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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, 6-21 are currently pending;
Claims 3-5 are canceled;
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11, and 14-15 are amended.
Status of Objections and Rejections Pending Since the Office Action of 04/28/2026
The drawing objections are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment;
The 103 rejections of claims 1-2 and 6-20 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment and argument.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 06/06/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-7, 11-12, and 14-16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejections of claims 1-7, 11-12, and 14-16 have been withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1 and 14 are allowable. Claims 8-10, 13, and 17-20, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, require all the limitations of an allowable claim. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(a), the restriction requirement between Species A1-A3 and between Species B1-B2, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 02/26/2026, is hereby withdrawn and claims 8-10, 13, and 17-20 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
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, 9-10, and 16-21 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 2 recites the limitation "the streamlines" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the streamlines" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the fluid flow” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the fluid flow” in line 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 18-20 are also rejected based on their dependency on claim 17.
Claim 9 includes the limitation “wherein the flow guide is at least part of an electrode.” It is unclear if the “an electrode” of claim 9 is the same electrode as introduced in claim 1, line 2, upon which claim 9 depends, or a different electrode;
Claim 10 includes the limitation “wherein the flow guide is in contact with an electrode”. It is unclear if the “an electrode” of claim 10 is the same electrode as introduced in claim 1, line 2, upon which claim 10 depends, or a different electrode.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 fails to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 includes the limitation “wherein the polymer solute which enables the fluid to display elastic turbulence is a polymer”. Claim 14, upon which claim 15 depends, already includes the limitation “the fluid contains a polymer solute enabling the fluid to display elastic turbulence” in line 4. The solute is a polymer solute, and therefore is already a polymer as is limited in claim 15. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 6-8 and 11-14 are allowed.
Regarding claim 1, Fleck teaches a system comprising an electrochemical half-cell which comprises: an electrode (first chamber 4 with cathode 15 or alternatively second chamber 5 with the anode 16; [0045]; figs. 1-3) a fluid containing a constituent able to undergo electrochemical reaction at the electrode ([0050] catholyte 23 in the first chamber 4; alternatively [0050] anolyte flows through the second chamber 5); structure defining a fluid flow path carrying flow of the fluid into contact with the electrode ([0050] flow channels 26 of anode 16; alternatively pore structure in the cathode 15; [0050]), and at least one pump for propelling the fluid along the flow path (fig. 1; [0046] first pump 8 on the cathode side and second pump 9 on the anode side), and the flow path in contact with the electrode is configured to compel changes in the direction of fluid flow, to cause elastic turbulence within flow of the fluid in contact with the electrode ([0052]; [0050] pore structure on the cathode side; [0039]; [0050] anolyte flows in meandering manner through flow channels; [0055] fig. 5 shows a meandering flow channel; fluid is in contact with anode 16 figs. 2-4).
Fleck fails to teach wherein the fluid contains a polymer solute enabling the fluid to display elastic turbulence.
Xu is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flow cells ([0002]). Xu teaches wherein the fluid contains a polymer solute enabling the fluid to display elastic turbulence (adding an additive to the electrolyte such as polyacrylamide, which inherently enables the fluid to display elastic turbulence, ([0026]; [0071] in order to improve the viscosity [0068]; [0023]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xu and added an additive such as polyacrylamide to the fluid. Doing so improves the viscosity of the fluid (Xu [0023]; [0068]).
Fleck also fails to teach wherein the fluid contains, at a concentration of from 0.05% to 5% by weight, a polymer solute comprising one or more flexible linear polymer chains, each chain containing at least 5,000 monomer units connected on to the next by single covalent bonds permitting rotation of one monomer unit relative to the next, the polymer solute having a mean molecular weight of at least 106 Daltons, wherein the at least one pump is operated such that the flow entering the electrochemical half-cell at an inlet of the electrochemical half-cell is laminar and the flow within the structure is in a condition of elastic turbulence occurring at a Reynolds number of from 1 to 1000, and wherein the elastic turbulence enhances transport of the constituent to the electrode and transport of reaction products away from the electrode. The addition of a secondary source also fails to teach these limitations. As such, claim 1 is allowable. Claims 6-8 and 11-13 are also allowable based on their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Fleck teaches a method of operating a flowing electrochemical half-cell with an electrode in contact with a flow path for a fluid containing a constituent able to undergo electrochemical reaction at the electrode (first chamber 4 with cathode 15 or alternatively second chamber 5 with the anode 16; [0045]; figs. 1-3; [0050] catholyte 23 in the first chamber 4; alternatively [0050] anolyte flows through the second chamber 5; [0050] flow channels 26 of anode 16; alternatively pore structure in the cathode 15; [0050]), the flow path in contact with the electrode causes changes in the direction of flow ([0052]; [0050] pore structure on the cathode side; [0039]; [0050] anolyte flows in meandering manner through flow channels; [0055] fig. 5 shows a meandering flow channel), and the method comprises pumping the fluid along the flow path with the fluid in a condition of elastic turbulence while it is in contact with the electrode (fig. 1; [0046] first pump 8 on the cathode side and second pump 9 on the anode side).
Fleck fails to teach wherein: the fluid contains a polymer solute enabling the fluid to display elastic turbulence
Xu is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of flow cells ([0002]). Xu teaches wherein the fluid contains a solute enabling the fluid to display elastic turbulence (adding an additive to the electrolyte such as polyacrylamide, which inherently enables the fluid to display elastic turbulence, ([0026]; [0071] in order to improve the viscosity [0068]; [0023]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Xu and added an additive such as polyacrylamide to the fluid. Doing so improves the viscosity of the fluid (Xu [0023]; [0068]).
Fleck also fails to teach wherein the fluid contains, a polymer solute comprising one or more flexible linear polymer chains, each chain containing at least 5,000 monomer units connected one to the next by single covalent bonds such that one monomer unit can rotate relative to the adjoining monomer units; and a mean molecular weight of at least 106 Daltons, at a concentration of from 0.05% to 5% by weight, the elastic turbulence occurring at a Reynolds number of rom 1 to 1000, and wherein the elastic turbulence enhances transport of the constituent to the electrode and transport of reaction products away from the electrode. The addition of a secondary source also fails to teach these limitations. As such, claim 14 is allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN-111446221-A teaches a low resistance chip embedded array micro-jet radiator (Title) including a viscoelastic fluid such as polyacrylamide at a mass concentration of 0.001% to 0.1% ([0013]-[0014]), wherein the embedded array microjet heat dissipation structure triggers elastic turbulence at a low Reynolds number in the flow field ([0027]-[0029]).
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 MADISON L KYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0164. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/M.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights