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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Election/Restrictions
1. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8, in the reply filed on 01/05/2026 is acknowledged.
2. Claims 9-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/05/2026.
Specification
3. The examiner has not checked the specification to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors (grammatical, typographical, and idiomatic). Cooperation of the applicant(s) is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant(s) may become aware of in the specification, in the claims and in any further amendment(s) that applicant(s) may file.
Applicant(s) is also requested to complete the status of the copending applications referred to in the specification by their Attorney Docket Number or Application Serial Number, if any.
The status of the parent application(s) and/or any other application(s) cross-referenced to this application, if any, should be updated in a timely manner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (Second Paragraph)
4. 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 4-5 & 7-8 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.
The claim limitations on “the alloy comprises a metal having electronegativity lower than that of Ni and Fe at a molar ratio of 5% to 10%” and “5%” in claims 4 & 5 (also in claims 7 & 8), respectively, appear unclear and indefinite because they do not define of what the percentage is. Does the claimed percentage mean for the total metals (Ni, Fe, and third metal)? or does it mean a ratio of the Ni + Fe or a ratio with respect to just one of the metals?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(2)
5. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 & 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kendrick (US 2023/0395816 A1), hereinafter “Kendrick”.
The claimed invention relates to a doped Ni-Fe-based catalyst for OER, comprising an alloy comprising Fe; Ni; and a metal having electronegativity lower than that of Ni and Fe; wherein the alloy comprises Ni and Fe at a molar ratio of 9:1 to 3:2.
Kendrick discloses an oxygen evolution reaction catalyst comprising Ni, Fe, and a third metal X, where X comprises any of Co, Zn, Al, Mn, or Cr (see page 3, claim 1).
The catalyst disclosed has molar ratios of Ni:Fe:X at 8:1:1, 7:2:1, 1:1:2, 6:3:1, 6:2:2, or 6:1:3 (see page 3, claim 5).
Regarding claims 1 & 2, the reference teaches the same catalyst as claimed, the catalyst disclosed comprises the same metals Fe, Ni, and a third metal which can be Al or Zn (Kendrick, page 3, claim 1). The claimed alloy molar ratio of Ni and Fe of 9:1 to 3:2 is also met by the reference molar ratios of 8:1, 7:2, 6:2, or 6:1 since the disclosed ranges are falling within the claimed range (Kendrick, page 3, claim 5).
Regarding claim 3, the claimed Ni:Fe at a molar ratio of 3:1 appears met by the reference molar ratio of 6:3 (which is 3:1) (Kendrick, page 3, claim 5).
Regarding claims 4 & 7, the reference teaches a molar ratio of Ni:Fe:X at 6:3:1, which would be a molar ratio of 10% (1/(6+3+1), which is in the claimed range thus meets the claim limitation (see page 3, claim 5).
Regarding claim 6, the claim further defines that the metal having electronegativity lower than that of Ni and Fe comprises Al. This claim limitation is met by the teaching of the reference because Al is taught to be suitable as a third metal (Kendrick, page 3, claims 1-4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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) 5 & 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kendrick (US 2023/0395816 A1), hereinafter “Kendrick”.
Kendrick discloses a catalyst as discussed in the precedent paragraph, except for the following difference.
Kendrick is silent with respect to the molar ratio of Al.
Even though Kendrick does not indicate the molar ratio of the third metal (Al) in the catalyst disclosed, it can be assumed that the same amount of the metal had been used in view of the same Ni and Fe molar ratios disclosed and claimed. However, without any further evidence for this assumption, if in fact the amount of the third metal in the disclosed catalyst is not the same as the claimed amount then the following applies.
It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize Al at the claimed amount (e.g. 5%) with a reasonable expectation of achieving the same catalyst in Kendrick because metal content is a results-effective variable, in view of In re Boesch and In re Aller.
Conclusion
7. Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 1-8 are rejected. Claims 9-17 are withdrawn. No claims are allowed.
Contacts
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner CAM N. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1357. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (8:30 am – 5:00 pm) at alternative worksite or at cam.nguyen@uspto.gov.
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, Anthony Zimmer, can be reached at 571-270-3591. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Cam N. Nguyen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/CNN/
February 07, 2026