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 .
Claims Status
Claims 1-5 and 7-17 are pending. Claims 1-5 and 7-10 have been amended. Claim 6 has been canceled. Claims 11-17 are new.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/17/2026, with respect to 112 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-9 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/17/2026, with respect to rejections under 35 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 10 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/17/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-9 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lindsay et al. (US 20210247347 A1).
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/17/2026 is being considered by the examiner, however it is not clear how the submitted references are relevant to the instant application as they pertain to one-way clutch.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (Materials Science and Engineering C 29 ‘2009’ 1156–1160) in view of Lindsay et al. (US 20210247347 A1).
Considering claims 1-5 and 7-9, Zhao discloses a device comprising: a substrate (Si); a metal layer (Au) deposited on the substrate to form a conducting electrode; and a thick layer of aluminum is deposited on the metal layer, wherein the aluminum layer (Al) is anodized so as to form an anodized porous alumina layer (AAO) having nanopores (page 1156, last paragraph, and Fig. 1).
With respect to the functional limitation reciting a device for removal of heavy metal ions from water, wherein the device, upon application of potential, allows the flow of water through the micropores to perform absorption of contaminants using the electrically conducting electrode covered with the anodized porous alumina layer facilitating removal of the contaminants from the water through ion concentration polarization and minimizing wastage of water and where the device is installed, the limitations of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed functions, then it meets the claim. In the instant case the structure of the Zhao is the same as claimed invention therefore will be capable of performing the claimed functions.
Zhao does not disclose an adhesive layer of Ti or Cr.
However, Lindsay discloses using an adhesive layer of chromium in between silicon substrate and the gold or platinum layers [0090].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use chromium as an adhesive layer between silicon substrate and gold or platinum electrodes in the device of Zhao, because Lindsay discloses using an adhesive layer of chromium in between silicon substrate and the gold or platinum layers.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rabin et al. (Adv. Funct. Mater. 2003, 13, 631).
Considering claims 1-5 and 7-9, Rain discloses a device comprising: a substrate (Si); a metal layer (Pt/Ti) deposited on the substrate to form a conducting electrode; and a thick layer of aluminum is deposited on the metal layer, wherein the aluminum layer (Al) is anodized so as to form an anodized porous alumina layer (PAA) having nanopores (page 632, and Figs. 1 and 2),
With respect to the functional limitation reciting a device for removal of heavy metal ions from water, wherein the device, upon application of potential, allows the flow of water through the micropores to perform absorption of contaminants using the electrically conducting electrode covered with the anodized porous alumina layer facilitating removal of the contaminants from the water through ion concentration polarization and minimizing wastage of water, the limitations of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed functions, then it meets the claim. In the instant case the structure of the Zhao is the same as claimed invention therefore will be capable of performing the claimed functions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use chromium as an adhesive layer between silicon substrate and gold or platinum electrodes in the device of Rabin, because Lindsay discloses using an adhesive layer of chromium in between silicon substrate and the gold or platinum layers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-17 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: novel and inventive over prior art of record. The closest prior art (Ardo et al. US 20200402782 A1) discloses a method of a method removal of ions via ion pumping through an anodized alumina membrane coated with gold and titanium as an adhesion layer. However, the intendent claim 10 requires a substrate, that is coated with gold or platinum with an adhesion layer, and anodized alumina on top, where the contaminant removal is performed by absorption of contaminants by ion concentration polarization. In contrast Ardo pertains to ion pumping and flow of the ions through the porous alumina membrane, and does not absorb the ions (contaminants). Therefore, also Ardo would not have a substrate, as it needs to be able to allow for the flow of the ions form one side of the membrane to the other.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5 and 7-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Wojciech Haske whose telephone number is (571)272-5666. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 am - 6:00 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/WOJCIECH HASKE/Examiner, Art Unit 1794