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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species (a) claims 1-6 in the reply filed on 07/09/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zheng et al. (US 5621609), hereafter Zheng.
Regarding claim 1, Zheng at abstract discloses “This invention relates to a composite electrode material for use in … the electrodes.” Zheng also discloses “The specific surface area was measured by a surface analyzer and the specific capacitance in H.sub.2 SO.sub.4 electrolyte was calculated from the measurement of cyclic voltammogram.”, “The minimum amount of electrolyte needed by electrode materials can be calculated based on the specific capacitance of the electrode and the ion content of the electrolyte.” and “To compare the specific capacitances for composite electrodes and RuO.sub.2.xH.sub.2 O electrodes, the specific capacitances of each were measured by cyclic voltammetry at different voltage scan rates as shown in FIG. 1.” Zheng therefor discloses a method of evaluating activity of an electrode [“the specific capacitance of the electrode ”] that includes an active material [composite electrodes materials, see Table I], the method comprising: making evaluation of activity of the electrode, based on a specific capacitance and a specific surface area [“The specific surface area measured” i.e. (m.sup.2/g)] of an active material film formed solely from the active material [composite electrodes materials], and a specific capacitance of the electrode [“the specific capacitance of the electrode ”].
Regarding claim 5, Zheng discloses the method of evaluating electrode activity according to claim 1, wherein the electrode is for a battery that uses a liquid electrolyte [for example, H2SO4].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 3-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, Zheng discloses specific capacitance, charging/discharging storage and mass of the active material film. Zheng is silent about method of evaluating electrode activity according to claim 1, wherein the specific capacitance of the active material film is calculated by using an electrochemical impedance method to measure a capacitance of the active material film, and dividing the obtained capacitance by a mass of the active material film. It is well known that “Specific Capacitance (Cs): The total capacitance (\(C\)) divided by the mass (\(m\)) of the active electrode material.” to measure how much electrical charge capacity the material provides per unit mass. Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date will use capacitance to mass ratio for advantages that Zheng has to offer and in order to obtain claim invention.
Regarding claim 4, Zheng discloses the specific surface area, charging/discharging storage and mass of the active material film. Zheng is silent about method of evaluating electrode activity according to claim 1, wherein the specific surface area of the active material film is calculated by using surface probe microscopy to measure the surface area of the active material film, and dividing the obtained surface area by a mass of the active material film. It is well-known that specific surface area is obtained by dividing total surface area by mass (A/M) to dictate how much active electrode material is exposed to ions, directly scaling the specific capacitance and charge storage capacity. Therefore, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date will use the surface area to mass ratio for advantages that Zheng has to offer and in order to obtain claim invention.
Regarding claim 6, Zheng as stated above at claims 3-5 discloses the method of evaluating electrode activity according to claim 5, wherein the specific capacitance of the electrode is calculated by using an electrochemical impedance method to measure a capacitance of the electrode in a state where the liquid electrolyte used in the battery that uses the electrode is caused to be in contact with the electrode, and the obtained capacitance is divided by a mass of the active material in the electrode.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: No prior art has been found that meets the limitation of claim2 calling for a method of evaluating activity of an electrode that includes an active material, the method comprising: wherein the evaluation of the activity of the electrode is performed in accordance with an electrode active specific surface area (m2/g) calculated using the following formula (I), Electrode active specific surface area (m2/g) = a × x + b in formula (I), a is a gradient of a calibration curve for the specific capacitance and specific surface area of the active material film, b is a specific surface area of the electrode when a surface roughness Ra of the electrode was set to zero, and x is the specific capacitance of the electrode.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. V. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-1968. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/PARESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
August 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights