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
Claims 32-37 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/29/25.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-29 and 38-39 in the reply filed on 12/29/25 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The limitation “about” is interpreted in light of page 15 of the originally filed specification as “within 10% of the stated value.”
In claim 31, the limitation “essentially free of halogens” is interpreted in light of page 51 of the originally filed specification as “less than about 1% of halogens”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-31 and 38-39 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.
Specifically, in claim 1, and all dependent claims, the units Z and Y are not defined. Are they the number or units? The number of bonds? Some other type of naming convention?
Claims 13-14 recite the limitation "the alcohol" in the last lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note that amending claims 13-14 to depend upon claim 12 will overcome the instant rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 10, 21-22, 24-29, 31 and 38-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2020/0362129 (herein Holdcroft).
As to claims 1, 4-7, 10, Holdcraft discloses a polymer prepared via the scheme below in figure 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
524
910
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note that B in this case is a linear (nonbranching monomer). However, Holdcraft discloses that the polymer can comprise multivalent linkers such as 1,3,5-triethynylbenzene (see paragraph 268).
PNG
media_image2.png
336
365
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Note that this structure reads on claimed structure VIII when x=1. The other monomer in paragraph 195 and figure 1.
The polymers are taught as branched with the multivalent linkers. See paragraph 240.
PNG
media_image3.png
441
417
media_image3.png
Greyscale
reads on the claimed structure of claim 37, which yields a structure after polymerization reading on claim 6 and 7 respectively.
The polymers also comprise a diacetylenebenzene
PNG
media_image4.png
73
171
media_image4.png
Greyscale
, reading on bifunctional monomer C. See figure 1 and examples.
The multifunctional linker (branching monomer) is in addition to a linear. See paragraph 240. The Z to Y is taught as 0.001 to 20 mole percent (e.g. 0.001:99.9 to 1:4). See paragraph 273.
As to claim 2, the polymers are insoluble in water (a polar solvent). See paragraph 275 and examples.
As to claims 21-22, 27, 29 and 38-39, a catalyst layer is applied on a Nafion membrane (substrates, reading on mechanical reinforcement that are porous polymeric material). See paragraph 62, 243-245-, 288-289, 476 and examples. The hyperbranched ionomeric polymer of claim 1 may be present on the membrane (thus as a binder). See paragraph 88, 243-247 and examples. Thus, reading on an ionomeric polymer membrane. The catalyst layer may also comprise the ionomeric polymer. See paragraph 62, 243-245-, 288-289, 476 and examples.
As to claim 24, the catalyst layer may be Pt/C, etc. See paragraph 272-275, 475-479 and examples.
As to claim 25, as elucidated above, the catalyst layer is in contact with a layer (e.g. top) and only one of the catalyst layer and the membrane are taught, thus reading on a bilayer. See paragraph 62, 243-245-, 288-289, 476 and examples.
As to claim 26, the catalyst layer is a cathode or anode. See paragraph 288, 374, 476-481 and examples.
As to claim 28, see the examples utilizing Nafion, which is a linear sulfonated phenylated poly(phenylene) polymer.
As to claim 31, halogens are not required for the membrane and thus would be about 0%.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adamski et al. Journal of Membrane Sciences 595 (2020) 117539 (herein Adamski).
As to claims 1, 4-7, 10, specifically, see scheme 1, which reads on the claimed structures. The unit X is utilized in about 0.02 to 2 mol%. Note that the branching unit is 3P.L reading on unit Z, the ionic comonomer is TEAsBTC and the unit C is BP.L.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 3 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adamski et al. Journal of Membrane Sciences 595 (2020) 117539 (herein Adamski).
The discussion with respect to Adamski set-forth above is incorporated herein by reference.
As to claims 3 and 8-9, Adamski generally exemplifies low amounts of branching monomer (e.g. 2 mol%), which is outside the claimed range.
However, Adamski teaches that the degree of branching controls solubility (section 2.4), viscosity (section 3.2), mechanical strength and Young’s modulus (section 4 under conclusion). Therefore, there is motivation to further increase the degree of branching (mol% of branching comonomer B).
In light of this, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to have modified the amount of comonomer B to within the claimed range because one would want to further increase viscosity, mechanical strength and Young’s modulus. See sections 2.4, 3.2 and conclusion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Note that claims 11-12, 15-20, 23 and 30 are not rejected over prior art.
The closest prior art US 2020/0362129 (herein Holdcroft) teaches a catalyst ink (paragraph 373, 475). However, the catalyst inks are not with a linear ionomeric polymer, wherein the linear ionomeric polymer enables the branched or hyperbranched ionomeric polymer to disperse in the polar solvent.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK S KAUCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-7340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6 PM EST.
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, Arrie Lanee Reuther can be reached at (571) 270-7026. 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.
/MARK S KAUCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1764