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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
1. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 10 is a use claim and one cannot claim a new use because it is not among the categories of patentable inventions.
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.
2. Claims 1-11, 17 and 18 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 limitation "the nitrogen atmosphere" in claim 1 in step S2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no initial recitation of a nitrogen atmosphere in step S2; therefore, it is unclear what atmosphere is being referred to. While a part of step S1 is done under a nitrogen atmosphere the graphite will be taken out of the nitrogen atmosphere before step S2, so it is not clear exactly what nitrogen atmosphere is being referred to. Thus, claim 1 is indefinite. Claims 2-11 depend form claim 1 and are indefinite for the same reasons.
Claim 11 is indefinite as the claim is a “use” claim and is indefinite as it merely recites a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced.
Claim 17 recites a mass ratio of the substrate A to the bismuth ion solution and a mass ratio of the non-ionic chelating agent to the bismuth ion solution in step (1). However, step (1) is not initially recited as including the bismuth ion solution. These elements are only introduced in step (2). Therefore, claim 17 is indefinite as it is unclear whether the bismuth ion solution is intended to be included in step (1) or not.
Claim 18 recites conditions for “the reaction” in step (1). However, step (1) doesn’t include a step of conducting a reaction. Step (1) is a pre-treatment step of washing that doesn’t include a reaction step. Therefore, claim 18 is indefinite as it is unclear whether a reaction is intended to happen in step (1) or not.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 12-16, 19 and 20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a method of preparing a bismuth ion filter membrane as claimed in claim 12. In particular, the prior art fails to teach or suggest preparing a chelated bismuth ion solution by conducting steps S1 and S2 using flake graphite, chitosan, and a bismuth ion solution and also including an ultrasonication step. Therefore, claim 12 is allowed. Claims 13-16, 19 and 20 depend from claim 12 and are allowable for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-11, 17 and 18 are rejected.
Claims 12-16, 19 and 20 are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT S WALTERS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-5351. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ROBERT S WALTERS JR/
March 26, 2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights