DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 6/17/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Yim fails to teach the “a catalyst layer containing a catalyst material is included on the inner walls of thorough holes. This is not found persuasive because para 10, 11, claim 1 and fig 2 of Yim clearly show the catalyst material in the inner walls of the through holes. Applicant asserts that Yim fails to teach the central axis of each through hole remains unblocked and hollow. The examiner respectfully submits claims 1 does not require such a limitation. Claims 11 is withdrawn with traverse.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The amended Specification received on 6/17/26 is accepted.
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yim et al. (KR 20170056377 A; see machine translation of record) in view of Pellin et al. (US 20100075827 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yim discloses a membrane-electrode assembly for fuel cells, the membrane- electrode assembly (para 11) comprising: an electrolyte membrane (para 11, "a polymer electrolyte membrane"); and a pair of catalyst electrodes provided to face each other with the electrolyte membrane in between (para 11, " an electrode… located on one side of the polymer electrolyte membrane; and a counter electrode disposed on the other side of the polymer electrolyte membrane"), wherein at least one of the catalyst electrodes comprises porous polymer film including a plurality of spaced apart through holes, and a catalyst layer containing a catalyst material is included on inner walls of the through holes (para 14).
Yim does not disclose the porous polymer film comprises an anodic oxide film.
Pellin discloses the use of an anodic oxide film for catalyst support (claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, , for the porous polymer film of Yim to comprise a anodic oxide film as taught by Pellin above as such has a reasonable expectation of success and enables “unique features including higher specificities than conventional catalysts” (para 32).
Regarding claim 2, Yim disclose the catalyst material covers the inner walls of the through holes. Yim does not explicitly disclose the catalyst material covers an entire exposed surface of the porous polymer film, and upper and lower surfaces of the porous polymer film.
Pellin discloses the catalyst material covers an entire exposed surface of the anodic oxide film, including the inner walls of the through holes and upper and lower surfaces of the anodic oxide film (claim 3 and 5). Pellin specifically states atomic layer deposition (ALD) is used to coat the catalytic layer which "coats the entire length of the pore inner surface uniformly to the same coating thickness, not only on an individual pore's inner surfaces, but in all pores and nonporous surfaces of the support surface” (para 38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for the catalyst material to not only cover the inner walls of the through holes but also cover the entire exposed surface of the porous polymer film, and upper and lower surfaces of the porous polymer film as taught by Pellin as doing such creates “ultra-uniform heterogeneous catalytic membranes” (para 38).
Regarding claim 3, Yim does not explicitly disclose catalyst material is formed to a uniform thickness within a range of 1 nm to 100 nm. Pellin discloses using ALD process to coat the catalyst material and states the thickness of a typical deposited monolayer resulting from one AB reaction cycle is 7.5nm - 50nm (para 64). Pellin also states the specific thicknesses of layers are dependent upon the nature of the deposited substance (para 64). The range of the coating thickness disclosed by Pellin lies inside the range of 1 nm to 100 nm claimed in the instant application. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05
Regarding claim 4, although Yim discloses the porous polymer film as catalyst support with plurality of through holes, Yim does not disclose each of the through holes is a pore hole formed when manufacturing the anodic oxide film by anodizing a base metal.
Pellin discloses anodic aluminum oxide (AAO) film with organized arrays of channels with controlled pore diameters (para 36). Pellin further teaches the AAO membranes produced electrochemically and have highly aligned, uniform-diameter pores (para 44). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for each of the through holes of the above modified anodic oxide film to be a pore hole formed when manufacturing the anodic oxide film by anodizing a base metal as taught by Pellin as doing such creates controlled pore size and aligned pore structure (para 36 and 44).
Regarding claim 5, Pellin discloses the diameter of the formed through holes can be varied depending upon the intended purpose of the holes (para 21, 36-37). As such, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art for each of the through holes to be a via hole formed to have a diameter larger than a diameter of a pore hole formed when manufacturing the anodic oxide film by anodizing a base metal as the diameter isa design choice obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Additionally, variations in dimensions are obvious absent criticality demonstrated by the applicant. MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 7, Yim discloses the catalyst material comprises first layer selected from a group consisting platinum (para 16). Yim does not disclose the first layer is formed with a uniform thickness along the inner walls of the through holes and upper and lower surfaces of the porous polymer film.
Pellin discloses the first layer is formed with a uniform thickness along the inner walls of the through holes and upper and lower surfaces of the anodic oxide film (see claim 3 rejection above).
Regarding claim 8, Yim does not disclose the catalyst material comprises a second layer selected from a group consisting of platinum, ruthenium, osmium, platinum-ruthenium alloy, platinum-osmium alloy, platinum- palladium alloy, platinum-chromium alloy, platinum-nickel alloy, platinum-iron alloy, platinum-cobalt alloy, platinum- titanium alloy, and platinum-magnesium alloy, but selected from a material different from the first layer and provided on the first layer, wherein the second layer is formed with a uniform thickness along a surface of the first layer.
Pellin discloses the catalyst layer is “selected from the group consisting of vanadium (V) oxide, chromium oxide, nickel, platinum, ruthenium, and combinations thereof (claim 34). Pelin further discloses the catalytic layer depositing process comprises “depositing alternating monolayers of different precursor moieties upon a substrate; allowing the monolayers to react with each other to form a first film upon the substrate; depositing a second group of alternating monolayers of the different precursor moieties upon the first film” (para 22). Pelin also discloses the uniform thickness of the layers (para 64). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the membrane-electrode assembly comprising the first layer of catalyst material of Yim by incorporating second layer selected from a material different from the first layer and provided on the first layer as taught by Pelin as doing such allows “large number of different types of catalysts to be generated” (para 39).
Regarding claim 9, Yim discloses the catalyst material comprises first layer selected from a group consisting platinum (para 16) and the layer is provided in powder form (para 10). Yim does not disclose a second layer selected from a material different from the first layer and provided on the first layer and the second layer is formed to have a uniform thickness.
Pellin discloses a second layer selected from a material different from the first layer and provided on the first layer and the second layer is formed to have a uniform thickness (see rejection of claim 8 above).
Regarding claim 10, Yim discloses the catalyst material comprises first layer selected from a group consisting platinum (para 16). Yim does not disclose a second layer selected from a material different from the first layer and provided on the first layer, wherein the first layer is formed to have a uniform thickness and the second layer is provided in powder form.
Pellin discloses a second layer selected from a material different from the first layer and provided on the first layer (see rejection of claim 8 above).
Although Yim and Pelin do not explicitly disclose first layer is formed to have a uniform thickness and the second layer is provided in powder form, the modified membrane assembly of Yim and Pellin constitute a first layer provided in powder form (Yim, para 10) and second layer formed to have a uniform thickness (Pellin, para 64). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to reverse the order of the known catalyst layers such that the first layer is formed to have a uniform thickness and the second layer is provided in powder form because the claimed order is merely a rearrangement of known elements absent criticality demonstrated by the applicant (MPEP 2144.04).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yim et. al. (KR 20170056377 A; see attached machine translation) and Pellin et al. (US 20100075827 A1) in view of Routkevitch et al. (US 20100219079 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Yim and Pellin disclose anodic oxide film comprising a porous layer having a pore hole (see rejection of claim 1). Yim and Pellin do not disclose a barrier layer formed on a side of the porous layer to seal the pore hole wherein the barrier layer is provided to face an opposite side of the electrolyte membrane.
Routkevitch discloses AAO structure has a “dense aluminum oxide layer 142 (e.g., a barrier layer) which separating the porous AAO from the Al substrate” (para 92). Routkevitch teaches the barrier layer may be optionally removed or retained depending on the intended application (para 96). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the membrane-electrode assembly comprising the porous layer having a pore hole disclosed by Yim and Pellin by incorporating the barrier layer as taught by Routkevitch as removing it is optional (para 96). Furthermore, the barrier layer is formed at pore bottom during anodization which necessarily seals the pore holes, is formed on a side of the porous layer and is provided to face an opposite side of the electrolyte membrane.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARTI KHANAL whose telephone number is (571)272-8608. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-5pm.
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, Michael N Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.
/A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights