dimethyl acetamide, diethyl carbonate, dimethyl carbonate, y-butyrolactone (GBL), propylene carbonate (PC), ethylene carbonate (EC), N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), fluoroethylene carbonate, N,N-dimethylacetamide, or mixtures thereof (see lines 32-37, col 14).
Conflicting claim 7 of USP 10,804,558 in view of Nakanishi, as set forth above, recites all the limitations as recited in instant Claim 6 and further recites wherein said ion exchange membrane is selected from polymeric membranes such as: ion exchange membranes such as membranes based on a styrene-divinylbenzene copolymer or a chloromethylstyrene-divinylbenzene copolymer containing amino groups, membranes based on poly (ether ether ketones), membranes based on a divinylbenzene-vinylpyridine copolymer containing a quaternary pyridine group; membranes based on an aromatic polysulfonic copolymer containing a chloromethyl group and amino groups, membranes based on polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); cation exchange membranes such as membranes based on a fluoropolymer- copolymer based on tetrafluoroethylene sulfonate, membranes based on poly (ether ether ketones), membranes based on polysulfones, membranes based on polyethylene, membranes based on polypropylene, membranes based on ethylene-propylene copolymers, membranes based on polyimides, membranes based on polyvinyl fluorides (see lines 41-58, col 14).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FIKI V OWHOSO whose telephone number is (571)272-3418. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 5712725453. 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.
/F.V.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725