DETAILED ACTION
Application 19/171,630, “CARBO-IONIC CULTURES AND EXTRACTS AND APPLICATIONS THEREOF”, was filed with the USPTO on 4/7/2025 and is DIV of 17/438,160.
This office action is in response to communication filed on 4/7/2025.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 4/7/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. The list of foreign patent documents and non-patent documents that are missing legible copies are:
Gong et al. (CN 104830740 A)
Dong et al. (CN 105576302 B)
Kobayashi Hisato et al. (JP 1985-239495 A2)
CUERO RENGIFO Raul (WO 2018213526 A2)
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2020/021881 mailed May 28, 2020
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“produce iron (II) ions” in claim 1 should read “produces iron (II) ions”
“volume ratio of organic component to inorganic component” in claims 19 and 20 should read “volume ratio of the organic component to the inorganic component”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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 extract". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. To overcome this rejection the Examiner suggests amending the term by changing it to “an extract”. For examination purposes, "the extract" in claim 1 reads “an extract”.
Claims 2-20 are rejected as they depend from, and therefore incorporate the claimed subject matter from claims rejected under this statute.
Claim 9 recites the terms "a meat extract”, “a yeast extract”, “a peptone” and “a salt”. It is not clear if "a meat extract”, “a yeast extract”, “a peptone” and “a salt” refer to the same meat extract, yeast extract, peptone and salt as claimed in claim 7. To overcome this rejection the Examiner suggests amending the terms by changing them to "the meat extract”, “the yeast extract”, “the peptone” and “the salt”. For examination purposes, the aforementioned terms in claim 9 read "the meat extract”, “the yeast extract”, “the peptone” and “the salt”.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the volume ratio". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. To overcome this rejection the Examiner suggests amending the term by changing it to “a volume ratio”. For examination purposes, " the volume ratio " in claim 19 reads “a volume ratio”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (CN 105576302 A, citations see machine translation) in view of Won et al. (title: Effect of initial pH, operating temperature, and dissolved oxygen concentrations on performance of pyrite-fuel cells in the presence of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans; Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 360, 15 October 2018, Pages 512-519).
Regarding claim 1, Dong et al. teaches a battery (A1, dual-electrode Swagelok NER55 battery, [0099]) comprising an electrolyte (electrolyte solution, [0096]), wherein the electrolyte (electrolyte solution, [0096]) comprises the extract (the obtained microorganisms, [0097]) produced by culturing (15 hours of microbial culture, [0097]) a microorganism (Escherichia coli, see Example 1 [0093]) in a culture medium (Luria-Bertani (LB) medium, [0049] and [0094]) comprising an organic component (comprises yeast extract, [0094]) and an inorganic component (comprises NaCl, [0094]).
Dong et al. does not teach that produce iron (II) ions.
Won et al. teaches an extract (the medium containing Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans where the anode pyrite is placed, see section 2.3. PFCs operation, page 513-514) produced by culturing (cultured in the 9 K nutrient medium; see 2.1. preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, page 513) a microorganism (Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, A. ferrooxidans, see 2.1. preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, page 513) that produce iron (II) ions (see Fe2+ on the right side of equation (1), page 512; note: Fe2+ released from pyrite is promoted in the presence of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, see second paragraph in left column page 513; at the beginning of the process, pyrite in presence of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans produces iron (II) ions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the electrolyte solution taught by Dong et al. by adding the medium containing Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans taught by Won et al. because Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans consumes oxygen (see Won et al. equation (2), page 512). Doing so would ensure the safety of the battery (see Dong et al. [0024], [0027] and [0043]).
Regarding claim 2, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the microorganism comprises halophiles, algae, cyanobacteria, thermophilic or thermotolerant bacteria, chemoautotrophic bacteria (Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, A. ferrooxidans, see Won et al. 2.1. preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, page 513; note: it’s known in the art that Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans is a chemoautotrophic bacteria), chemolithic bacteria, actinomycetes, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 3, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the microorganism comprises Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans (Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, A. ferrooxidans, see Won et al. 2.1. preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, page 513), Thiobacillus ferroxidans, Leptospirillum ferroxidans, Vibrio vulnificus, Listeria monocytogenes, Yersinia enterocolica, Salmonella enterica, Klebsiella pneumonia, Escherichia coli (Escherichia coli, see Dong et al. Example 1 [0093]), Rhizopus arrhizus, Acidithiobacillus thiooxidans, or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 4, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the microorganism comprises Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans (Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans, A. ferrooxidans, see Won et al. 2.1. preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, page 513).
Regarding claim 5, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the organic component (organic component of Luria-Bertani (LB) medium, [0049] and [0094]) comprises a nutrient broth (it’s known in the art that Luria-Bertani (LB) medium is nutritionally rich and considered as a nutrient broth).
Regarding claim 6, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the organic component comprises a meat extract, a yeast extract (yeast extract, Dong et al. [0094]), a peptone, or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 7, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the organic component comprises a meat extract (NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]; note: meat extract contains NaCl, although NaCl is an inorganic salt, interpreted under “comprises”), a yeast extract (yeast extract, Dong et al. [0094]), a peptone (peptone, see*; note: it’s known in the art that Luria-Bertani (LB) medium contains peptone although peptone is not listed in Dong et al.), and a salt (NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]).
* LB Broth (1X): <https://www.thermofisher.com/order/catalog/product/10855001>
Regarding claim 8, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the salt is sodium chloride (NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]).
Regarding claim 9, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the organic component comprises water (water, Dong et al. [0097]), a meat extract in the amount of from 0.1 to 5 g/L (5 g/L NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]; note: meat extract contains NaCl, although NaCl is an inorganic salt, interpreted under “comprises”), a yeast extract in the amount of 0.1 to 5 g/L (5 g/L yeast extract, Dong et al. [0094]), a peptone in the amount of from 0.1 to 10 g/L (10 g/L peptone 140, see*), and a salt in the amount of from 0.1 to 10 g/L (5 g/L NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]).
* LB Broth (1X): <https://www.thermofisher.com/order/catalog/product/10855001>
Regarding claim 10, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. does not teach wherein the inorganic component comprises an iron salt.
Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component (9K nutrient medium, see 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) comprises an iron salt (FeSO4·7H2O, see 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the culture medium taught by Dong et al. in view of Won et al. by growing Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans in a separate 9K nutrient medium taught by Won et al. because 9K nutrient medium is known in the art as a standard culture medium for growing Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans.
Regarding claim 11, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component (9K nutrient medium, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) comprises iron (II) ions (Fe2+; FeSO4·7H2O, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 50 to 200 mM (159.06 mM; Fe2+ calculated from 44.22 g/L FeSO4·7H2O, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513; Fe2+ concentration = 44.22 g/L ÷ 278.01 g/mol (molecular weight of FeSO4·7H2O)).
Regarding claim 12, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component further comprises a potassium salt (KCl and K2HPO4, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513), an ammonium salt ((NH4)2SO4, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513), a magnesium salt (MgSO4·7H2O, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513), a calcium salt (Ca(NO3), see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513; note: Ca(NO3) appears to be a printing error of Won et al., see rejections of claims 16 and 17), or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 13, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic comprises potassium ions (K+; KCl and K2HPO4, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 1 to 25 mM (7.08 mM K+; calculated from 0.10 g/L KCl and 0.50 g/L K2HPO4, K+ concentration = 0.10 g/L ÷ 74.55 g/mol + 2×0.50 g/L ÷ 174.18 g/mol = 7.08 mM).
Regarding claim 14, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component comprises ammonium ions (NH4+; (NH4)2SO4, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 5 to 75 mM (45.4 mM NH4+;calculated from 3.0 g/L (NH4)2SO4, NH4+ concentration = 2 ×3.0 g/L ÷ 132.14 g/mol = 45.4 mM).
Regarding claim 15, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component comprises magnesium ions (Mg2+; MgSO4·7H2O, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 1 to 10 mM (2.03 mM Mg2+ ; calculated from 0.50 g/L MgSO4·7H2O, Mg2+ concentration = 0.5 g/L ÷ 246.47 g/mol = 2.03 mM).
Regarding claim 18, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component (9K nutrient medium, see Won et al. 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) has a pH of less than or equal to 3 (2.2, see Won et al. second paragraph, left column, page 514).
Claims 16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dong et al. (CN 105576302 A, citations see machine translation) in view of Won et al. (title: Effect of initial pH, operating temperature, and dissolved oxygen concentrations on performance of pyrite-fuel cells in the presence of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans; Journal of Hazardous Materials, Volume 360, 15 October 2018, Pages 512-519) in view of Silverman et al. (Title: STUDIES ON THE CHEMOAUTOTROPHIC IRON BACTERIUM FERROBACILLUS FERROOXIDANS. I. An Improved Medium and a Harvesting Procedure for Securing High Cell Yields. J Bacteriol. 1959 May;77(5):642–647).
Regarding claim 16, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. does not teach wherein the inorganic component comprises calcium ions at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM (note: Won et al. appears having printing errors of “(in g/L): 20.01 Ca(NO3)” in 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513; it appears that the “2” should be subscripted under (NO3) but instead printed to be the number “2” in front of “0.01”; it’s known in the art that 9K medium is a standard medium containing Ca(NO3)2 instead of Ca(NO3) and the concentration is 0.01 g/L; see rejection below).
Silverman et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component comprises calcium ions (Ca2+; Ca(NO3)2, see Table 1, right column, page 643) at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM (60.9 μM Ca2+; calculated from 0.01 g/L Ca(NO3)2, Ca2+ concentration = 0.01 g/L ÷ 164.09 g/mol = 60.9 μM; see Table 1, right column, page 643).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the concentration of calcium ions taught by Dong et al. in view of Won et al. to be 60.9 μM taught by Silverman et al. because it’s well known in the art that 9K medium has Ca(NO3)2 concentration of 0.01 g/L (60.9 μM Ca2+).
Regarding claim 17, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the inorganic component comprises potassium ions at a concentration of from 1 to 25 mM (7.08 mM K+; see citations above), ammonium ions at a concentration of from 5 to 75 mM (45.4 mM NH4+; see citations above), magnesium ions at a concentration of from 1 to 10 mM (2.03 mM Mg2+; see citations above)
Dong et al. in view of Won et al. does not teaches calcium ions at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM.
Silverman et al. teaches calcium ions (Ca2+; Ca(NO3)2, see Table 1, right column, page 643) at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM (60.9 μM Ca2+; calculated from 0.01 g/L Ca(NO3)2, Ca2+ concentration = 0.01 g/L ÷ 164.09 g/mol = 60.9 μM; see Table 1, right column, page 643).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the concentration of calcium ions taught by Dong et al. in view of Won et al. to be 60.9 μM taught by Silverman et al. because it’s well known in the art that 9K medium has Ca(NO3)2 concentration of 0.01 g/L (60.9 μM Ca2+).
Regarding claim 19, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. teaches wherein the culture medium (Luria-Bertani (LB) medium, Dong et al. [0049] and [0094]) comprises:
(a) an organic component comprising water (water, Dong et al. [0097]), a meat extract in the amount of from 0.1 to 5 g/L (5 g/L NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]; note: meat extract contains NaCl, although NaCl is an inorganic salt, interpreted under “comprises”), a yeast extract in the amount of 0.1 to 5 g/L (5 g/L yeast extract, Dong et al. [0094]), a peptone in the amount of from 0.1 to 10 g/L (10 g/L peptone 140, see*), and a salt in the amount of from 0.1 to 10 g/L (5 g/L NaCl, Dong et al. [0094]);
(b) an inorganic component comprising water (water, Dong et al. [0097]),
wherein the volume ratio of organic component to inorganic component is from 5:1 to 1:5 (note: product-by-process limitation, the patentability of claim 20 is based upon the battery structure itself, does not depend on the method of the volume ratio how organic and inorganic component is mixed).
Dong et al. in view of Won et al. does not teach an inorganic component comprising water, potassium ions at a concentration of from 1 to 25 mM, ammonium ions at a concentration of from 5 to 75 mM, magnesium ions at a concentration of from 1 to 10 mM, and calcium ions at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM.
Won et al. teaches wherein an inorganic component (9K nutrient medium, see 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) comprising potassium ions (K+; KCl and K2HPO4, see 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 1 to 25 mM (7.08 mM K+; calculated from 0.10 g/L KCl and 0.50 g/L K2HPO4, K+ concentration = 0.10 g/L ÷ 74.55 g/mol + 2×0.50 g/L ÷ 174.18 g/mol = 7.08 mM), ammonium ions (NH4+; (NH4)2SO4, 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 5 to 75 mM (45.4 mM NH4+; calculated from 3.0 g/L (NH4)2SO4, NH4+ concentration = 2 ×3.0 g/L ÷ 132.14 g/mol = 45.4 mM), magnesium ions (Mg2+; MgSO4·7H2O, see 2.1. Preparation of pyrite and bacterial culture, right column, page 513) at a concentration of from 1 to 10 mM (2.03 mM Mg2+ ; calculated from 0.50 g/L MgSO4·7H2O, Mg2+ concentration = 0.5 g/L ÷ 246.47 g/mol = 2.03 mM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the culture medium taught by Dong et al. in view of Won et al. by growing Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans in a separate 9K nutrient medium taught by Won et al. because 9K nutrient medium is known in the art as a standard culture medium for growing Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans.
However, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. does not teach calcium ions at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM.
Silverman et al. teaches calcium ions (Ca2+; Ca(NO3)2, see Table 1, right column, page 643) at a concentration of from 10 to 100 μM (60.9 μM Ca2+; calculated from 0.01 g/L Ca(NO3)2, Ca2+ concentration = 0.01 g/L ÷ 164.09 g/mol = 60.9 μM; see Table 1, right column, page 643).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the concentration of calcium ions taught by Dong et al. in view of Won et al. to be 60.9 μM taught by Silverman et al. because it’s well known in the art that 9K medium has Ca(NO3)2 concentration of 0.01 g/L (60.9 μM Ca2+).
Regarding claim 20, Dong et al. in view of Won et al. in view of Silverman et al. teaches wherein the volume ratio of organic component to inorganic component is from 2:1 to 1:2 (note: product-by-process claim, the patentability of claim 20 is based upon the battery structure itself, does not depend on the method of the volume ratio how organic and inorganic component is mixed).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1163. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM - 4:30 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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/NING CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights