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 .
Specification
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.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality: Paragraph 23 “Chemical
formula 2)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (CN105312087).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a nanocomposite catalyst including a melamine derivative, carbon material, and nanoclusters (paragraph 0012). The material constituting the nanoclusters is a transition metal (paragraph 0012). The prepared composite has intrinsic catalytic activity for the oxygen reduction reaction (paragraph 0079). The melamine derivative is a derivative formed from melamine and cyanuric acid (paragraph 0020). Melamine is an organic nitrogen compound with a basic functional group and satisfies Formula (1). Cyanuric acid has an acidic functional group and meets the binder requirement of the present invention.
With regards to the base point amount/acid point amount, example 11 in Wang dissolves 55 mg of melamine and 55 mg of cyanuric acid separately in 100 mL of an alcohol-water mixture (paragraph 0168). 400 mg of commercially available carbon black, which acts as the carrier, is added to the melamine solution (paragraph 0168). The solvent is removed and the resulting solid is added to a cyanuric acid solution (paragraph 0168). A base point amount/acid point amount of 2.05 is calculated. The table below shows the calculations.
Mass of melamine with respect to carrier = 55 mg/400 mg = 0.1375
Mass of cyanuric acid with respect to carrier = 55 mg/400 mg = 0.1375
Equivalent weight per one mol of basic functional group of melamine = 21.02
Equivalent weight per one mol of acidic functional group of cyanuric acid = 43.02
Base point amount/acid point amount = (0.1375/21.02)/(0.1375/43.02) = 2.05
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses TEM analysis showed Pt metal nanoclusters (paragraph 0141).
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses the melamine derivative-modified carbon is a support for the metal and alloy particles (paragraph 0081).
Regarding claim 5, the mass of melamine with respect to carrier is 0.1375 in example 11 (paragraph 0168).
Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses a melamine derivative containing melamine (paragraph 0020) which has an equivalent weight of additive per mole of basic functional group of 21.02 g/mol.
Regarding claims 9-11, Wang discloses the application of the nanocomposite in the preparation of fuel cell electrochemical catalysts (paragraph 0078). The nanocomposite is used in the preparation of a catalytic electrode (paragraph 0106). No specific structure is required for the fuel cell or metal-air cell in claims 10 and 11 besides the catalyst already anticipated. Thus, the examiner concludes that the catalyst is capable of performing the intended use in a fuel cell/metal-air cell as a cathode.
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN105312087) as applied to claims 1, 3-5, and 8-11 above.
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses a mass ratio of carbon support to the melamine derivative containing melamine and cyanuric acid of 1-30:1 (paragraph 0019). The mass ratio of melamine to cyanuric acid is 10:1-1:2 (paragraph 0068). Using this information, we can create a system of equations, seen in the table below, to find a weight of additive with respect to carrier of 0.667, slightly outside the claimed range.
Mass ratio of carbon/(Melamine + Cyanuric acid) = 1/1 = 1
Melamine + cyanuric acid = 1 (1)
Mass ratio of melamine/cyanuric acid = 0.5
melamine = 0.5*cyanuric acid (2)
0.5 cyanuric + cyanuric acid = 1 Substitute (2) into (1)
Cyanuric acid mass = 1/1.5
Mass of cyanuric acid with respect to carrier = (1/1.5)/(1) = 0.667
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to choose the instantly claimed ranges through process optimization, since it has been held that the general conditions of the claims are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang CN105312087) as applied to claims 1, 3-5, and 8-11, and further in view of Hase (JP2011090987).
Regarding claim 7, Wang discloses a binder with an acidic functional group that is cyanuric acid (paragraph 0020), but does not disclose a binder that is a perfluorocarbon sulfonate polymer with an equivalent weight per mole of acidic functional group of more than or equal to 600 g/mol and equal to or less than 1100 g/mol.
Hase discloses a catalyst with metals that have oxygen reduction capability (paragraph 0015), a binding agent considered to meet the additive required by the instant claims (paragraph 0025), and a polymer electrolyte agent considered to meet the binder required by the instant claims (paragraph 0022). Hase discloses Nafion which is a perfluorocarbon sulfonate polymer that has an equivalent weight of 1100 g/mol (paragraph 0022).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to substitute cyanuric acid in Wang with Nafion in Hase because both compounds have acidic functional groups capable of reacting with the basic amino groups on the catalyst carrier. In Hase, the amino groups of p-phenylenediamine, and Wang, the amino groups of melamine.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed 04/07/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 3-7, and 9-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 2, 5, and 8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Wang and Hase. Wang is now used as the primary reference in the rejection because of both the requirement for the organic nitrogen satisfying formula (1) and updated base point amount/acid point amount in claim 1.
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.
/DAVID ANDREW CALDERON/ Examiner, Art Unit 1742
/CHRISTINA A JOHNSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights