DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-14 are pending.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 2 and 6-10 are 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.
Regarding claim 2, the phrasing “normal temperature and pressure” is indefinite because it is unclear what range, if any, is being recited. The specification does not appear to specify what temperature and/or pressure is considered normal.
Regarding claim 6, the claimed “n” is not defined in regards to the chemical formulas. The phrase “represent a group” is indefinite because it is unclear what chemistry is being referred to. It is unclear what “represent a group excluding hydrogen” is referring to. There is no guidance in regards to the chemical formula including R1 to R4.
Claims 7-10 depend from claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 –
(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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Voskian et al. (US 2020/0023307).
Regarding claim 1, Voskian discloses a carbon dioxide separating system including separating a target species (e.g. CO2) from a gas mixture (abstract) using electrochemistry (title) (= a carbon dioxide recovery system for separating carbon dioxide from a carbon dioxide contained gas that contains carbon dioxide by an electrochemical reaction), the carbon dioxide recovery system comprising:
An electrochemical cell (100) comprising a positive electrode (120) and negative electrode (110), the negative electrode comprising an electroactive material such as polyanthraquinone [0036] (= an electrochemical cell including a working electrode and a counter electrode, the working electrode including a carbon dioxide adsorbent; the instant specification indicates that the adsorbent may be for example polyanthraquinone [0034]), wherein
Source of electrons are provided by an external circuit [0024], [0040], [0053] (= the carbon dioxide adsorbent is configured to adsorb carbon dioxide in accordance with supply of electrons from the counter electrode to the working electrode in response to application of voltage between the working electrode and the counter electrode; Moreover, Voskian discloses the same material as claimed and the same voltage as claimed therefore the polyanthraquinone necessarily is configured to adsorb as claimed, there does not appear to be any structural difference present),
An ionic liquid is provided with separators between the negative electrode and positive electrode [0006], [0009] (= an electrolytic substance is provided between the working electrode and the counter electrode).
Regarding the phrase “the electrolytic substance has resistance to a redox reaction with at least one of the carbon dioxide contained gas, the working electrode, or the counter electrode when a voltage is applied between the working electrode and the counter electrode”, since Voskian discloses the same chemical structure as indicated in the specification as satisfying the electrolytic substrate (e.g. ionic liquid, pyridinium, pyrrolidinium [0046]), the disclosure of Voskian fully reads on the claimed phrasing. There is no structural difference between the system of Voskian and the claimed system. Moreover, the claimed “resistance to redox reaction” does not require any physical or structural characteristics. There is no degree of resistance claimed.
Regarding claims 2 and 14, Voskian discloses the same chemical as the specification indicates satisfies the claimed electrolytic substance. The claimed “has resistance to a decomposition reaction at normal temperature and pressure when a voltage is applied” does not further structurally limit the claimed system.
Regarding claims 3-4, the instant claims are directed towards the manner of operating the claimed system. The instant claims do not appear to recite any further structural elements. Voskian discloses the same structural material as the instant specification indicates satisfies the claimed electrolytic substance. Moreover, Voskian discloses a charge mode and a discharge mode whereby the voltage is switched from positive to negative [0060]. The voltages of Voskian are therefore different.
Regarding claim 5, Voskian discloses the electrode comprising an electron source [0026], [0041].
Regarding claims 6-10, Voskian discloses the electrolytic substance comprising an ionic liquid. Voskian discloses pyrrolidinium which satisfies formula (5) [0046].
Regarding claims 11-13, Voskian discloses the electrolytic substance comprising an ionic liquid comprising an anion including structures such as trifluoroacetate, heptaflurorobutanoate, etc. [0046].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2018/0030604
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFANIE S WITTENBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-7594. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 am -4:00 pm EST.
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 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.
/Stefanie S Wittenberg/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights