CTNF 18/275,884 CTNF 83826 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 5/13/26 is acknowledged. Claims 8-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method of manufacture, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Specification 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Ito (US 2011/0262834 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Ito discloses an apparatus comprising: in order: a porous substrate 20 ; a first porous electrode layer 30 ; an electrolyte layer 40 ; and a second porous electrode layer 35 (paragraph 41). Ito discloses that the electrolyte layer is comprised of two layers, a first solid electrolyte layer 41c and a second solid electrolyte later 42c wherein the first porous electrode layer 30 is in contact with the first solid electrolyte layer 41c and the second porous electrode layer 35 is in contact with the second solid electrolyte later 42c (see Figures 1 & 8). Ito disclose that the interface between first solid electrolyte layer 41c and first porous electrode layer 30 is rougher than that of the second solid electrolyte later 42c (paragraph 17). The clause “even when an output voltage of the fuel battery cell is generated between the first porous electrode layer and the second porous electrode layer, a portion of the second solid electrolyte layer, which is thinnest in thickness, has a thickness at which a leakage current between the first solid electrolyte layer and the second solid electrolyte layer is less than an allowable value” is met by Ito because a) it is a conditional statement based on usage of the apparatus and b) the “allowable value” is arbitrary and thus the condition is always fulfilled. Regarding claim 2, Ito discloses that the first solid electrolyte layer 41c is thinner than the second solid electrolyte later 42c (paragraph 54) . 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-3, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Badding (US 2002/0102450 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Badding discloses an apparatus comprising: a porous support on which a cathode layer is formed, an electrolyte sheet on the electrode layer, and an anode layer on the electrolyte sheet (paragraph 6). Badding discloses that the electrolyte has an interfacial (second electrolyte) layer applied to it between the electrolyte and electrode (paragraph 60). Badding discloses that the interfacial layer is roughened in relation to the other components (paragraph 61). The clause “even when an output voltage of the fuel battery cell is generated between the first porous electrode layer and the second porous electrode layer, a portion of the second solid electrolyte layer, which is thinnest in thickness, has a thickness at which a leakage current between the first solid electrolyte layer and the second solid electrolyte layer is less than an allowable value” is met by Badding because a) it is a conditional statement based on usage of the apparatus and b) the “allowable value” is arbitrary and thus the condition is always fulfilled. Regarding claims 2 and 3, Badding discloses that the interfacial layer has a thickness of 1-5 microns (paragraph 61) and the electrolyte sheet has a thickness of 100-500 microns (paragraph 33). Regarding claim 5, Badding discloses via holes in the electrolyte sheets which can be used for attaching electrical components such as lead wires to the electrodes or electrolyte (paragraph 48). Regarding claim 7, Badding discloses that the porous support is metal (paragraph 6) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Badding as applied to claim 1 above . Badding discloses an interfacial layer comprised of metal oxides (paragraph 61) and porous substrates but not two layers. Duplication of parts is not grounds for patentability, however. See MPEP 2144.04 VI B. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize multiple interfacial layers to maximize the benefits of the different metal oxides claimed in Badding. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p. 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 571-272-1453. 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. /IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/275,884 Page 2 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/275,884 Page 3 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/275,884 Page 4 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/275,884 Page 5 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/275,884 Page 7 Art Unit: 1725
Prosecution Insights