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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Group II in the reply filed on June 16, 2026 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims of Groups I and II are so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under product/process unity framework (37 C.F.R § 1.475) and that the requirement for unity of invention does not address why the permitted combination under § 1.475(b)(1) is inapplicable to the present claims. Applicant argues that charactering the common feature as a “nanocrystal” is overbroad. This is not found persuasive. To satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F.R § 1.475(b)(1), the product and process must share a special technical feature that defines a contribution over prior art. As discussed in the Office Action mailed April 16, 2026, the common technical feature (nanocrystal) shared between groups is already disclosed in the prior art (Suzhou). Because this shared feature cannot serve as a special technical feature, the groups do not form a single general inventive concept, rendering § 1.475(b)(1) inapplicable. The finding of a lack of unity does not rely on an abstract reduction to the generic term “nanocrystal.” As discussed in the Office Action mailed April 16, 2026, Suzhou discloses the specific core-shell perovskite nanocrystal structure recited in instant claims. Because Suzhou reads on the nanocrystal with specific structural limitations highlighted by Applicant, the nanocrystal does not represent a special technical feature over prior art, and Groups I and II fail to satisfy the unity of invention requirement.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Abstract, “that is doped 5 with a metal halide” should read “that is doped with a metal halide.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Indefiniteness
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected 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.
Claim 13 recites “the polar solvent.” The claim lacks an antecedent basis for this limitation. Claim 11 recites “a polar solvent.” It is suggested that claim 13 be amended to depend from claim 11 to correct this issue.
Clarification and/or amendment is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (ACS Nano, 2018; cited on PTO-892) in view of Mondal et al. (ACS Energy Letters, 2018; cited on PTO-892).
Regarding claim 10, Zhong discloses a one-pot synthesis method for CsPbBr3@SiO2 core−shell nanoparticles (NPs) (abstract). Zhong discloses that a CsPbBr3 nanocrystal (NC) (reads on core perovskite structure having a formula ABX3) can be encapsulated in a SiO2 shell (page 8584, column 2, ¶3). Regarding claim 16, Zhong discloses that a silica precursor such as tetramethoxysilane (TMOS) (reads on a precursor compound comprising silicon and oxygen) can be used for the SiO2 shell (page 8583, column 2, ¶ 3). Regarding claim 17, Zhong discloses that about 3.3 mM of TMOS (5 µL TMOS in about 10 mL solution) can be used (page 8585, column 1, ¶ 3). Regarding claim 19, Zhong discloses that toluene can be used as a mixing solvent (page 8585, column 1, ¶ 3). Regarding claim 20, Zhong discloses that the mixing step can be performed at 30 °C for 120 min (page 8583, column 1, ¶1; page 8585, column 1, ¶ 3). Regarding claims 11-13, Zhong discloses that the solvent comprising oleic acid (fatty acid), oleylamine (fatty amine), and ammonia (amine having a structure N(R2)3) solution can be used for preparing CsPbBr3 NCs (metal halide perovskite) (page 8580, column 1, ¶ 2). Zhong discloses that the formation rates and uniform preparation of core-shell NPs depends on several parameters such as reaction temperature, precursor species, pH value, and the concentrations of oleic acid and oleylamine (abstract; page 8582, column 1, ¶ 1).
Zhong does not disclose a metal halide in addition to the core perovskite structure and further step of dissolving the metal halide in a polar solvent comprising an alcohol such as ethanol, a fatty acid such as oleic acid, a fatty amine such as oleylamine, and an amine such as ammonia in the specific volume ratio recited in instant claim 12. Zhong does not disclose specific concentration ranges of the metal halide and the core perovskite structure recited in instant claims 15 and 18.
Mondal discloses a method for the room temperature post-synthetic treatment of CsPbCl3 perovskite nanocrystals with CdCl2 (reads on the metal halide CdX’2 of instant claim 14) (abstract). Mondal discloses that a saturation solution of CdCl2 in ethanol or oleylamine can be utilized (page 37, column 1, ¶ 2). Mondal discloses that several metal halides can be used for tuning/improving the optical and electronic properties of the metal halide perovskite NCs (page 32, column 2, ¶ 2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Zhong by adding the post-synthetic treatment step taught by Mondal using a metal halide such as CdCl2 in order to prepare more effective perovskite NPs. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications and reasonably would have expected success because Mondal teaches that a metal halide such as CdCl2 can be used to improve the performance of perovskite NCs. Further, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to prepare Cd-doped CsPbBr3@SiO2 core−shell NPs by performing post-treatment procedures such as metal doping and silica encapsulation simultaneously in a one-pot process in order to achieve lower costs and faster production with fewer steps. The composition of the polar solvent, and the amounts of the components such as the metal halide and core perovskite structure in the mixture are result-effective parameters that a person of ordinary skill in the art would routinely optimize. Optimization of these parameters is a routine practice that would be obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to employ and reasonably would expect success. It would have been customary for an artisan of ordinary skill to determine the optimal composition of the solvent and the optimal amount of the components in the mixture for achieving the desired characteristics of the core-shell NPs. “[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.” See MPEP § 2144.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONG HWAN BAEK whose telephone number is (571)272-0670. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu, 9 am - 3 pm 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, Michael G Hartley can be reached at 571-272-0616. 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.
/JONG HWAN BAEK/Examiner, Art Unit 1618
/Michael G. Hartley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1618
Prosecution Insights