DETAILED ACTION
Summary
Applicants election of claims 2, 3, and 44-46, without traverse, in the response filed May 26, 2026 has been acknowledged.
Claims 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 14, 28-30, 37, 40, 41, and 43-50 are currently pending while claims 6, 9, 10, 14, 28-30, 37, 40, 41, 43, and 47-50 have been withdrawn from consideration.
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, 3, and 44-46 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, “a sufficiently strong electric field”.
It is unclear as to what structures of the claimed polymer material are encompassed by the phrase “a sufficiently strong electric field” and what structures of the claimed polymer material are specifically excluded by the phrase “a sufficiently strong electric field” because it is unclear as to what limitations the relative term “sufficiently strong” definitely imparts on the claimed electric field. Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Claim 2 recites, “a sufficiently strong magnetic field”.
It is unclear as to what structures of the claimed polymer material are encompassed by the phrase “a sufficiently strong magnetic field” and what structures of the claimed polymer material are specifically excluded by the phrase “a sufficiently strong magnetic field” because it is unclear as to what limitations the relative term “sufficiently strong” definitely imparts on the claimed magnetic field. Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Claim 2 recites, “a sufficiently high temperature”.
It is unclear as to what structures of the claimed polymer material are encompassed by the phrase “a sufficiently high temperature” and what structures of the claimed polymer material are specifically excluded by the phrase “a sufficiently high temperature” because it is unclear as to what limitations the relative term “sufficiently high” definitely imparts on the claimed temperature. Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Claim 2 recites, “a sufficiently strong pressure”.
It is unclear as to what structures of the claimed polymer material are encompassed by the phrase “a sufficiently strong pressure” and what structures of the claimed polymer material are specifically excluded by the phrase “a sufficiently strong pressure” because it is unclear as to what limitations the relative term “sufficiently strong” definitely imparts on the claimed temperature. Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the electrical conductivity of the polymer material" on line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claims are rejected for dependency.
Amending “the electrical conductivity of the polymer material” to “an electrical conductivity of the polymer material” would overcome the rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 2, 3, and 44-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kou et al. (“Degradation and Breakdown of Polymer/Graphene Composites under Strong Electric Field”, J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 139 included in Applicant submitted IDS filed January 28, 2025).
With regard to claims 2 and 44, Kou et al. discloses a polymer material comprising
one or more polymers comprising one or more electron rich domains (see Abstract teaching graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite), wherein
when: the polymer material is disposed between a plurality of layers, each layer independently selected from: one or more metals, one or more semiconductors, one or more materials capable conducting a charge, and mixtures thereof; and at least one of: a sufficiently strong electric field is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently strong magnetic field is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently high temperature is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently strong pressure is applied across the one or more polymers, the electrical conductivity of the polymer material is increased (the cited polymer material comprising one or more polymers, recall the graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite, is cited to read on the claimed “when: the polymer material is disposed between a plurality of layers, each layer independently selected from: one or more metals, one or more semiconductors, one or more materials capable conducting a charge, and mixtures thereof; and at least one of: a sufficiently strong electric field is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently strong magnetic field is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently high temperature is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently strong pressure is applied across the one or more polymers, the electrical conductivity of the polymer material is increased” because the cited graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite includes a structure which enables an increase in electrical conductivity, when disposed between a plurality of layers, each layer independently selected from: one or more metals, one or more semiconductors, one or more materials capable conducting a charge, and mixtures thereof; and at least one of: a sufficiently strong electric field is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently strong magnetic field is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently high temperature is applied across the one or more polymers; or a sufficiently strong pressure is applied across the one or more polymers).
With regard to claim 3, Kou et al. discloses wherein
the polymer material is an electrically conductive polymer material, or the polymer material is an conductive polymer material that is a transparent conductive adhesive (see Abstract teaching graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite).
With regard to claim 45, Kou et al. discloses wherein
the increase in the electrical conductivity is reversible or partially reversible (the cited polymer material comprising one or more polymers, recall the graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite, is cited to read on the claimed “wherein the increase in the electrical conductivity is reversible or partially reversible” because the cited graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite includes a structure which enables the increase in the electrical conductivity to be reversible or partially reversible).
With regard to claim 46, Kou et al. discloses wherein
the increase in the electrical conductivity is via heat treatment, via thermal annealing or cooling, or via ultra-cooling (the cited polymer material comprising one or more polymers, recall the graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite, is cited to read on the claimed “wherein the increase in the electrical conductivity is via heat treatment, via thermal annealing or cooling, or via ultra-cooling” because the cited graphene nanoplatelets and poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composite includes a structure which enables the increase in the electrical conductivity to be via heat treatment, via thermal annealing or cooling, or via ultra-cooling).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN Q DAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5120. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 6:00 AM to 2:00 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/DUSTIN Q DAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721 August 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights