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 Status
This office action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed 4/10/2026.
Claims 16, 19, 22-24 and 26-27 have been amended; support is found in original claims.
Claims 1-15 and 17-18 have been cancelled.
Claims 16, 19-28 are currently pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 19 objected to because of the following informalities:
In line a and line b; “a solution or dispersion of at least one allyl ketene dimer’” should be “a solution or dispersion of the at least one allyl ketene dimer’”
. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 16, 19, -22 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dopp et al. (EP 1 859 505 B1) in view of Rabouillat et al. (2014/0037915 A1).
As to claim 16. A metal-air cell comprising (zinc air cell- [0031]):
a. a first housing part(102-cathode can) and a second housing part (110 metal anode cup) that together form a cell housing (figure 1); and
b. a metal based anode (zinc-112 –[0026]), a layer-shaped air cathode (114-air electrode [0027]) and an electrolyte [0026] (alkaline electrolyte), wherein
c. the first housing part has at least one air passage opening (108-air inlet),
d. a layer-shaped air diffusor is arranged between the first housing part and the air cathode (122-air diffusion membrane),
e. a layer-shaped separator (116) is arranged between the air cathode (114) and the metal-based anode (112, figure 1),
f. the layer-shaped air diffusor is configured to be air permeable [0027] and has a first side facing the air cathode and a second side facing away from the air cathode (figure 1), and
g. the layer-shaped air diffusor (122) has a hydrophobic coating (120 hydrophobic membrane) on at least one of the sides [0027, 0031 lines 32-34, disclose that 120 can be a coating) but does not disclose the coating comprising at least one alkyl ketene dimer.
Rebouillat et al. discloses a cathode and teaches a hydrophobic treatment such as ketene dimer treatment [0037]. Rebouillat et al. is analogous as it pertains to applying a hydrophobic treatment to air cathode.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed replace the PTFE of Dopp with the ketene dimer coating because the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved (MPEP 2143, B)
As to claim 19, The metal-air cell of claim 16, the hydrophobic coating is based on a coating with a solution or dispersion of at least one alkyl ketene dimer.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have the alkyl ketene dimer as a solution as this is a known method of applying a material, furthermore the product-by-process limitations of claim 1 (coating with a solution of dispersion) are not given patentable weight since the courts have held that patentability is based on a product itself, even if the prior art product is made by a different process (In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 1985). Moreover, a product-by-process limitation is held to be obvious if the product is similar to a prior art product (In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685, and In re Fessman, 180 USPQ 324). Claim 19 as written does not distinguish the product of the instant application from the product of the prior art.
As to claim 20, Dopp et al discloses the metal-air cell according to claim 16, wherein the layer-shaped air diffuser comprises an air-permeable matrix formed of a hydrophilic material (Dopp et al. discloses a separate component that can be used as an air diffusion membrane and can be made of PVA which is hydrophilic material [0034, line 54-55, [0038]).
As to claim 21. Dopp et al. discloses the metal-air cell of claim 20, wherein at least one of
a. the air-permeable matrix is a nonwoven fabric [0028] (paper).
As to claim 22. Dopp et al. discloses the metal-air cell according to claim 16, but now wherein the layer-shaped air diffusor has the hydrophobic coating on both sides.
However, it has been held that duplication of parts for a multiplied effect has no patentable significance, it would have been well within the purview and obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide another. (MPEP 2144VIB).
As to claim 25. Dope further discloses the metal-air cell of claim 16, wherein
the metal-air cell is a zinc-air cell [0027].
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dopp et al. (EP 1 859 505 B1) in view of Rabouillat et al. (2014/0037915 A1) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Lin et al. (US 6300011 B1).
As to claim 24. Dopp et al. the metal-air cell of claim 16, but not at least one of
a. the metal-air cell further comprises at least one additional layer between the air cathode and the layer-shaped air diffusor, and
b. the at least one additional layer is a hydrophobic membrane.
Lin et al. discloses a zinc air battery comprising a cathode 133, an electrolyte barrier layer 135 made of polytetrafluorethylene (additional layer), a second barrier layer 132 and an air diffuser layer 131 (as seen in figure 2). The electrolyte barrier layer will prevent the electrolyte from leaking. (col. 6 lines 52-col. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to have the electrolyte barrier (additional layer) because this will prevent electrolyte from leaking.
Claim(s) 26 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dopp et al. (EP 1 859 505 B1) in view of Rabouillat et al. (2014/0037915 A1) and Takebe et al. (US 2004/0137292 A1).
As to claims 26 and 28. (Currently Amended) A method of manufacturing a layer-shaped air diffusor for the metal-air cell according to claim 16, Modified Dopp et al. discloses the layered shaped air diffusion with a hydrophobic coating of alkyl ketene dimer as discussed above but does not disclose the method as :
providing an air-permeable matrix; and
the air-permeable matrix with a hydrophobic coating,
wherein a solution or dispersion of at least one alkyl ketene dimer is used for the hydrophobic coating.
However Takebe et al. discloses a method of forming a diffusion layer by providing a gas diffusion layer, applying a hydrophobic coating [0242] by dipping (immersion process -applies to claim 28). A rationale to support a conclusion that a claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP §§ 2143 and 2143.02).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has argued that it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace one hydrophobic material for another hydrophobic material because Reboulillat relates to fuel cells and not metal air cell. However it is well known in the art that the air cathode of a fuel cell and a metal air cell are structured the same and one of ordinary skill would look to both areas for the air cathode structure. Furthermore, PTFE and alkyl ketene dimer are both known hydrophobic coatings, so are used for the same purpose.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 27 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record discloses a gas diffusion layer with a alkyl ketene dimer coating but none of the cited references discloses the amount of the dimer is use or the weight per unit area. While disclosed for PTFE, this does not necessarily mean that the same amount/weight per unit would be used with the material of alkyl ketene dimer.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) 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 MARIA J LAIOS whose telephone number is (571)272-9808. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/Maria Laios/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights