CTNF 18/452,771 CTNF 83464 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-6, and 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Ono et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2021/0292926) . Regarding claim 1, Ono discloses an electrolysis device comprising: an electrolysis cell (2) including a diaphragm (30), a porous cathode (21; paragraphs 29-30 – the cathode has a gas diffusion layer 21A, and a porous catalyst layer 21B) that has a first surface in contact with one surface of the diaphragm (30) and a second surface on the opposite side of the first surface (facing a flow path plate 24; figure 2) and to reduce a substance to be reduced, i.e. CO 2 (paragraphs 19, 27); an anode (11) that is disposed to be in contact with the other surface of the diaphragm (30) and to oxidize a substance to be oxidized (paragraphs 25, 41), a cathode flow path that is provided in the second surface (facing a flow path plate 24; figure 2) of the porous cathode (21) and makes a gas containing the substance to be reduced flow so as to supply the porous cathode with the substance to be reduced (paragraph 38), and an anode flow path (provided in flow path plate 14) that is provided to be in contact with the anode (11) and makes an electrolysis solution flow so as to supply the anode with the electrolysis solution containing the substance to be oxidized (paragraphs 23-24); a first supply part (200; figures 7-10) supplying the cathode flow path with the gas containing the substance to be reduced (paragraph 28); and a second supply part supplying the anode flow path with the electrolysis solution (paragraph 24); wherein the cathode flow path has a first area (vertical left channel shown in figure 10) that includes a gas flow path of a continuous structure which has a first gas inlet (242) connected to the first supply part (200), and a first gas outlet (243), and a second area that includes a gas flow path of an interrupted structure (U-shaped channel 241; figure 10) which has a second gas inlet (252) connected to the first gas outlet (243), and a second gas outlet (252; paragraphs 38, 79, 82-83). Regarding claim 2, Ono discloses that the dimensions one area is larger than dimensions of a second area (figures 10-12; the U-shaped channel 241 is longer than the vertical channel). It has been held by the courts that the shape is a matter of choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant. MPEP 2144.04.IV.B Regarding claim 3, it has been held by courts that limitations relating to the size of an element is not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art, if the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. MPEP 2144.04. IV.A. Regarding claim 4, Ono discloses wherein a porosity of the porous cathode of one area is higher than a porosity of the porous cathode of a first area (paragraph 29). Regarding claim 5, Ono teaches that the catalyst layer on the cathode side can employ various shapes, as desired, i.e. mesh, wire, particles, thin film or island (denser layer may be provided in order to increase the reaction efficiency; paragraphs 29-30). Regarding claim 6, it has been held by the courts that apparatus claims must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. Functional limitations do not serve to further limit apparatus claims beyond imparting the limitation that the device is capable of performing a claimed function. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In the instant case, the device of Ono is capable of applying a current density (paragraph 91) and thus, it meets the claim. Regarding claim 8, Ono further teaches wherein the first area and the second area are disposed in the one electrolysis cell (figures 10-12). Regarding claim 9, Ono teaches wherein multiple electrolytic cells (2) may be provided (paragraph 51 - the first area and the second area are disposed in the electrolysis cells; figures 10-12). Regarding claim 10, Ono discloses wherein the electrolysis cell in which the first area is disposed and the electrolysis cell in which the second area is disposed are stacked (figures 10-12). Regarding claim 11, the electrolysis device of Ono is a carbon dioxide electrolysis device (abstract; paragraph 21). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art made of record fails to teach the particular placement of a dehumidifier between the first gas outlet of the first area and the second gas inlet of the second area of the cathode flow path. While the individual parts of the present invention appear to be known in the art, there is no reason taught in the prior art to combine these elements in a way that would render the claims obvious without impermissible hindsight construction. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZULMARIAM MENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9805. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30p. 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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. /ZULMARIAM MENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794 Application/Control Number: 18/452,771 Page 2 Art Unit: 1794 Application/Control Number: 18/452,771 Page 3 Art Unit: 1794 Application/Control Number: 18/452,771 Page 4 Art Unit: 1794 Application/Control Number: 18/452,771 Page 5 Art Unit: 1794 Application/Control Number: 18/452,771 Page 6 Art Unit: 1794