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 .
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.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball (US 2014/0295316), and further in view of Sato (US 2022/0263100).
As to claim 1, Ball discloses a catalyst for a fuel cell ([0001]-[0005], discussed throughout), the catalyst ([0011]-[0013], discussed throughout) comprising: a catalyst metal ([0011], discussed throughout); and a carrier that supports the catalyst metal ([0011]-[0013], carbon support, discussed throughout), wherein: an outer surface area of the carrier to an inner surface area of the carrier ([0011]-[0015], the outer surface area is the surface area minus the inner surface area which is the micropore area, discussed throughout), which is a ratio between the inner and outer surface areas of the carrier, is 0.56 to 0.69 ([0014]-[0015], shows overlapping ranges, discussed throughout).
Ball is silent to wherein a proportion of the catalyst metal supported on an outer surface of the carrier is 23% to 35%. Sato a catalyst comprising a metal catalyst supported on a carbon carrier ([0008]) wherein a proportion of the catalyst metal supported on an outer surface of the carrier is 23% to 35% ([0008], [0075]-[0081], shows overlapping ranges). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the catalyst distribution from Sato within Ball because excellent catalytic activity and durability are provided ([0008], discussed throughout) and as a mere combing prior art elements according to methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05).
As to claim 3, modified Ball discloses wherein, the catalyst metal is platinum or a platinum alloy ([0006], [0022], [0026], discussed throughout, Ball).
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2022/0263100), and further in view of Ball (US 2014/0295316).
As to claim 1, Sato discloses a catalyst ([0008], discussed throughout) for a fuel cell ([0065], discussed throughout), the catalyst ([0008], discussed throughout) comprising: a catalyst metal ([0008], discussed throughout); and a carrier that supports the catalyst metal ([0008], discussed throughout), wherein: an outer surface area of the carrier to an inner surface area of the carrier ([0100], discusses the inner and outer surfaces, [0075]-[0081], discusses the locations of the metal catalyst in location to the inside of the carbon carrier and the outside of the carbon carrier thus showing the different surfaces, discussed throughout); and a proportion of the catalyst metal supported on an outer surface of the carrier is 23% to 35% ([0008], [0075]-[0081], shows overlapping ranges; discussed throughout).
Sato is silent to wherein, a ratio between the inner and outer surface areas of the carrier, is 0.56 to 0.69. Ball discloses a catalyst for a fuel cell ([0001]-[0005], discussed throughout), the catalyst ([0011]-[0013], discussed throughout) comprising: a catalyst metal ([0011], discussed throughout); and a carrier that supports the catalyst metal ([0011]-[0013], carbon support, discussed throughout), wherein: an outer surface area of the carrier to an inner surface area of the carrier ([0011]-[0015], the outer surface area is the surface area minus the inner surface area which is the micropore area, discussed throughout), which is a ratio between the inner and outer surface areas of the carrier, is 0.56 to 0.69 ([0014]-[0015], shows overlapping ranges, discussed throughout). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the ratio between the inner and outer surfaces of the support catalyst from Ball within Sato as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05).
As to claim 2, modified Sato discloses wherein, the carrier is mesoporous carbon ([0202]-[0208], discussed throughout, Sato).
As to claim 3, modified Sato discloses wherein, the catalyst metal is platinum or a platinum alloy ([0031], [0139]-[0141], discussed throughout, Sato).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights