Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement has been made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 USC 119 (a-d). The certified copy has been filed on 06/22/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed 06/22/2023 and 01/31/2024 have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings received 06/22/2023 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-11, and 13-15, in the reply filed on 04/10/2026 is acknowledged.
However, Applicant’s replay is confusing. Even Applicant admits on a record that election of group I is made WIHOUT TRAVERSE, applicant states that elected inventions encompasses claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-11, 13-15, 19, 20, 22-29, and 31-36, i.e. all claims. It was interpreted as possible typographical error. Further Applicant argues that Groups I and II share the special technical feature of an electrode-less, membrane- less battery with a ceramic or solid polymerized buffer between active catholyte and anolyte phases - a feature absent from Manthiram. Because this feature contributes over the prior art, it establishes unity of invention under PCT Rule 13.2. Thus, claims of both Groups I and II should be examined That is in fact a TRVERSE which contradicts previous statement above. Group I and II share at least one common technical as an electrode less and membrane less battery which is known from Manthiram. Therefore, the restriction requirement would have made Final, if elections would made with Traverse.
Claims Status.
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 04/10/2026. Claims 1-36 were pending. Claims 3, 8, 12, 16-18, 21, 30, have been cancelled. Claims 1, 4-7, 10, 13, 14, 19, 20, 22, 24, 26, and 28 have been amended. Claims XXXX have been added. Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-11, 13-15, 19, 20, 22-29, and 31-36 are now pending. Claims 19, 20, 22-29, and 31-36 are withdrawn from examination as being drawn to non-elected (without traverse) invention. Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-11, and 13-15 are presented for examination. Applicant's arguments have been considered.
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.
Claims 1 and 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated Manthiram et. al. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes, Nature Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 16103, 14 February 2017 (Manthiram).
Regarding claim 1, Manthiram discloses a battery comprising: a cathode current collector (p.11, Fig. 7), an anode current collector (p.11, Fig. 7) a liquid or solid polymerized catholyte comprising dissolved active ions in contact with the cathode, a liquid or solid polymerized anolyte comprising dissolved active ions in contact an anode (p.10, col. 2, para 1) and a ceramic or solid polymerized buffer comprising active and working ions disposed between the catholyte and the anolyte (p.10, col. 2, para 1, p.11, Fig. 7) wherein the battery is electrode-less and membrane-less (p.10, col.1, last para, col. 2, first para). As such, instant claim 1 is anticipated by Manthiram.
Regarding claims 13, Manthiram discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Regarding a limitation: “the ceramic or solid polymerized buffer regulates pH in the battery”: Applicant sets forth the manner in which the claimed apparatus operates. It has been held that 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 satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP § 2114. Since the b buffer of Manthiram substantially similar to that as claimed it is fully capable to perform claimed functions. As such, the instantly claimed apparatus is unpatentable over the cited prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 2,4, 6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manthiram et. al. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes, Nature Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 16103, 14 February 2017 in view of WO 2019/241531 to Yadav (Yadav, provided in IDS, published December 19, 1919).
Regarding claims 2,4, 6, and 9, Manthiram discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Manthiram does not expressly disclose wherein the cathode current collector and the anode current collector comprise at least one of: carbon, lead, zinc, a stainless steel, copper, nickel, silver, bismuth, titanium, magnesium, aluminum, indium, tin, gold, iron, a polypropylene, or a combination thereof, and wherein the cathode current collector or the anode current collector comprises at least one of: a mesh, a foil, a foam, a sponge, a felt, a fibrous cloth, a porous block architecture, or a combination thereof.
Yadav teaches a battery includes a cathode compartment, a catholyte solution disposed within the cathode compartment, a ceramic or solid polymerized buffer comprising LiSiCON (claim 33, re claim 9) an anode compartment, an anolyte solution disposed within the anode compartment (Abstract), wherein the catholyte solution comprises manganese oxalate (claim 31, re claim 4), the anolyte comprises zinc chloride ( claim 32, re claim 6) comprising a cathode current collector and anode current collector comprise a carbon (claim 29) It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Manthiram with the cathode current collector or/and anode current collector comprising carbon, in order to provide a battery having attributes of low cost, high safety and high energy density (Manthiram, para 15).
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manthiram et. al. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes, Nature Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 16103, 14 February 2017 in view of US 2020/0321601 to Slocum (Slocum).
Regarding claims 5 and 7, Manthiram discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Manthiram does not expressly disclose wherein a concentration of the liquid or solid polymerized catholyte in a liquid or polymerized form is of no more than about 16M and wherein a concentration of the liquid or solid polymerized anolyte solution in liquid or polymerized form is no more than about 16M.
Slocum teaches a semi-solid battery module, comprising a flowable anodic semi-solid (also referred to herein as "anolyte") and/or a flowable cathodic semi-solid (also referred to herein as catholyte (para 62). Slocum also teaches that any catholyte or anolyte can have, when taken in moles per liter (molarity), at least 12 M concentration of redox species (para 62). Therefore such concentrations are known in the art. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the concentration the catholyte or anolyte of Manthiram within concentration range (more than 12M) as taught by Slocum in order to provide increased electrical conduction between the current collector and the electrode material (para 5).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manthiram et. al. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes, Nature Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 16103, 14 February 2017 in view of US 2020/0313212 to Loretz (Loretz).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Manthiram discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Manthiram does not expressly disclose wherein the ceramic or solid polymerized buffer is a polymerized solution comprising at least one of: sodium acetate, acetic acid, potassium phosphate monobasic, sodium hydroxide, potassium hydrogen phthalate, potassium carbonate, potassium tetraborate, potassium hydroxide, disodium EDTA dihydrate, a tris buffered saline comprising 1.37M sodium chloride, 0.027M potassium chloride, and 0.25M tris/tris-HCl, potassium phosphate monobasic, potassium chloride, hydrochloric acid, boric acid, tris-EDTA, tris hydrochloride, potassium acid phthalate, hydrochloric acid, sodium chloride-tris-EDTA, tris-acetate-EDTA, tris-borate-EDTA, a phosphate buffer, a borax standard buffer, tris-glycine-SDS, disodium phosphate, citric acid, monopotassium phosphate, boric acid, diethyl barbituric acid, dihydrogen potassium phosphate, sodium phosphate dibasic, potassium hydrogen phthalate, potassium biphthalate, manganese sulfate, lead sulfate, copper sulfate, vanadyl sulfate, zinc sulfate, zinc oxide, aluminum oxide, magnesium oxide, iron oxide dissolved in potassium hydroxide, sodium hydroxide or lithium hydroxide, acrylic acid, a polyacrylic acid, acrylamide, a polyacrylamide, potassium sulfate, sodium sulfate, a polyacrylic acid partially neutralized with potassium or sodium, N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide, N,N'-(1,2- dihydroxyethylene)bisacrylamide, ethylene glycol diacrylate, di(ethylene glycol) diacrylate, tetra(ethylene glycol) diacrylate, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate, di(ethylene glycol) dimethacrylate, tri(ethylene glycol) dimethacrylate, potassium persulfate,ammonium persulfate, sodium persulfate, or a combination thereof.
Loretz teaches pH buffering region in flow battery rebalancing cell (Title) comprising wherein the ceramic or solid polymerized buffer is a polymerized solution comprising at least one of hydrochloric acid, acetic acid citric acid (para 90) of salt of boric acid (claim 17). It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the well-known buffer of Loretz as well as adjust a concentration of buffers below 16M (re claim 11) in order to provide flow batteries with balanced pH of an electrolyte stream.
Claim 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manthiram et. al. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes, Nature Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 16103, 14 February 2017 in view of US 20080089012 to Kon.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Manthiram discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Manthiram does not expressly disclose cathode current collector, or both is coated with an aqueous or organic dispersion of graphite, an expanded graphite, multiwalled carbon nanotubes, single walled carbon nanotubes graphene, graphene oxide or a combination thereof.
Kon teaches a current cathode current collector coater with graphite (claim 3). Therefore a coating current collector with conductive materials as graphite is well known in the art. Since a graphite coating comprising resin it is interpreted as organic dispersion. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cathode current collector of Manthiram with the graphite coating, as taught by Kon, in order to improve collection of an electrical current and as such avoid loss of a power in the battery.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manthiram et. al. Lithium battery chemistries enabled by solid-state electrolytes, Nature Reviews, Vol. 2, No. 16103, 14 February 2017.
Regarding claims 15, Manthiram discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Manthiram does not expressly disclose wherein the battery is in a discharged state. However, since the criticality of the battery being in the discharge state -a position claimed by Applicant is not supported by any showing of criticality of such state in the instant specification, nor did Applicant stated that such state serves any specific purpose or performs any specific function other that the function disclosed in Manthiram, it would have been obvious top those skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to place the battery in the discharge state as an obvious design choice, and as such it does not impact the patentability of claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER USYATINSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7703. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/Alexander Usyatinsky/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights