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Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and Species B, C, D and E, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/24/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Species A, drawn to claims 1-8 and 16-19, in the reply filed on 08/24/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
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) 1-3, 5, 7, 8, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helms (US 20170346104 A1) in view of Check (Design, Synthesis and Characterization of Two-Dimensional Polyelectrolytes).
Regarding claims 1, 7, 8, and 16-19, Helms discloses an electrochemical cell (See Fig. 16 [0024][0055]) comprising: (a) an anode (left most side plate shown in Fig. 16 [0024]); (b) a first electrolyte solution comprising redox inactive ions, redox active ions, or a mixture thereof (left most solution shown in tank being circulated as described in [0024][0055]- aqueous anolyte/catholyte); (c) a cathode (right most side plate shown in Fig. 16 [0024][0055]); (d) a second electrolyte solution comprising redox inactive ions, redox active ions, or a mixture thereof (right most solution shown in tank being circulated as described in [0024][0055] aqueous anolyte/catholyte); and (e) at least one ion-conductive membrane ([0024]) comprising a continuous, unitary, homogeneous sheet of an organic framework ([0075]), the at least one ion-conductive membrane separating ([0024]) (a) and (b), separating (b) and (d), or separating (c) and (d).
However, Helms does not disclose that the ion-conductive membrane which is formed from an organic framework comprises a network of covalently bonded aromatic rings, wherein the aromatic rings comprise phenylene rings.
Check discloses an ion-exchange membrane which is formed of an organic framework which has improved conductivity (see pg. 34 and pg. 168 ) and discloses that such a framework can comprise phenylene rings which are covalently bonded as shown below (see also pg. 169).
PNG
media_image1.png
412
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the organic framework of Helms by using the organic framework of Check because Check discloses that this organic framework is appropriate for ion-exchange membranes and further discloses that this type of membrane has improved conductivity.
With regards to “glassy” modified Helms discloses all of the claimed structure of the ion-conducting membrane and thus is also glassy.
Regarding claim 2, modified Helms discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, modified Helms discloses wherein the ion-conductive membrane is a free-standing membrane ([0078]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Helms discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, modified Helms discloses that wherein the ion-conductive membrane is a composite membrane comprising the continuous, unitary, homogeneous sheet of the glassy organic framework on a substrate ([0079]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Helms discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Helms discloses wherein the aromatic rings are functionalized with one or more anionic groups (-SO3H, see Figure above).
Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helms (US 20170346104 A1) in view of Check (Design, Synthesis and Characterization of Two-Dimensional Polyelectrolytes) as applied to claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8, and 16-19 above, and further in view of Jia (US 20230178848 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 6, Helms discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Helms does not disclose that the organic framework wherein the aromatic rings are functionalized with one or more cationic groups or functionalized with halogen atoms.
Jia discloses an organic framework membrane separator (Abstract, [0006]) that can be used in an electrochemical cells ([0006]) between an anode and cathode and that the organic framework can have aromatic rings functionalized with either anionic groups or cationic groups ([0087]) or functionalized with halogen ([0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the functionalization of the aromatic rings of modified Helms to include either cationic groups or halogen as disclosed by Jia because Jia discloses that this is an appropriate function for an organic framework membrane separator that is used in electrochemical cells.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights