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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN 202111489735.1, filed on December 8, 2021.
Specification
The use of the term Nafion, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: within the context of Claims 4 and 11 and the specification, “IO− “ of Claims 4 and 11 appears to be a typography error that should read “IO3−.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-17 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.
Claim 1 recites the phrase “a strong acidic aqueous solution.” It is unclear what conditions yield a strong acidic aqueous solution. For the purposes of examination, a strong acidic aqueous solution is interpreted as being an aqueous solution containing an acid with a pKa of less than -1. Claims 2-17 are rejected by nature of being dependent on Claim 1.
Claims 7 and 12-17 contain the trademark/trade name Nafion®. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a polymeric membrane and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN 109755604 with reference to provided translation) in view of Walsh (U.S. Patent No. 4,038,460), further in view of Jiang (U.S. Patent No. 11,063,286).
Regarding Claim 1, Li teaches an aqueous iodine-based battery based on a multi-electron transfer comprising a positive electrolyte and a negative electrolyte ([0009]-[0010]), wherein each of the positive electrolyte and negative electrolyte comprise an aqueous solution containing I- and a Br- and/or Cl- source respectively ([0012]).
Li does not teach the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte are strongly acidic or that they contain Cd2+.
Walsh teaches that cadmium and zinc are electrochemically similar and that it would be obvious to substitute cadmium for zinc (Col. 4 lines 60-63).
Walsh is analogous to the instant application as it is the field of electrochemical applications of cadmium and zinc. While Walsh does not specifically relate to aqueous batteries, the teaching that cadmium and zinc are interchangeable in an electrochemical context is a general teaching that may be easily applied to any electrochemical application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing modify the aqueous battery of Li to include cadmium instead of zinc.
Jiang teaches iodate based aqueous batteries may have a high energy density in an acidic electrolyte (Col. 3 lines 8-12).
To solve the same problem of providing an aqueous battery with high energy density, Jiang teaches the usage of sulfuric acid in the electrolyte to create a highly acidic environment as a necessary aspect of utilizing iodate in an aqueous battery. Jiang teaches the reduction of iodate at the positive electrode leads to high energy density, owing in part to the high number of electrons transferred (Col. 3 lines 25-35). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to acidify the electrolyte of Li in order to accommodate iodate.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Li goes on to teach a source of the I- in the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is at least one of HI, KI, NaI, or CdI2, respectively ([0012]).
Jiang goes on to teach a supporting electrolyte in the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is selected from H2SO4 to ensure a strong acidic environment (Col. 2 lines 12-16).
Modified Li does not teach a source of Cd2+ is at least one of CdI2 or CdSO4.
Li does teach ZnSO4 as a zinc source ([0012]). Walsh, as previously discussed, identifies that cadmium and zinc are electrochemically similar and may be interchanged in an electrochemical context (Col. 4 lines 60-63). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to substitute the zinc of ZnSO4 from Li for cadmium as is taught to be suitable by Walsh.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Modified Li does not explicitly teach during a charging process, IO- generated from the I− at a positive electrode forms a Cd(IO3)2 precipitate with the Cd2+ in the strong acidic aqueous solution, to solve a problem of a self-discharge of the aqueous iodine-based battery based on the multi-electron transfer due to an infiltration of an oxidized charging product IO3−.
While modified Li does not explicitly teach the cadmium iodate precipitate, Jiange does teach the presence of IO3− in a highly acidic solution (Col. 2 lines 50-60). The structure taught by modified Li would inherently result in the claimed precipitate and offer the claimed benefit. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to arrive at the claimed precipitate.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Li goes on to teach the Br− source additive is at least one of NaBr, KBr, or HBr; the Cl− source additive is at least one of NaCl, KCl, or HCl; and a concentration of an introduced additive is from 1M to 3M ([0012] teaches a supporting electrolyte containing KCl and/or KBr with a concentration of 1-2 mol/L).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Modified Li as described above also teaches each of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is the strong acidic aqueous solution containing the Cd2+ and the I−, and the Br− and/or Cl− source additive is introduced into the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte to improve a kinetics and a reversibility of an electrochemical reaction process.
Li goes on to teach a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a membrane material, the positive electrolyte, and the negative electrolyte ([0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Jiang goes on to teach the membrane material is a polymer material selected from at least one of polyethersulfone (PES), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polysulfone (PSF), polyethylene (PE), or Nafion (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion®).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Li goes on to teach a single cell or a stack; wherein a structure of the single cell comprises a positive terminal plate, a positive current collector, a positive carbon felt electrode filled with the positive electrolyte, a separator, a negative carbon felt electrode filled with the negative electrolyte, a negative current collector, and a negative terminal plate, wherein the positive terminal plate, the positive current collector, the positive carbon felt electrode, the separator, the negative carbon felt electrode, the negative current collector and the negative terminal plate are stacked in a sequential; the stack is composed of two or more single cell circuits in series and/or parallel ([0009] and [0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 2 as described above.
Modified Li does not explicitly teach during a charging process, IO− generated from the I− at the positive electrode forms a Cd(IO3)2 precipitate with the Cd− in the strong acidic aqueous solution, to solve a problem of a self-discharge of the aqueous iodine-based battery based on the multi-electron transfer due to an infiltration of an oxidized charging product IO3−.
While modified Li does not explicitly teach the cadmium iodate precipitate, Jiange does teach the presence of IO3− in a highly acidic solution (Col. 2 lines 50-60). The structure taught by modified Li would inherently result in the claimed precipitate and offer the claimed benefit. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to arrive at the claimed precipitate.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 2 as described above.
Modified Li as described above also teaches each of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is the strong acidic aqueous solution containing the Cd2+ and the I−, and the Br− and/or Cl− source additive is introduced into the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte to improve a kinetics and a reversibility of an electrochemical reaction process.
Li goes on to teach a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a membrane material, the positive electrolyte, and the negative electrolyte ([0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Jiang goes on to teach the membrane material is a polymer material selected from at least one of PES, PVC, PSF, PE, or Nafion (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion®).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 4 as described above.
Modified Li as described above also teaches each of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is the strong acidic aqueous solution containing the Cd2+ and the I−, and the Br− and/or Cl− source additive is introduced into the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte to improve a kinetics and a reversibility of an electrochemical reaction process.
Li goes on to teach a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a membrane material, the positive electrolyte, and the negative electrolyte ([0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Jiang goes on to teach the membrane material is a polymer material selected from at least one of PES, PVC, PSF, PE, or Nafion (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion™).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 5 as described above.
Modified Li as described above also teaches each of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is the strong acidic aqueous solution containing the Cd2+ and the I−, and the Br− and/or Cl− source additive is introduced into the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte to improve a kinetics and a reversibility of an electrochemical reaction process.
Li goes on to teach a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a membrane material, the positive electrolyte, and the negative electrolyte ([0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Jiang goes on to teach the membrane material is a polymer material selected from at least one of PES, PVC, PSF, PE, or Nafion (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion®).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Jiange goes on to teach the polymer material is a Nafion resin (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion®).
Claim(s) 3, 6, 9, 10, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN 109755604) in view of Walsh (U.S. Patent No. 4,038,460), further in view of Jiang (U.S. Patent No. 11,063,286) as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Jones (A New Zinc-Iodate Primary Battery. J. Electrochem. Soc. 1958, 105, 435).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Modified Li does not explicitly teach the positive electrolyte or the negative electrolyte, a molar concentration of the Cd2+ is from 0.5M to 3M, a molar concentration of the I− is from 1M to 6M, a molar ratio of the Cd2+ to the I− is 1:2 to 1:1, and a molar concentration of H+ is from 3M to 12M, respectively.
Li does teach an iodine concentration of 2-8 mol/L and a zinc concentration of 1-4 mol/L ([0012]). As discussed previously, Walsh identifies cadmium as electrochemically similar to zinc to the point it would be obvious to interchange the two in an electrochemical context (Col. 4 lines 60-63). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 I. In the instant case, the claimed range of Cd2+ concentration of 0.5M to 3M overlaps with the taught range of 1-4 mol/L. Similarly, the claimed range of I− concentration of 1M to 6M overlaps with the taught range of 2-8 mol/L. These concentration ranges taught by Li would lead to a range of the molar ratio of the Cd2+ to the I- that overlaps with the claimed range of 1:2 to 1:1.
To solve the same problem of creating an aqueous battery with an iodate active substance, Jones teaches an acidic environment of 4 M H2SO4 and 0.5 HCl (pg. 436 right col.). The acidic solution of Jones results in an H+ concentration that falls withing the range claimed in the instant application.
Considering the concentration values taught by Li and Jones, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to arrive at the concentration ranges claimed in the instant application.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 1 as described above.
Modified Li does not explicitly teach a composition of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte are as follows respectively: HI used as an iodine-based active substance with a concentration of 1M to 6M; HBr and/or HCl used as the Br− and/or Cl− source additive with a concentration of 1M to 3M; H2SO4 used as a support electrolyte with a concentration of 1M to 3M; CdSO4 used as an active substance of Cd with a concentration of 1M to 3M; or the HI used as the iodine-based active substance with a concentration of 1M to 6M; at least one of NaBr, KBr, NaCl, and KCl used as the Br− and/or Cl− source additive with a concentration of 1M to 3M; the H2SO4 used as the support electrolyte with a concentration of 2M to 4M; the CdSO4 used as the active substance of the Cd with a concentration of 1M to 3M; or CdI2 used as the iodine-based active substance and the active substance of the Cd with a concentration of 0.5M to 3M; the HBr− and/or the HCl used as the Br− and/or Cl− source additive with a concentration of 1M to 3M; the H2SO4 used as the support electrolyte with a concentration of 2M to 4M; or the CdI2 used as the iodine-based active substance and the active substance of the Cd with a concentration of 0.5M to 3M; at least one of the NaBr, the KBr, the NaCl, and the KCl used as the Br− and/or Cl− source additive with a concentration of 1M to 3M; the H2SO4 used as the support electrolyte with a concentration of 3M to 5M; or NaI and/or KI used as the iodine-based active substance with a concentration of 1M to 6M; the HBr− and/or the HCl used as the Br− and/or Cl− source additive with a concentration of 1M to 3M; the H2SO4 used as the support electrolyte with a concentration of 2M to 4M; the CdSO4 used as the active substance of the Cd with a concentration of 1M to 3M; or the NaI and/or the KI used as the iodine-based active substance with a concentration of 1M to 6M; at least one of the NaBr, the KBr, the NaCl, and the KCl used as the Br− and/or Cl− source additive with a concentration of 1M to 3M; the H2SO4 used as the support electrolyte with a concentration of 3M to 5M; the CdSO4 used as the active substance of the Cd with a concentration of 1M to 3M.
Li does teach the use of ZnI2 as a source of zinc and a zinc concentration of 1-4 mol/L ([0012]). As discussed previously, Walsh identifies that cadmium and zinc are electrochemically similar, making it obvious to interchange them in an electrochemical context (Col. 4 lines 60-63). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 I. In the instant case, the claimed range of Cd2+ concentration of 0.5M to 3M overlaps with the taught range of 1-4 mol/L. Li also teaches the use of KBr, NaCl, and KCl as sources for Cl- and Br- in a concentration of 1-2 mol/L ([0012]), lying within the claimed range of 1M to 3M. Jones teaches an acidic environment of 4 M H2SO4 and 0.5 HCl (pg. 436 right col.), lying within the claimed H2SO4 range of 3M to 5M. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to create a positive and negative electrolyte solution comprising CdI2, KBr and/or KCl, and H2SO4 within the claimed concentration ranges. Considering the concentration values taught by Li and Jones, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to arrive at the concentration ranges claimed in the instant application.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 2 as described above.
Modified Li does not explicitly teach the positive electrolyte or the negative electrolyte, a molar concentration of the Cd2+ is from 0.5M to 3M, a molar concentration of the I− is from 1M to 6M, a molar ratio of the Cd2+ to the I− is 1:2 to 1:1, and a molar concentration of H is from 3M to 12M, respectively.
Li does teach an iodine concentration of 2-8 mol/L and a zinc concentration of 1-4 mol/L ([0012]). As discussed previously, Walsh identifies cadmium as electrochemically similar to zinc to the point it would be obvious to interchange the two in an electrochemical context (Col. 4 lines 60-63). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 I. In the instant case, the claimed range of Cd2+ concentration of 0.5M to 3M overlaps with the taught range of 1-4 mol/L. Similarly, the claimed range of I− concentration of 1M to 6M overlaps with the taught range of 2-8 mol/L. These concentration ranges taught by Li would lead to a range of the molar ratio of the Cd2+ to the I- that overlaps with the claimed range of 1:2 to 1:1. Jones teaches an acidic environment of 4 M H2SO4 and 0.5 HCl (pg. 436 right col.). The acidic solution of Jones results in an H+ concentration that falls withing the range claimed in the instant application. Considering the concentration values taught by Li and Jones, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to arrive at the concentration ranges claimed in the instant application.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 3 as described above.
Modified Li does not teach the molar ratio of the Cd2+ to the I− is 1:2.
As the ranges of concentrations of Cd2+ and I− taught by modified Li overlap with the claimed concentration ranges, the taught concentration ranges include the ratio of the Cd2+ to the I− of 1:2. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 I. In the instant case, the claimed ration of the Cd2+ to the I− of 1:2 lies with the range taught by modified Li. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to arrive at the ratio of the Cd2+ to the I− of 1:2.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 3 as described above.
Modified Li as described above also teaches each of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is the strong acidic aqueous solution containing the Cd2+ and the I−, and the Br− and/or Cl− source additive is introduced into the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte to improve a kinetics and a reversibility of an electrochemical reaction process.
Li goes on to teach a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a membrane material, the positive electrolyte, and the negative electrolyte ([0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Jiang goes on to teach the membrane material is a polymer material selected from at least one of PES, PVC, PSF, PE, or Nafion (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion®).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Li teaches all the limitations of Claim 6 as described above.
Modified Li as described above also teaches each of the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte is the strong acidic aqueous solution containing the Cd2+ and the I−, and the Br− and/or Cl− source additive is introduced into the positive electrolyte and the negative electrolyte to improve a kinetics and a reversibility of an electrochemical reaction process.
Li goes on to teach a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a membrane material, the positive electrolyte, and the negative electrolyte ([0034] teaches this collection of elements).
Jiang goes on to teach the membrane material is a polymer material selected from at least one of PES, PVC, PSF, PE, or Nafion (Col. 2 lines 44-45 teaches the use of Nafion®).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ryuichi (JP H0642377) teaches a battery using metal iodides such as zinc iodide and cadmium iodide.
Adams (US 2020/0176198) teaches zinc-iodide batteries may have acidic electrolytes.
Mitra (US 2020/0358074) teaches a zinc-iron-periodate based battery chemistry.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN G. DIAMOND whose telephone number is (571)270-5888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5 pm.
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, Sam Xiao Zhao can be reached at (571) 270-5343. 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.
/B.G.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/SADIE WHITE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights