DETAILED ACTION
Citation to the Specification will be in the following format: (S. # : ¶/L) where # denotes the page number and ¶/L denotes the paragraph number or line number. Citation to patent literature will be in the form (Inventor # : LL) where # is the column number and LL is the line number. Citation to the pre-grant publication literature will be in the following format (Inventor # : ¶) where # denotes the page number and ¶ denotes the paragraph number.
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 Application
The response dated 7/2/2026 has been received and will be entered.
Claim(s) 1-16 and 18 is/are pending.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 8, 13 is/are currently amended.
Claim(s) 14-17 and 19 is/are acknowledged as cancelled.
The action is FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Specification
I. With respect to the objection to the amendment filed 11/17/2013 under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure, and alternatively, the objection to the specification for browser-executable code, the objection(s) are obviated by amendment. The objections are WITHDRAWN.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. §112
I. With respect to the rejection of Claims 4, 5, 8, 13, and 18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement, the rejection is obviated by the amendment cancelling the new matter. The rejection is WITHDRAWN.
I. With respect to the rejection of Claims 16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention, the rejection is mooted by cancellation, and is accordingly WITHDRAWN.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. §102-103
I. With respect to the rejection of Claim(s) 1-16, 18 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Frisch, et al., Mesoporous WCx Films with NiO-Protected Surface: Highly Active Electrocatalysts for the Alkaline Oxygen Evolution Reaction, ChemSusChem 2021; 14: 4708-4717 (published online 9/8/2021, hereinafter “Frish at __”), the traversal is on the grounds that filing a translation to perfect foreign priority “would seem to be an unnecessary expense, because the claim 1 in the present application is essentially a translation of claim 1 in the EP priority document.” (Remarks of 7/2/2026 at 9). In response, MPEP 216 states: “[i]f the certified copy is not in the English language and there is no translation, the examiner may reject the unpatentable claims and at the same time require an English translation (the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) that is submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate) for the purpose of determining the applicant’s right to rely on the foreign filing date.” (emphasis added). See also 37 C.F.R. 1.55(g)(3)(ii). Expense is not a factor. Whatever Google translation the Remarks are referring to being “essentially a translation” is not the same as a translation with a statement that the certified copy is accurate. The rejection is MAINTAINED.
II. With respect to the rejection of Claim(s) 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Xia, et al., An easy soft-template route to synthesis of wormhole-like mesoporous tungsten carbide/carbon compsosites, Composites Science and Technology 2012; 72: 1655-1655 (hereinafter “Xia at __”), the rejection is mooted by cancellation and is accordingly WITHDRAWN.
III. With respect to the rejection of Claim(s) 14-15 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Lu, et al., Ordered Mesoporous Metal Carbides with Enhanced Anisole Hydrodeoxygenation Selectivity, ACS Catal. 2016; 6: 3506-3514 (hereinafter “Lu at __”), the rejection is mooted by cancellation and is accordingly WITHDRAWN.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102-103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
I. Claim(s) 1-13 and 18 – or as stated below - is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Frisch, et al., Mesoporous WCx Films with NiO-Protected Surface: Highly Active Electrocatalysts for the Alkaline Oxygen Evolution Reaction, ChemSusChem 2021; 14: 4708-4717 (published online 9/8/2021, hereinafter “Frish at __”).
The PCT filing date and numerous additional authors serve as the basis for the rejection under 102(a)(1). Assuming full support in the priority document, perfecting the foreign priority may obviate the amendment.
This would appear to be the Applicants work. As such, a detailed explanation is not undertaken. The process is taught. (Frish at 4714, col. 2 et seq. – Experimental; entire reference).
The products are taught. (Frish at 4715, col. 1 – NiO-ALD).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DANIEL C. MCCRACKEN whose telephone number is (571) 272-6537. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9-6).
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, Anthony J. Zimmer can be reached on 571-270-3591. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/DANIEL C. MCCRACKEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights