Detailed Action
This is a Final Office action based on application 18/560,058 filed on November 9, 2023. The application is a 371 of PCT/ CA2022/ 050742, with priority to US provisional application 63/187,761 filed May 12, 2021.
Claims 1, 3-7, 9, 11-13, 15-19, 21-27 are pending, claims 21-27 are withdrawn, and claims 1, 3-7, 9, 11-13, and 15-19 have been fully considered.
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 .
Status of the Rejection
The §112(b) rejections of record are moot because the claims to which they pertained have been canceled
In view of Applicant’s amendments, the §103 ground of rejection previously applied to claims 1 and 9 is withdrawn, but the §103 ground of rejection previously applied claim 2 and 14 is now applied to amended claims 1 and 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11-13, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Nyberg ‘098” (US 4,888,098 A to Nyberg et al) in view of “Nyberg ‘826” (US 5,788,826 A to Nyberg) and “Demeter” (US 2020/0001251 A1 to Demeter et al).
Regarding claim 1, Nyberg ‘098 teaches a membrane apparatus for selectively retaining and releasing a target cation (figure 1; col 9 ln 1-42, an apparatus for selectively binding a releasing a metal cation species "M+"), said membrane apparatus comprising:
a cation exchange layer (figure 1, apparatus comprises a plurality of bipolar electrodes 2, each comprising cation exchange layer 12 on its cathodic side), wherein said cation exchange layer is permselective, and comprises a sorbing agent, wherein said sorbing agent comprises a target cation binding coefficient and a hydrogen ion binding coefficient, and wherein said target cation binding coefficient is less than or equal to said hydrogen ion binding coefficient (col 12 ln 35-48, cation exchange layer 12 comprises a permselective ion exchange material, which has a first binding affinity for M+, and a second binding affinity for hydrogen ions which is higher than the first binding affinity; col 15 ln 58 - col 18 ln 68, in experimental examples 4-8, the sorbing agent is sarcosine moieties and the target cation is Cu2+);
an anion exchange layer, wherein said anion exchange layer is permselective (figure 1, apparatus comprises a plurality of bipolar electrodes 2, each comprising anion exchange layer 14 on its anodic side; col 12 ln 35-48);
wherein said cation exchange layer and said anion exchange layer are coupled and configured for hydraulic communication to facilitate water splitting under an applied voltage (col 12 ln 45 - col 13 ln 34).
The apparatus of Nyberg ’098 differs from the claimed apparatus in that Nyberg ‘098’s cation exchange layer and anion exchange layer are not in direct contact with each other to define a boundary therebetween such that the water splitting under an applied voltage is located at the boundary.
Nyberg ‘826 is similarly directed to a membrane apparatus for selectively retaining and releasing ions from water (col 5 ln 55-62; col 18 ln 42 – col 19 ln 21, “The operation of this exemplary cell will be described in the context of the removal and subsequent concentration of CuSO4 from a solution ...”), comprising:
a cation exchange layer wherein said cation exchange layer is permselective (figure 1, layer 105; col 5 ln 65-col 6 ln 3, “At least one water-splitting ion exchange membrane ... the water-splitting membrane comprising (i) a cation exchange surface facing the first electrode”; col 8 ln 10-22, “FIG. 1 ... water-splitting membrane 100 comprises ... cation exchange surface 105 (typically a cation exchange layer having cationic exchange groups)”),
an anion exchange layer, wherein said anion exchange layer is permselective (figure 1 layer 110; col 5 ln 65-col 6 ln 3, “the water-splitting membrane comprising ... (ii) an anion exchange surface facing the second electrode”; col 8 ln 10-24, “FIG. 1 ... water-splitting membrane 100 comprises ... an anion exchange surface 110 (typically comprising an anion exchange layer having anionic exchange groups)”);
and wherein said cation exchange layer and said anion exchange layer are in direct contact with each other to define a boundary therebetween (col 8 ln 20, “adjacent and abutting”; col 10 ln 40-44) and are hydraulically coupled and configured to facilitate water splitting at the boundary under an applied voltage (col 10 ln 27-35, “under a sufficiently high electric field, produced by application of voltage to electrodes 40 and 45, water is dissociated into its component ions H+ and OH− ... at the boundary between the cation and anion exchange surfaces or layers in the membrane”.
Nyberg ‘826 specifically teaches that the structure employed in Nyberg ‘098, in which a bipolar electrode layer is interposed between the cation exchange layer and anion exchange layer, adds unnecessary cost and size to the apparatus (col 4 ln 20-52). It follows that the feature from Nyberg ‘826, of wherein the cation exchange layer and anion exchange layer are directly attached to one another so as to define a boundary therebetween, would, if incorporated, predictably improve the apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by reducing the size and cost of the apparatus.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by eliminating the bipolar electrode (Nyberg ‘098, figure 1, electrode 2) that is interposed between the cation exchange layer (Nyberg ‘098, figure 1, CEM 12) and anion exchange layer (Nyberg ‘098, figure 1, AEM 14), and instead attaching the cation exchange layer directly to the anion exchange layer to define a water-splitting boundary therebetween, based on Nyberg ‘826’s teaching that the bipolar electrode in Nyberg ‘098’s apparatus is an extraneous component which increases the size and cost of the device (Nyberg ‘826, col 4 ln 20-52), and Nyberg ‘826’s disclosure of a membrane apparatus that has the cation exchange layer attached directly to the anion exchange layer and is effective for the intended purpose of selectively retaining and releasing ions from water (col 5 ln 55-62).
Nyberg ‘098 and Nyberg ‘826 do not specify that the target cation (that the cation ion exchange membrane sorbing agent is configured to bind) comprises a lithium cation.
Demeter discloses a cation exchange membrane comprising a sorbing agent within a binding affinity for a target cation (figure 1; para [0004], [0007], [0020]-[0022]). In particular Demeter teaches wherein the sorbing agent is a crown ether with binding affinity for a lithium cation (para [0017], [0020], [0035]). Note that instant specification para [00149] recites that crown ethers are suitable sorbing agents within the scope of the claimed invention. Demeter teaches that the cation exchange membrane comprising the lithium-sorbing agent is useful in an electrochemical apparatus for separating lithium cation from a mixed cation brine (para [0003]-[0004], [0030]-[0031], figure 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by selecting, as the sorbent, a sorbent which is selective for lithium binding, based on Demeter's disclosure of a cation exchange membrane modified to incorporate a lithium-binding sorbent material, because Nyberg ‘098 is directed to a device for binding and releasing a target metal cation for the purpose of recovering a specific metal species from a mixed stream (col 3 ln 21-35), and the incorporation of Demeter's lithium binding CEM would predictably enable Nyberg ‘098’s apparatus to selectively recover lithium, broadening the utility of Nyberg ‘098’s base invention.
Regarding claim 3, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders the apparatus of claim 1 obvious. Nyberg ‘098 does not disclose what quantity of voltage the membrane apparatus is configured to have applied to it. However, this claim feature does not distinguish the claimed apparatus over the prior art apparatus because "apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does" (Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987)). Since the prior art apparatus is apparently capable of having a voltage of 5 V or less applied to it, this limitation apparently does not distinguish the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus of modified Nyberg ‘098.
Regarding claim 5, Nyberg ‘098, Nyberg ‘826, and Demeter render the apparatus of claim 1 obvious, and Demeter further teaches the sorbing agent comprises a crown ether (para [0017], [0020], [0035]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders the apparatus of claim 1 obvious. Nyberg ‘098 does not disclose the sorbing agent comprises between about 35% and about 50% of the cation exchange layer (note, in the experimental example of col 17 ln 6-37, Nyberg ‘098 functionalizes 20% of the cation exchange layer monomers with the sarcosine sorbing agent; otherwise Nyberg ‘098 does not specify any preferred loading level or range of loading levels). However, differences in concentration will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to vary the amount of sorbent in Nyberg ‘098’s sorbing layer, such to a sorbent concentration in the claimed range of 35 to 50% in order to provide adequate sorption capacity for the target cation, in light of the reasonable expectation that the device will function in a predictable manner under these conditions.
Regarding claim 9, Nyberg ‘098 teaches an electrically regenerated ion exchange apparatus for recovering a target cation from a feed solution, said ion exchange apparatus comprising:
a single contiguous flow configuration from an inlet of said ion exchange apparatus to an outlet of said ion exchange apparatus (figure 1, fluid 10 has a contiguous flow configuration spanning from an inlet at the bottom of the device to an outlet at the top of the device), said configuration comprising a first electrode along a contiguous flow path of said ion exchange apparatus (figure 1, the cathode located at the right side of the device is a first electrode) and a second electrode along said contiguous flow path of said ion exchange apparatus (figure 1, the anode located at the left side of the device is a second electrode); and
a membrane apparatus interposed between said first electrode and said second electrode (figure 1, a plurality of membrane apparatus each comprised of a bipolar electrode 2, cation exchange layer 12 on a cathodic face of the bipolar electrode 2, and anion exchange layer 14 on an anodic face of the bipolar electrode 2), wherein said membrane apparatus comprises:
a cation exchange layer (figure 1, cation exchange layer 12) comprising a sorbing agent comprising a target cation binding coefficient and a hydrogen ion binding coefficient, wherein said target cation binding coefficient is less than or equal to said hydrogen ion binding coefficient (col 12 ln 35-48, cation exchange layer 12 comprises a permselective ion exchange material, which has a first binding affinity for M+, and a second binding affinity for hydrogen ions which is higher than the first binding affinity; col 15 ln 58 - col 18 ln 68, in experimental examples 4-8, the sorbing agent is sarcosine moieties and the target cation is Cu2+); and
an anion exchange layer (figure 1, anion exchange layer 14; col 12 ln 35-48);
wherein said cation exchange layer and said anion exchange layer are configured to electrolyze water to generate hydroxide ions under an applied voltage (col 12 ln 45 - col 13 ln 34).
The apparatus of Nyberg ’098 differs from the claimed apparatus in that Nyberg ‘098’s cation exchange layer and anion exchange layer are not in direct contact with each other to define a boundary therebetween such that the generation of hydroxide ions is located at the boundary.
Nyberg ‘826 is similarly directed to a an electrically regenerated ion exchange apparatus for recovering a target cation from a feed solution (col 5 ln 55-62), comprising:
a single contiguous flow configuration from an inlet of said ion exchange apparatus to an outlet of said ion exchange apparatus (figure 1, a single contiguous flow path allows water to flow from inlet 30, past first electrode 40, membrane apparatus 100, and second electrode 45; alternative embodiment of figure 4, a single contiguous flow path allows water to flow from inlet 30, past first electrode 40, past a plurality of membrane apparatus 100a through 100g, and past second electrode 45, to outlet 35), said configuration comprising a first electrode along a contiguous flow path of said ion exchange apparatus (figure 1 and 4, first electrode 40) and a second electrode along said contiguous flow path of said ion exchange apparatus (figure 1 and 4, second electrode 45); and
a membrane apparatus interposed between said first electrode and said second electrode (figure 1, membrane apparatus 100; figure 4, plurality of membrane apparatus 100a through 100g), wherein said membrane apparatus comprises:
a permselective cation exchange layer (figure 1, layer 105; col 5 ln 65-col 6 ln 3, “At least one water-splitting ion exchange membrane ... the water-splitting membrane comprising (i) a cation exchange surface facing the first electrode”; col 8 ln 10-22, “FIG. 1 ... water-splitting membrane 100 comprises ... cation exchange surface 105 (typically a cation exchange layer having cationic exchange groups)”),
a permselective anion exchange layer (figure 1 layer 110; col 5 ln 65-col 6 ln 3, “the water-splitting membrane comprising ... (ii) an anion exchange surface facing the second electrode”; col 8 ln 10-24, “FIG. 1 ... water-splitting membrane 100 comprises ... an anion exchange surface 110 (typically comprising an anion exchange layer having anionic exchange groups)”);
and wherein said cation exchange layer and said anion exchange layer are in direct contact with each other to define a boundary therebetween (col 8 ln 20, “adjacent and abutting”; col 10 ln 40-44) and are hydraulically coupled and configured to electrolyze water to generate hydroxide ions at the boundary under an applied voltage (col 10 ln 27-35, “under a sufficiently high electric field, produced by application of voltage to electrodes 40 and 45, water is dissociated into its component ions H+ and OH− ... at the boundary between the cation and anion exchange surfaces or layers in the membrane”.
Nyberg ‘826 specifically teaches that the structure employed in Nyberg ‘098, in which a bipolar electrode layer is interposed between the cation exchange layer and anion exchange layer, adds unnecessary cost and size to the apparatus (col 4 ln 20-52). The feature from Nyberg ‘826 of wherein the cation exchange layer and anion exchange layer are directly attached to one another so as to define a boundary therebetween, would, if incorporated, predictably improve the apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by reducing the size and cost of the apparatus.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by eliminating the bipolar electrode (Nyberg ‘098, figure 1, electrode 2) that is interposed between the cation exchange layer (Nyberg ‘098, figure 1, CEM 12) and anion exchange layer (Nyberg ‘098, figure 1, AEM 14), and instead attaching the cation exchange layer directly to the anion exchange layer to define a water-splitting boundary therebetween, based on Nyberg ‘826’s teaching that the bipolar electrode in Nyberg ‘098’s apparatus is an extraneous component which increases the size and cost of the device (Nyberg ‘826, col 4 ln 20-52), and Nyberg ‘826’s disclosure of a membrane apparatus that has the cation exchange layer attached directly to the anion exchange layer and is effective for the intended purpose of selectively retaining and releasing ions from water (col 5 ln 55-62).
Nyberg ‘098 and Nyberg ‘826 do not specify that the target cation (that the cation ion exchange membrane sorbing agent is configured to bind) comprises a lithium cation.
Demeter discloses a cation exchange membrane comprising a sorbing agent within a binding affinity for a target cation (figure 1; para [0004], [0007], [0020]-[0022]). In particular Demeter teaches wherein the sorbing agent is a crown ether with binding affinity for a lithium cation (para [0017], [0020], [0035]). Note that instant specification para [00149] recites that crown ethers are suitable sorbing agents within the scope of the claimed invention. Demeter teaches that the cation exchange membrane comprising the lithium-sorbing agent is useful in an electrochemical apparatus for separating lithium cation from a mixed cation brine (para [0003]-[0004], [0030]-[0031], figure 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by selecting, as the sorbent, a sorbent which is selective for lithium binding, based on Demeter's disclosure of a cation exchange membrane modified to incorporate a lithium-binding sorbent material, because Nyberg ‘098 is directed to a device for binding and releasing a target metal cation for the purpose of recovering a specific metal species from a mixed stream (col 3 ln 21-35), and the incorporation of Demeter's lithium binding CEM would predictably enable Nyberg ‘098’s apparatus to selectively recover lithium, broadening the utility of Nyberg ‘098’s base invention.
Regarding claim 11, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders obvious the ion exchange apparatus of claim 9, and Nyberg ‘098 further teaches the apparatus is configured to facilitate water splitting at said first electrode (col 12 ln 45-52, the device is configured to carry out water electrolysis at each of Nyberg ‘098’s cathodes and anodes, including the cathode that constitutes claimed first electrode).
Regarding claim 12, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders obvious the ion exchange apparatus of claim 9, and Nyberg ‘098 further teaches said first electrode is a cathode (figure 1, the rightmost electrode (which corresponds to claimed first electrode) is a cathode).
Regarding claim 13, Nyberg ‘098 modified by Nyberg ‘826 and Demeter renders obvious the ion exchange apparatus of claim 9. Nyberg ‘826 further teaches that said ion exchange apparatus may be a plurality of ion exchange apparatuses (figures 9-10; col 19 ln 66 – col 22 ln 11). Nyberg ‘826 teaches that by combining a plurality of ion exchange devices in parallel under the control of a common controller, they obtain a system which is capable of simultaneously removing ions from fluid with one ion exchange device at the same time that another ion exchange device is regenerating and releasing its absorbed ions (col 20 ln 35 – col 21 ln 20).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect a plurality of Nyberg ‘098's ion exchange apparatus together into a system, as taught in Nyberg ‘826 (figures 9-10), so that one ion exchange device can be operated in to retain target ions from influent water while another is operated to release and recover the ions it has retained, thereby enabling the ion exchange apparatus to remove ions from process water in an effectively continuous fashion.
Regarding claim 15, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders obvious the ion exchange apparatus of claim 9, and Nyberg ‘098 further teaches wherein said cation exchange layer and said anion exchange layer are coupled and configured for hydraulic communication with sufficient permselectivity to facilitate water splitting under an applied voltage (col 12 ln 45 - col 13 ln 34).
Regarding claim 17, Nyberg ‘098, Nyberg ‘826, and Demeter render the apparatus of claim 9 obvious, and Demeter further teaches the sorbing agent comprises a crown ether (para [0017], [0020], [0035]).
Regarding claim 19, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders the apparatus of claim 9 obvious. Nyberg ‘098 does not disclose the sorbing agent comprises between about 35% and about 50% of the cation exchange layer (note, in the experimental example of col 17 ln 6-37, Nyberg ‘098 functionalizes 20% of the cation exchange layer monomers with the sarcosine sorbing agent; otherwise Nyberg ‘098 does not specify any preferred loading level or range of loading levels). However, differences in concentration will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration is critical. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to vary the amount of sorbent in Nyberg ‘098’s sorbing layer, such to a sorbent concentration in the claimed range of 35 to 50% in order to provide adequate sorption capacity for the target cation, in light of the reasonable expectation that the device will function in a predictable manner under these conditions.
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Nyberg ‘098 as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, in view of Xiang et al (US 2021/0388465 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 16, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders obvious the apparatuses of claims 1 and 9, but does not disclose said sorbing agent comprises a metal oxide at least partially stripped of a metal.
Xiang teaches a membrane apparatus for selectively retaining and releasing a lithium cation teaches, said membrane apparatus comprising: a cation exchange layer comprising a lithium sorbing agent (per para [0027], Xiang's "membrane electrode" is comprises an active carbon thin film electrode which is coated on one side with a lithium sorbing layer comprising lithium sorbing material dispersed in polymer binder; para [0023]-[0026], the lithium sorbing agent comprises a metal oxide formed by stripping lithium from LiMn2O4 ; note, per instant specification para [000149], lithium manganese oxide is a suitable sorbing agent for lithium within the scope of the claimed invention); an anion exchange layer, wherein said anion exchange layer is permselective (para [0028], "anion exchange membrane"). Xiang's lithium sorbing agent comprises a metal oxide that is formed by at least partially stripping the lithium from lithium manganese oxide (para [0009], [0023]). Xiang also teaches that lithium is an economically important element and there is need in the art for lithium extraction methods (para [0002]-[0004]), and, that their membrane device based on a membrane comprising lithium-sorbing material is effective for separating lithium cations from a brine comprising mixed cations (para [0006], [0018]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nyberg ‘098 by incorporating, as the sorbent in the cation exchange layer, the sorbent as disclosed in Xiang which comprises a metal oxide at least partially stripped of a metal, because Nyberg ‘098 is directed to a device for binding and releasing a target metal cation for the purpose of recovering a specific metal species from a mixed stream (col 3 ln 21-35), Xiang teaches there is motivation to apply such methods to the recovery of lithium (para [0002]-[0006]), and the incorporation of Xiang's sorbent would predictably enable the Nyberg ‘098 apparatus to selectively recover lithium, thereby broadening the utility of Nyberg ‘098's base invention.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Nyberg ‘098 as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, in view of McEachern et al (US 2020/0299805 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 18, modified Nyberg ‘098 renders the apparatus of claims 1 and 9 obvious, but does not teach said sorbing agent comprises titanate, metatitanate, metatitanic acid, or a combination thereof.
McEachern teaches a method of selectively recovering lithium cations from a water comprising a mixture of cations by contacting the water with a lithium-selective sorbent to selectively adsorb lithium cations, then contacting the sorbent with strong acid to displace the lithium cations with hydrogen ions and thereby release the lithium from the sorbent (para [0003]). McEachern teaches that a preferred sorbent material for use in their method is a lithium titanate molecular sieve (para [0037]-[0039], claim 1-3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base apparatus of Nyberg ‘098 by selecting, as the sorbent, a titanate material which is selective for lithium binding, based on McEachern's disclosure of a titanate sorbent and its use in a method of selectively retaining and releasing lithium ions (para [0003], [0039]). Nyberg ‘098 is directed to a device for first retaining a target metal cation on a sorbent, then releasing the metal cation by displacing it with an acidic proton (col 12 ln 35 - col 13 ln 34). Since McEachern teaches that their sorbent selective adsorbs lithium over other metal cations, but the lithium can then be desorbed by stripping with acid (para [0003]), it follows that the use of McEachern's sorbent in the Nyberg ‘098 device would predictably result in a device that is configured to retain and release lithium according to the same principle of operation as Nyberg ‘098’s base device. The incorporation of McEachern's lithium sorbent would predictably enable the Nyberg ‘098 apparatus to be applied to the selective recovery of lithium, thereby improving Nyberg ‘098's base invention by expanding its utility.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s amendments incorporate, into independent claims 1 and 9, subject matter which previously appeared in dependent claims 2 and 14 (which are now canceled). Applicant traverses the 103 rejection that was previously applied to claims 2 and 14 (and is now applied to claims 1 and 9), on the grounds that the Demeter reference cannot combine with Nyberg’s devices to provide an obvious suggestion of the claimed subject matter. Particularly, Applicant argues that Demeter’s disclosed cation exchange layer is not a permselective cation exchange layer as claimed, because lithium cations are able to pass through it. Applicant draws attention to the definition of “permselectivity” given at instant [00118], and argues that, since Demeter’s cation exchange layer allows ions to pass through, it is not permselective.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
As Applicant points out, the words of the claim must be understood in light of the specification (MPEP 2111). Instant para [00118] defines “permselectivity” as the property of preventing unidirectional ion migration from carrying current across the entirety of a membrane; and, instant [00117] says that the word “membrane” specifically means a bipolar membrane. Instant para [00138] further says that the requirement of permselectivity can be understood as requiring each ion exchange layer to block transport of ions of one charge sign. In other words, permselectivity of a bipolar membrane is achieved when the anion exchange layer blocks cations and the cation exchange layer blocks anions, such that unidirectional transport of any one ion across the whole membrane is prevented. The definition of “permselective” given in the specification does not forbid the cation exchange layer from allowing transport of ions altogether. What it forbids is for the cation exchange layer to allow transport of the same ion(s) that the anion exchange layer allows transport of.
Demeter writes, about their ion exchange layers, that “[a]nion exchange membranes can preferentially allow passage of negatively charged ions and can substantially block the passage of positively charged ions. In contrast, cation exchange membranes can preferentially allow the passage of positively charged ions and can substantially block the passage of negatively charged ions” (para [0026]). Demeter’s ion exchange layers are therefore permselective layers in accordance with the definition laid out in the instant specification. Applicant’s argument, that the prior art’s cation exchange layer is not permselective because it allows cations through, is unpersuasive.
The §103 grounds rejection that was previously applied to claims 2 and 14 is therefore maintained with respect to amended claims 1 and 9.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated any new ground of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew R Koltonow whose telephone number is (571)272-7713. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:00 - 6:00 ET.
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, Luan V Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/ANDREW KOLTONOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights