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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
1. This action is in response to the amendment filed May 4, 2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending in this case, with claims 8-20 withdrawn as a non-elected invention.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
2. 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
3. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Nora et al (CA 2393426) in view of Chi et al. (TW I651264 B).
De Nora discloses a nickel-iron alloy substrate formed as a layer on an inner core made of an electronically conductive material, where nickel and iron metal
may be deposited as such onto the core, or compounds of nickel and iron may be deposited on the core and then reduced, for example one or more layers of Fe(OH)2 and Ni(OH)2 are deposited onto the core (page 9, lines 6-24) where an outer portion comprises an iron-rich nickel-iron oxide surface layer and, underneath, an iron depleted nickel-iron alloy containing generally round cavities (porous) filled with
iron-rich nickel-iron oxide inclusions (page 11, lines 12-22). De Nora does not disclose the electrically conductive layer is stainless steel.
Chi teaches a support layer surface of stainless steel and a double metal hydroxide layer comprising iron oxide and nickel oxide (paragraph 21) along with an oxide layer, where the layered double hydroxide layer is coated on the support layer (paragraph 23). Chi does not disclose an iron-rich precipitate deposited on a porous iron-nickel layer. De Nora and Chi are combinable because they are related to a similar technical field, which is double metal hydroxide multilayered article. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have employed the stainless steel substrate, as taught in Chi, for the electrically conductive layer of De Nora to improve the corrosion resistance and heat resistance of the article, as in claim 1.
Concerning claim 2, De Nora and Chi do not appear to explicitly teach the surface roughness of the oxide layer, however substantially identical materials treated in a substantially identical manner are expected to have substantially identical properties. In the present case the multilayered article is carried out using material and process conditions which are substantially identical to those disclosed by applicants. Therefore the multilayered article discussed above would be expected to meet the claimed surface roughness.
Concerning claim 3, De Nora and Chi do not explicitly disclose the thickness of the oxide layer; however, thickness modifications involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art and therefore obvious. Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) See MPEP 2144.04.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 4-7 are 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 does not teach or suggest the recited oxide layer further including a porosity between about 30% and about 80%.
The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited oxide layer further including a microstructure including a spheroidal structure having a diameter between about 20 nm and about 100 nm. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited oxide layer further including a first layer including an iron-nickel hydroxide layer having a thickness between about 80 nm and about 150 nm; and further comprising a second layer comprising an iron-rich oxide disposed over the first layer, the second layer comprising spheroidal structures having a diameter between about 20 nm and about 100 nm. The closest prior art does not teach or suggest the recited oxide layer further including a porous structure defining a pore having a diameter between about 20nm and about 50nm.
The prior art does not teach motivation or suggestion for modification to make the invention as instantly claimed.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s argument of the rejection made under 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chi et al. (TW I651264 B) are moot based on grounds of new rejection.
Applicant’s argument of the rejection made under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chi et al. (TW I651264 B) are moot based on grounds of new rejection.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lawrence Ferguson whose telephone number is 571-272-1522. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9:00 AM – 5:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frank Vineis, can be reached on 571-270-1547. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/LAWRENCE D FERGUSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights