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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority (KR10-2020-0178395, filed on December 18, 2020; KR10-2021-0168178, filed on November 30, 2021) under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAN et al. (WO2019068051A2, hereinafter YAN) in view of YOON et al. (US20200038813A1, hereinafter YOON).
Regarding Claim 1, YAN discloses anion exchange polymers capable of forming anion-exchange membranes (AEMs) and ionomers (AEIs) for use in anion exchange membrane fuel cells (AEMFCs) (¶[0002]).
The aromatic monomer has substituents independently selected from hydrogen, halide, alkyl, alkenyl, alkynyl, or aryl, wherein two substituents may be linked to form a five-membered ring optionally substituted with halide or alkyl. Preferred aromatic monomers include 9,9-dimethyl-9H-fluorene (¶[0056]).
The resulting poly(aryl piperidinium) anion exchange polymer comprises a backbone structural unit containing a piperidinium ring integrated into the polymer chain through the carbon opposite the positively charged nitrogen atom and associated with a counter-anion. The polymer further comprises an aromatic structural unit having substituents independently selected from hydrogen, halide, alkyl, alkenyl, alkynyl, or aryl, wherein two substituents may be linked to form a five-membered ring optionally substituted with halide or alkyl (¶[0065]).
More specifically, the aryl linkages of the poly(aryl piperidinium) backbone may be derived from 9,9-dimethyl-9H-fluorene, and the piperidinium linkages may be derived from N,N-dimethyl-4-piperidinium (¶¶[0077]–[0078]).
Based on these disclosures, the 9,9-dimethyl-9H-fluorene-derived aryl linkage corresponds to the fluorene segment wherein each R is CH₃, and the N,N-dimethyl-4-piperidinium linkage corresponds to the piperidinium group integrated into the polymer backbone. Chemical Formula 1 permits A, B, C, and D to be identical or different and requires x + y + z + m = 1, without requiring each of x, y, z, and m to be greater than zero. The molar ratios x, y, z, and m define the proportions of the selected segment structures, including any repeated segment structures among A, B, C, and D.
However, YAN does not explicitly disclose that the porous polyethylene support is hydrophilized.
YOON discloses a method of hydrophilizing a porous membrane and preparing an ion-exchange membrane using the hydrophilized porous membrane (¶[0002]).
More specifically, the method includes hydrophilizing a porous membrane, preparing an electrolytic solution by dissolving a polymer electrolyte in a solvent, and impregnating the hydrophilized porous membrane with the electrolytic solution (¶[0020]). The porous membrane used in the method may comprise two types of polyethylene having different weight-average molecular weights and an inorganic filler (¶[0042]). After hydrophilization, the porous membrane is impregnated with the electrolytic solution to fill the pores of the porous membrane with the polymer electrolyte (¶[0062]).
The hydrophilization of the pore surfaces of the porous membrane disclosed by YOON increases affinity for the polymer electrolyte, facilitates binding of the polymer electrolyte within the pores, and improves durability and ion conductivity (¶[0063]). In view of YAN’s porous polyethylene support impregnated with a poly(aryl piperidinium) anion exchange polymer, a person skilled in the art would have hydrophilized the polyethylene support to predictably increase the affinity between the support and the impregnated ionomer and improve durability and ion conductivity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the hydrophilization treatment, as disclosed by YOON, to the porous polyethylene support in the anion exchange composite membrane disclosed by YAN.
Regarding Claim 3, modified YAN makes obvious the polyfluorene-based anion exchange composite membrane of Claim 1. YOON discloses that the porous membrane may have a porosity of 50–80 vol% (¶[0019]), which is within the claimed range of “a porosity of 50–90%.” Furthermore, the porous membrane has an average pore size of 150 nm (¶[0067]), which corresponds to 0.15 μm and reads upon the claimed “a pore size of 0.01–0.5 μm.”
Regarding Claim 12, modified YAN makes obvious the polyfluorene-based anion exchange composite membrane of Claim 1. YAN discloses membrane-electrode assemblies for hydroxide exchange membrane fuel cells fabricated by depositing an electrode onto both sides of a poly(aryl piperidinium) membrane and completing the assembly with a gasket, gas diffusion layers, and flow fields (¶[00117]).
Regarding Claim 13, modified YAN makes obvious the polyfluorene-based anion exchange composite membrane of Claim 1. YAN discloses an anion exchange membrane fuel cell comprising a poly(aryl piperidinium) membrane separating the anode and cathode, wherein hydroxide ions flow through the membrane from the cathode to the anode (¶¶[00101]–[00103]).
Regarding Claim 14, modified YAN makes obvious the polyfluorene-based anion exchange composite membrane of Claim 1. YAN discloses that the anion/hydroxide exchange membranes may be used in electrolyzers, including water electrolyzers, and in electrolysis for H₂/O₂ production (¶[00105]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks filed May 22, 2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 dated February 25, 2026, have been fully considered. Claim 1 has been amended, and Claims 2, 4, and 5 have been canceled. Accordingly, the prior rejection is withdrawn in view of the claim amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of new prior art, YAN (WO2019068051A2) and YOON (US20200038813A1).
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 TAK L. CHIU whose telephone number is (703)756-1059. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00am - 6:00pm (CST).
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, PREM C. SINGH can be reached at (571) 272-6381. 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.
/TAK L. CHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/KRISHNAN S MENON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights