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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Election/Restrictions
1. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group III, claims 2-16, 18, & 20, in the reply filed on 02/19/2026 is acknowledged.
2. Claims 1, 17, 19, & 21-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/19/2026.
Status of Application
3. This application is a CIP of Application Serial No. 17/300,330, which was filed on 06/20/2023, which is now abandoned.
Claims 1-22 were originally presented in this application for examination.
Claims 1-22 are currently pending in this application for examination.
Specification
4. The examiner has not checked the specification to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors (grammatical, typographical, and idiomatic). Cooperation of the applicant(s) is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant(s) may become aware of in the specification, in the claims and in any further amendment(s) that applicant(s) may file.
Applicant(s) is also requested to complete the status of the copending applications referred to in the specification by their Attorney Docket Number or Application Serial Number, if any.
The status of the parent application(s) and/or any other application(s) cross-referenced to this application, if any, should be updated in a timely manner.
5. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 10, in line 1, “~” should change to -- - --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
6. Claims 2-3, 5, 7-9, 12-13, 16, & 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
A. In claim 2, line 3, “characterized by” should be deleted.
B. In claim 3, line 3, “characterized by” should be deleted.
C. In claim 3, line 9, “walls’ structure” should change to --walls structure--.
D. In claim 3, line 10, “characterized by the” should change to --having--.
E. In claim 3, line 11, “INT” should change to --INTs--.
F. In claim 3, line 11, “high density” should change to --high-density--.
G. In claim 5, line 4, “walls’ structure” should change to --walls structure--.
H. In claim 5, line 5, “characterized by the” should change to --having--.
I. In claim 5, line 6, “INT” should change to --INTs--.
J. In claim 5, line 6, “high density” should change to --high-density--.
K. In claim 5, line 7, “being” should change to --is--.
L. In claim 7, line 4, “walls’ structure” should change to --walls structure--.
M. In claim 7, line 5, “characterized by the” should change to --having--.
N. In claim 7, line 6, “INT” should change to --INTs--.
O. In claim 7, line 6, “high density” should change to --high-density--.
P. In claim 8, line 4, “walls’ structure” should change to --walls structure--.
Q. In claim 8, line 5, “characterized by the” should change to --having--.
R. In claim 8, line 6, “INT” should change to --INTs--.
S. In claim 8, line 6, “high density” should change to --high-density--.
T. In claim 8, line 8, “being” should change to --is--.
U. In claim 8, line 12, “walls’ structure” should change to --walls structure--.
V. In claim 8, line 12, “characterized by” should change to --having--.
W. In claim 9, line 2, “characterized by” should change to --having-- (or --comprises--).
X. In claim 12, line 2, “characterized by” should change to --having-- (or --comprises--).
Y. In claim 12, line 5, “being” should change to --is--.
Z. In claim 12, line 7, “being” should change to --is--.
AA. In claim 12, line 7, “0.36g” should change to --0.36 g--.
BB. In claim 12, line 9, “being” should be deleted.
CC. In claim 13, line 2, “being” should be deleted.
DD. In claim 13, last line, “being” should change to --is--.
EE. In claim 16, line 2, “characterized by” should change to --having-- (or --comprises--).
FF. In claim 18, line 3, “walls’ structure” should change to --walls structure--.
GG. In claim 18, line 4, “characterized by” should be deleted.
HH. In claim 18, line 5, “INT” should change to --INTs--.
II. In claim 18, line 5, “high density” should change to --high-density--.
JJ. In claim 18, last line, “INT” should change to --INTs--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) (Second Paragraph)
7. 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 2-16, 18, & 20 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.
The term “highly crystalline” in claim 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “highly crystalline” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
*Claims 2-16 & 20 are rejected because they depend on rejected claim 18 and they do not cure the indefiniteness.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
8. 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) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sinha et al. (NPL: “MoS2 and WS2 Nanotubes: Synthesis, Structural Elucidation, and Optical Characterization”, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 125.11 (2021): pages 6324-6340).
The claimed invention relates to a product comprising molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) inorganic nanotubes (INTs) having needle-like crystal with hollow core morphology and walls structure, which has one of the following configurations: randomly oriented nanoplatelets along a longitudinal axis of the MoS2 INTs, defining a high-density arrangement of active sites enabling enhanced catalytic activity; and comprising highly crystalline continual MoS2 layers substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of the INTs.
Sinha et al. discloses MoS2 nanotubes having a multiwall structure (see Abstract). The MoS2 nanotubes are of high crystalline quality (see p. 6329, bottom right-hand column). Fig. 3 on p. 6330 of the article shows images of MoS2 nanotubes having needle-like crystals shape, which appears the same as the images presented in Figs. 9A – 9D of the instant application. The MoS2 nanotubes disclosed have hollow core morphology in view of the image (Scheme 1) shown on p. 6327 of the article, which appears the same as the image presented in Fig. 2D of the instant application.
Sinha et al. teaches the same MoS2 product having the same structure and configuration features as claimed, thus anticipates the instant claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)/103
9. 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.
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) 2-16 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sinha et al. (NPL: “MoS2 and WS2 Nanotubes: Synthesis, Structural Elucidation, and Optical Characterization”, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 125.11 (2021): pages 6324-6340).
Sinha et al. discloses MoS2 nanotubes as set forth in the precedent paragraph. The disclosed MoS2 nanotubes were obtained by sulfurization of in-situ produced molybdenum oxide nanowhiskers (see p. 6325, left-hand column, lines 30-38). See also p. 6326, under “Materials and Methods, 2.1 Experimental Section”.
Product-by-Process limitations in the claims are noted. While the disclosed product (MoS2 nanotubes) might not be made by the same process or is made differently from the claimed process, the product (MoS2 nanotubes) disclosed is the same as claimed. It is considered that any difference imparted by product-by-process limitations would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made because where the examiner has found a substantially similar product as in the applied prior art the burden of proof is shifted to the applicant to establish that their product is patentably distinct not the examiner to show the same process of making, see In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685, In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324, In re Spada, 15 USPQ 2d 1655, In re Fitzgerald, 205 USPQ 594 and MPEP 2113.
Citations
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. All references are cited for related art. See PTO-892 Form prepared.
US 5,958,358 (teaches MoS2 nanocrystallites, col. 15, line 41; Examples and drawings).
US 7,641,886 (teaches MoS2 nanoparticles consist of sulfide layers and a hollow core occupying 5-10% of the total pore of the nanoparticles. The nanoparticles are multilayers, spherical, or close to spherical particles. See col. 2, lines 45-54; col. 2, lines 11-12, and col. 4, lines 37-38).
US 9,496,094 (teaches an electrode comprising MoS2 nanostructures, col. 15, claims 1-5).
US 10,669,498 (teaches MoS2 nanostructures, col. 6, claim 1).
US 12,415,966 (teaches MoS2 nanostructures, col. 39-40, claims 14, 16, & 18).
Conclusion
11. Claims 1-22 are pending. Claims 2-16, 18, & 20 are rejected. Claims 1, 17, 19, & 21-22 are withdrawn. No claims are allowed.
Contacts
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner CAM N. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1357. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (8:30 am – 5:00 pm) at alternative worksite or at cam.nguyen@uspto.gov.
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, Anthony Zimmer, can be reached at 571-270-3591. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Cam N. Nguyen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/CNN/
May 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights