DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, please replace “formulae” with “formula”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 5, please replace “Formulae” with “formulae”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, please replace “Formulae” with “formulae”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 3, line 5, delete “each” which precedes “R21” and delete “independently”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 3, line 7, please replace “being” with “is”.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 5, line 4, delete “each” which precedes “FG” and delete “independently”.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 5, line 4, delete “each” which precedes “R11” and delete “independently”.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 7, line 5, delete “each” which precedes “R21” and delete “independently”.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 7, line 7, please replace “being” with “is”.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 9, line 5, delete “each” which precedes “R11” and delete “independently”.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 9, line 13, delete “each” which precedes “FG” and delete “independently”.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, delete “each” which precedes “R21”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, delete “independently”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 11, line 1, delete “each” which precedes “R21” and delete “independently”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 11, line 6, delete “each” which precedes “s” and delete “independently”.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “haloalkylated” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, please insert “in” after “wherein”.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, please replace “formula (2S) has each FG being” with “formula (2S), FG is”.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, delete “independently” which precedes “hydroxyl”.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, please replace “each R11 being independently” with “R11 is”.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, please replace “being” with “are”.
Claim 29 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “haloalkylated” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, please replace “being” with “are”.
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 13, line 1, delete “each independently”.
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, please replace “R39 being” with “R39 are”.
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 3, please replace “s being each” with “s is”.
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, delete “independently”.
Claim 35 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, please insert “an an imidazole of formula (4S-2).
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “haloalkylated” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, the compounds 6-phenyl-1-butene and 5-phenyl-1-butene do not exist.
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, please replace “or any” with “or a”.
Claim 42 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 42 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, please replace “or any” with “or a”.
Claim 43 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 44 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 51 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim at line 5 recites “coating the electrode ink onto a substrate”. Diction is poor. One does not coat electrode ink onto a substrate. One applies (a coating of) electrode ink onto a substrate, or one coats a substrate with the electrode ink. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 51 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7, please insert “to form a dried electrode” after “drying the electrode” so that proper antecedent basis exists for the term “the dried electrode” in line 8.
Claim 52 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim at line 5 recites “coating the electrode ink onto a substrate”. Diction is poor. One does not coat electrode ink onto a substrate. One applies (a coating of) electrode ink onto a substrate, or one coats a substrate with the electrode ink. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 52 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 7, please insert “to form a dried electrode” after “drying the electrode” so that proper antecedent basis exists for the term “the dried electrode” in line 8.
Claim 52 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 13, please insert “hot-pressed membrane electrode” prior to “assembly”.
Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim at line 5 recites “coating the electrode ink onto a substrate”. Diction is poor. One does not coat electrode ink onto a substrate. One applies (a coating of) electrode ink onto a substrate, or one coats a substrate with the electrode ink. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 16, line 1, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 16, line 1, please insert “to form a dried membrane electrode assembly” after “assembly”.
Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 16, line 2, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 53 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 16, line 3, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 54 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim at line 7 recites “coating the crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate”. Diction is poor. One does not coat crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate. One applies (a coating of) crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate, or one coats a substrate with the crosslinkable electrode ink. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 54 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 9, please insert “to form a dried electrode” after “drying the electrode” so that proper antecedent basis exists for the term “the dried electrode” in line 10.
Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim at line 7 recites “coating the crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate”. Diction is poor. One does not coat crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate. One applies (a coating of) crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate, or one coats a substrate with the crosslinkable electrode ink. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 9, please insert “crosslinkable” prior to electrode”.
Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 9, please insert “to form a dried crosslinkable electrode” after “electrode”.
Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 10, please insert “crosslinkable” prior to “electrode”.
Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 17, line 1, please insert “hot-pressed and crosslinked” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 17, line 2, please insert “hot-pressed and crosslinked” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, delete “electrode” which precedes “membrane”.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim at line 7 recites “coating the crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate”. Diction is poor. One does not coat crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate. One applies (a coating of) crosslinkable electrode ink onto a substrate, or one coats a substrate with the crosslinkable electrode ink. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 8, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 9, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 9, please insert “to form a dried crosslinkable membrane electrode” after “assembly”.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 10, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 56 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 12, please replace “electrode membrane” with “membrane electrode”.
Claim 60 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 18, line 2, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 61 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert a comma “ , ” between “membrane” and “fuel cell”.
Claim 61 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 62 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 5, delete “and the reinforced membrane”.
Claim 62 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 63 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “reinforced ion exchange membrane or electrolyte” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, please insert “reinforced ion exchange membrane or electrolyte” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 1, please insert “reinforced ion exchange membrane or electrolyte” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 1, please insert “porous” prior to “substrate”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 2, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 3, please insert “reinforced ion exchange membrane or electrolyte” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 5, please insert “anion exchange” prior to “polymer”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 7, please insert “homogeneous” prior to “solution”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 8, please insert “ion exchange membrane or electrolyte” prior to “membrane”.
Claim 64 is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 19, line 9, please insert “reinforced ion exchange membrane or electrolyte” prior to “membrane”.
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.
Claim 1, 15, 16, 42, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Su et al. (US 10,266,617).
Su et al. discloses a cationic copolymer having an aromatic structural unit shown below wherein R1 and R2 are H or CH3, R3 and R4 are hydrogen, R5, R6, and R7 are each C1-C2 alkyl, m is 1 to 4, and n is 1 to 3. An aromatic structural unit in which R1 and R2 are hydrogen, n is 1 and m is 2 corresponds to claimed structural unit 1A in which m, n, and p = 0, R22 and R23 are hydrogen, and R21 is a quaternary ammonium group of formula (1S) wherein s = 0 and R37 is methylene.
PNG
media_image1.png
202
226
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Subject of independent claims 2-4 is patentably distinct over cited reference and over prior art listed in Applicant’s PTO-1449. Claims 2-4 will be allowable upon appropriate amendment to overcome claim objections set forth in paragraphs 6 to 12. None of these references teaches the subject of claims 2-4. Dependent claims 5-10, 12, 13, 19, 26-32, 35, 36, 44, 51-57, and 60-64 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome claim objections, supra, and if rewritten in independent form including all limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims are not in condition for allowance.
Drawings
Figure 1A is objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because it includes the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, and 28.
Figure 1B is objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because it includes the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 46, and 48.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rip A. Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-1104. The examiner can be reached on Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Jones, can be reached at (571)270-7733. 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.
/RIP A LEE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1762
August 21, 2026
Prosecution Insights