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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on June 17, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-15 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 2 has overcome the 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on March 19, 2026. The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn. New rejections follow.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 7, 10, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi et al. (US 2017/0271731 A1, hereinafter “Hayashi”) in view of Sayre et al. (US 2011/0111287 A1, hereinafter “Sayre”).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi discloses an air electrode/separator assembly (Fig. 1), comprising: a hydroxide ion conductive separator ([0037] and Fig. 1, separator 20), a catalyst layer ([0037] and Fig. 1, air electrode 12) comprising a catalyst for an air electrode ([0055], catalyst), a hydroxide ion conductive material ([0055], hydroxide-ion-conductive material), an electron conductive material ([0055], electron-conductive material), a binder ([0063], binder) and covering one side of the hydroxide ion conductive separator, and a gas diffusion electrode provided on the catalyst layer on a side opposite to the hydroxide ion conductive separator ([0066], positive electrode current collector 22).
Hayashi further discloses that the binder may comprise a resin mixture including poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) ([0063]), but is silent as to a motivation for including poly(vinyl alcohol) in the binder mixture.
Sayre discloses a cathode 130 comprising a binder 136 including a hygroscopic binder material that may be polyvinyl alcohol ([0036] and [0051]).
Hayashi and Sayre are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of metal-air batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air electrode of Hayashi with the teachings of Sayre, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. Doing so would keep the cell wet and resist dry-out, and promote adhesion due to water solubility of the polyvinyl alcohol (Sayre [0051]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further discloses wherein the humidity conditioning material comprises a water absorbent resin ([0063], resin mixture including PVA).
Regarding claim 7, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 5. Hayashi further discloses wherein the water absorbent resin includes a polyvinyl alcohol resin ([0063], resin mixture including PVA).
Regarding claim 10, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further discloses wherein the hydroxide ion conductive material in the catalyst layer is a layered double hydroxide (LDH) ([0060], hydroxide-ion-conductive material comprises a layered double hydroxide).
Regarding claim 12, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further discloses wherein the hydroxide ion conductive separator is a layered double hydroxide (LDH) separator ([0047]-[0048], separator contains an inorganic solid electrolyte that contains a layered double hydroxide).
Regarding claim 13, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 12. Hayashi further discloses wherein the LDH separator is composited with a porous substrate ([0047], porous body).
Regarding claim 15, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further discloses a metal-air secondary battery ([0037] and Fig. 1, zinc-air secondary battery 10) comprising the air electrode/separator assembly according to claim 1 ([0037] and Fig. 1, air electrode 12 and separator 20), a metal negative electrode ([0037] and Fig. 1, negative electrode 14), and an electrolyte ([0037] and Fig. 1, electrolytic solution 16), wherein the electrolyte is separated from the catalyst layer by the hydroxide ion conductive separator interposed therebetween ([0037] and Fig. 1).
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 2017/0271731 A1) in view of Sayre (US 2011/0111287 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yajima et al. (US 2008/0014491 A1, hereinafter “Yajima”).
Regarding claim 2, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Modified Hayashi does not disclose wherein the air electrode/separator assembly further comprises a humidity conditioning portion at an outer circumferential portion of the catalyst layer, the humidity conditioning portion comprising the humidity conditioning material.
Yajima discloses a water-diffusing portion 2a having a rectangular frame form that covers the periphery of a cathode catalyst layer 2 ([0044] and Fig. 1), and the water-diffusing portion 2a comprising a porous material having water absorbing ability ([0063]).
Although Yajima is in the field of fuel cells rather than the field of metal-air batteries, it is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor in controlling water produced in a reaction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the zinc-air secondary battery of modified Hayashi with the teachings of Yajima according to known methods to yield the predictable result of water absorption, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so (see MPEP §2143(I)(A)).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 2. Modified Hayashi further discloses wherein the air electrode/separator assembly is arranged vertically (Hayashi [0043]), and wherein the humidity conditioning portion is provided at an outer circumferential portion of the catalyst layer other than the top edge thereof (Yajima [0044] and Fig. 1, water-diffusing portion 2a covering the periphery of cathode catalyst layer 2).
Regarding claim 4, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 2. Modified Hayashi wherein the air electrode/separator assembly is arranged horizontally (Hayashi [0044]), and wherein the humidity conditioning portion is provided over an entire circumferential portion of the catalyst layer (Yajima [0044] and Fig. 1, water-diffusing portion 2a covering the periphery of cathode catalyst layer 2).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 2017/0271731 A1) in view of Sayre (US 2011/0111287 A1) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Shiraishi (JP 2005174765 A, translation provided by Applicant in IDS filed on October 30, 2023).
Regarding claim 6, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 5. Modified Hayashi does not disclose wherein the humidity conditioning material further comprises a silica gel.
Shiraishi discloses silica gel as a water absorbing material in a membrane electrode assembly ([0020]).
Although Shiraishi is in the field of fuel cells rather than the field of metal-air batteries, it is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor in controlling water produced in a reaction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the zinc-air secondary battery of modified Hayashi with the teachings of Shiraishi according to known methods to yield the predictable result of water absorption, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so (see MPEP §2143(I)(A)). In addition, doing so would result in a high water absorbing effect (Shiraishi [0020]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 2017/0271731 A1) in view of Sayre (US 2011/0111287 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoshida et al. (US 2013/0302705 A1, hereinafter “Yoshida”).
Regarding claim 9, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Modified Hayashi does not disclose wherein the catalyst layer comprises a two-layer structure composed of a catalyst layer for charge adjacent to the hydroxide ion conductive separator and a catalyst layer for discharge adjacent to the gas diffusion electrode.
Yoshida discloses wherein the catalyst layer comprises a two-layer structure composed of a catalyst layer for charge adjacent to the hydroxide ion conductive separator ([0097]-[0099] and Fig. 1, amphoteric catalyst layer 4 adjacent to anion exchange membrane 3 with oxygen generation ability for charging) and a catalyst layer for discharge adjacent to the gas diffusion electrode ([0102]-[0104] and Fig. 1, oxygen reduction catalyst layer 5 adjacent to gaseous diffusion layer 9 with oxygen reduction ability for discharging).
Yoshida is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of metal-air batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the zinc-air secondary battery of modified Hayashi with the teachings of Yoshida, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. Doing so would result in a battery with one-cell structure capable of discharging and charging with desirable repeating efficiency and excellent discharge output (Yoshida [0011] and [0112]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 2017/0271731 A1) in view of Sayre (US 2011/0111287 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamamura et al. (US 2017/0012334 A1, hereinafter “Yamamura”).
Regarding claim 11, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Modified Hayashi does not disclose wherein the catalyst layer comprises 10 to 60% by volume of the hydroxide ion conductive material relative to 100% by volume of solid content of the catalyst layer.
Yamamura discloses the amount of the hydroxide-ion-conductive material contained in the air electrode layer is preferably 10 to 80 vol % relative to the total amount of the air electrode catalyst, electron-conductive material, and hydroxide-ion-conductive material ([0027]).
Yamamura is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of metal-air batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the zinc-air secondary battery of modified Hayashi with the teachings of Yamamura, according to known methods to yield the predictable result of controlling hydroxide ion permeability in the catalyst layer, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so (see MPEP §2143(I)(A)). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.05(I)).
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (US 2017/0271731 A1) in view of Sayre (US 2011/0111287 A1) and Ogumi et al. (US 2013/0273442 A1, hereinafter “Ogumi”).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi discloses an air electrode/separator assembly (Fig. 1), comprising: a hydroxide ion conductive separator ([0037] and Fig. 1, separator 20), a catalyst layer ([0037] and Fig. 1, air electrode 12) comprising a catalyst for an air electrode ([0055], catalyst), a hydroxide ion conductive material ([0055], hydroxide-ion-conductive material), an electron conductive material ([0055], electron-conductive material), a binder ([0063], binder), and a humidity conditioning material ([0063], binder may include a mixture including PVA and cellulose) and covering one side of the hydroxide ion conductive separator.
Hayashi further discloses that the binder may comprise a resin mixture including poly(vinyl alcohol) ([0063]), but is silent as to a motivation for including poly(vinyl alcohol) in the binder mixture.
Sayre discloses a cathode 130 comprising a binder 136 including a hygroscopic binder material that may be polyvinyl alcohol ([0036] and [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air electrode of Hayashi with the teachings of Sayre, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. Doing so would keep the cell wet and resist dry-out, and promote adhesion due to water solubility of the polyvinyl alcohol (Sayre [0051]).
Modified Hayashi does not disclose a gas diffusion electrode provided on the catalyst layer on a side opposite to the hydroxide ion conductive separator.
Ogumi discloses a gas diffusion layer located on a catalyst layer on a side opposite to an anion-exchange membrane ([0050], [0094], and Fig. 2, water-repelling carbon layer 11b, air electrode catalyst layer 11c, and anion-exchange membrane 14).
Ogumi is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of metal-air batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the zinc-air secondary battery of modified Hayashi with the teachings of Ogumi, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so. Doing so would enable oxygen diffusion during charge/discharge and prevent electrolyte leakage (Ogumi [0050]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi further discloses the air electrode/separator assembly further comprising an air electrode current collector on the gas diffusion electrode on a side opposite to the catalyst layer ([0066], positive electrode current collector 22).
Claims 1, 5, 7, 10-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamura (US 2017/0012334 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yamamura discloses an air electrode/separator assembly ([0022] and Fig. 1, air electrode 10), comprising: a hydroxide ion conductive separator ([0022] and Fig. 1, separator 11), a catalyst layer ([0022] and Fig. 1, air electrode layer 12) comprising a catalyst for an air electrode ([0022] and Fig. 1, catalyst 13), a hydroxide ion conductive material ([0022] and Fig. 1, hydroxide-ion-conductive material 15), an electron conductive material ([0022], electron-conductive material 14), a binder ([0031], binder) and covering one side of the hydroxide ion conductive separator, and a gas diffusion electrode provided on the catalyst layer on a side opposite to the hydroxide ion conductive separator ([0034], positive electrode current collector).
Yamamura further discloses that the binder may comprise carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) resin ([0031] and Table 1, Examples 9 and 10), or a resin mixture comprising CMC ([0031]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a binder that is a resin mixture comprising CMC based on this suggestion. It is noted that CMC is a humidity conditioning material (see Applicant’s claim 7).
Regarding claim 5, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Yamamura further discloses wherein the humidity conditioning material comprises a water absorbent resin ([0031], resin mixture including CMC).
Regarding claim 7, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 5. Yamamura further discloses wherein the water absorbent resin includes a carboxymethyl cellulose resin ([0031], resin mixture including CMC).
Regarding claim 10, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Yamamura further discloses wherein the hydroxide ion conductive material in the catalyst layer is a layered double hydroxide (LDH) ([0028], hydroxide-ion-conductive material 15 comprises a layered double hydroxide).
Regarding claim 11, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Yamamura further discloses that the amount of the hydroxide-ion-conductive material contained in the air electrode layer is preferably 10 to 80 vol % relative to the total amount of the air electrode catalyst, electron-conductive material, and hydroxide-ion-conductive material ([0027]). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 12, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Yamamura further discloses wherein the hydroxide ion conductive separator is a layered double hydroxide (LDH) separator ([0035], separator 11 contains an inorganic solid electrolyte that contains a layered double hydroxide).
Regarding claim 13, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 12. Yamamura further discloses wherein the LDH separator is composited with a porous substrate ([0038], porous body).
Regarding claim 15, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Yamamura further discloses a metal-air secondary battery ([0040], metal-air secondary battery) comprising the air electrode/separator assembly according to claim 1 ([0040] and Fig. 1, air electrode 10), a metal negative electrode ([0040] and Fig. 1, metal negative electrode), and an electrolyte ([0040], electrolytic solution), wherein the electrolyte is separated from the catalyst layer by the hydroxide ion conductive separator interposed therebetween ([0040]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamura (US 2017/0012334 A1) in view of Hattori et al. (US 2017/0141445 A1, hereinafter “Hattori”).
Regarding claim 8, modified Yamamura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Yamamura does not disclose wherein the catalyst layer comprises 0.001 to 15% by volume of the humidity conditioning material in terms of solid content, relative to 100% by volume of solid content of the catalyst layer.
Hattori discloses an organic binder that may be carboxymethyl cellulose that is present in an air electrode at an amount less than or equal to 10 volume % ([0033]-[0034]).
Hattori is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of metal-air batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air electrode layer of modified Yamamura with the teachings of Hattori, according to known methods to yield the predictable result of binding the air electrode layer components together, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so (see MPEP §2143(I)(A)). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.05(I)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the separate layers of catalyst and humidity condition material on pages 6-8 with respect to claims 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the diffusion paper of Koda, see page 8, filed on June 17, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of newly found prior art references.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jackie Liang whose telephone number is (571)272-0880. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:45AM to 4:45PM.
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 (571)-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.
/J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 28 August 2026
Prosecution Insights