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Claims 5-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 6/16/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-4 and 11-12 in the reply filed on 6/16/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 3, 4, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
• Claim 2, line 2: add a space between “wherein” and “the”
• Claim 3, line 2: add a space between “wherein” and “an”
• Claim 4, line 2: add a space between “wherein” and “an”
• Claim 12, line 1: add a space between “wherein” and “the”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davoodi et al. (Rapid mechanochemical synthesis of nickel-vanadium carbide nanocomposite powder by magnesiothermic reaction).
Regarding claim 1, Davoodi teaches a metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery, wherein the metal carbide catalyst complex is a porous carbide compound (2.2 Nanocomposite Synthesis) containing vanadium metal and a different transition metal (Abstract, Ni-VC). Since an acid (1 M HCl) was used to remove MgO from the nanocomposite, there will be voids from where the MgO was, meaning that the compound will be porous.
Regarding claim 2, Davoodi teaches the metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery of claim 1, wherein the different transition metal is Ni. (Abstract, nickel in Ni-VC).
Regarding claim 3, Davoodi teaches the metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery of claim 1, wherein an amount of the vanadium metal is 55.2 wt% (Reaction 11)
Reaction 11 in Davoodi states that the general form of the Ni-VC composite reaction is as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
23
671
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This means that the molar ratio of vanadium to the other components in the metal carbide catalyst is 2:1:2, for vanadium, nickel, and carbon, respectively. Converting the molar ratio to weight percentage, the wt% of vanadium is around 55.2 wt%.
2
m
o
l
s
V
*
50.94
g
m
o
l
V
+
1
m
o
l
N
i
*
58.69
g
m
o
l
N
i
+
2
m
o
l
C
*
12
g
m
o
l
C
=
184.57
g
N
i
V
C
2
*
50.94
g
V
194.57
g
N
i
V
C
≈
55.2
w
t
%
o
f
v
a
n
a
d
i
u
m
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (Microstructure and wear-resistance of Fe–(Ti,V)C composite).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches of a metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery, wherein the metal carbide catalyst complex is a porous carbide compound (2. Experimental procedure) containing vanadium metal and a different transition metal (Abstract, Fe–(Ti,V)C composite). In the Experimental procedure, it states that the density of the compound is 60% of theoretical density, meaning that the compound is porous.
Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches the metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery of claim 1, wherein an amount of the different transition metal is 20 wt% (Table 1, Ti 20 wt%)
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.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. in view of Nakashima et al. (US12074355B2).
Regarding claim 11, Wang teaches the metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery of claim 1, but does not specifically teach a zinc-air battery system comprising:
a positive electrode part that comprises the metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery of claim 1, and reacts with oxygen in air;
a negative electrode part arranged to face the positive electrode part and comprising zinc metal;
and an electrolyte.
Nakashima, however, does teach of a zinc-air battery system (Col. 14, lines 30-37) comprising:
a positive electrode part that comprises a metal carbide catalyst complex for a zinc-air battery and reacts with oxygen in air (Col. 14, lines 37-43);
a negative electrode part arranged to face the positive electrode part and comprising zinc metal (Col. 14, lines 35-37);
and an electrolyte (Col. 14, lines 43-45).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date to use the Wang metal carbide catalyst complex on a zinc-air battery because Nakashima teaches that a water splitting catalyst with excellent ORR and OER can be used in a zinc-air battery (Col 20, lines 55-67; Col 21, lines 1-3). Kobayashi et al (US12362365B2) teaches that a compound with the composition of Wang’s catalyst can function as a water splitter with ORR and OER, (Kobayashi et al, Col 5, lines 1-20). This means that it can be used on the zinc-air battery taught by Nakashima.
Regarding claim 12, modified Wang with Nakashima teaches the zinc-air battery system of claim 11, wherein the electrolyte is an aqueous acid solution or an aqueous alkaline solution (Nakashima et al, Col 14, lines 43-45, KOH aqueous solution which is an aqueous alkaline solution).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Li et al. (Molybdenum and cobalt co-doped VC nanoparticles encapsulated in nanocarbon as efficient electrocatalysts for the hydrogen evolution reaction) teaches of a molybdenum and cobalt co-doped VC nanoparticle for the use as an electrocatalyst (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YVONNE WEI whose telephone number is (571)270-0870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5pm, Friday 7:30am-4pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/YVONNE WEI/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights