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 group I and sub-species X in the reply filed on 6/26/2026 is acknowledged. The election requirement between sub-species A and B is withdrawn
Claims 5 and 27-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-13, 15, 18, and 20-25 are 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 and all other issues are addressed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Li, CN 107675363 A is the closest prior art of record. Li teaches:
A diaphragm unit (carbon nanofiber membrane; Li title, abstract) comprising
partially carbonized and partially conductive organic fibers derived from a non-halogenated source (pre-oxidized polyacrylonitrile (PAN) which is carbonized in a nitrogen atmosphere at 700-1100°C, since the carbonization temperature is between the specification’s 600-1200°C for partial carbonization, the PAN would also be partially carbonized; Li [0012]-[0013], [0032]-[0033], claim 1),
wherein said fibers have an electrical conductance across compressed material of greater than 0 mhos and up to 1000 mhos (since the fibers are partially conductive they would also inherently possess this property as taught by the specification; see id., App. Spec. [0009], [0031]).
However, Li and the prior art of record do not teach:
7. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the diaphragm unit includes one or more types of inorganic particles and one or more types of binders.
8. The diaphragm unit claim 7, wherein the one or more types of binders include fluoropolymers.
9. The diaphragm unit claim 7, wherein the one or more types of binders include non-fluorinated chemicals.
10. The diaphragm unit of claim 7 wherein the one or more types of inorganic particles include zirconium dioxide particles.
11. The diaphragm unit of claim 7, wherein the one or more types of inorganic particles include attapulgite clay particles.
12. The diaphragm unit of any of claim 7, wherein the one or more types of inorganic particles include talc.
13. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, further comprising the carbonized organic fibers including fibers having a length of from about 20 microns to about 100 mm.
15. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the diaphragm unit is formed by reinforcing a previously used chlor-alkali diaphragm and physically reinforced with the fibers.
18. The diaphragm unit of claim 17, wherein the diaphragm unit is formed by reinforcing a previously used chlor-alkali diaphragm and physically reinforced with the fibers.
20. The diaphragm unit of claim 17, wherein the diaphragm unit includes one or more types of inorganic particles and one or more types of binders.
21. The diaphragm unit claim 17, wherein the one or more types of binders include fluoropolymers.
22. The diaphragm unit claim 17, wherein the one or more types of binders include non-fluorinated chemicals.
23. The diaphragm unit of claim 17, wherein the one or more types of inorganic particles include zirconium dioxide particles.
24. The diaphragm unit of claim 17, wherein the one or more types of inorganic particles include attapulgite clay particles.
25. The diaphragm unit of any of claim 17, wherein the one or more types of inorganic particles include talc.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 6, 13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
6, 13, & 19. The term "about" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. This term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. MPEP § 2173.05(b).
6 & 19. The term "substantially" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. This term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. MPEP § 2173.05(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 14, 16-17, 19, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li, CN 107675363 A. A machine translation was used for Li.
The body of the claim is generally written with parentheses following the limitations indicating the prior art's teachings and/or examiner notes.
1. A diaphragm unit (carbon nanofiber membrane; Li title, abstract) comprising
partially carbonized and partially conductive organic fibers derived from a non-halogenated source (pre-oxidized polyacrylonitrile (PAN) which is carbonized in a nitrogen atmosphere at 700-1100°C, since the carbonization temperature is between the specification’s 600-1200°C for partial carbonization, the PAN would also be partially carbonized; Li [0012]-[0013], [0032]-[0033], claim 1),
wherein said fibers have an electrical conductance across compressed material of greater than 0 mhos and up to 1000 mhos (since the fibers are partially carbonized they would also inherently possess this property as taught by the specification; see id., App. Spec. [0009], [0031]).
2. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the carbonized organic fibers include heat-treated oxidized polyacrylonitrile fibers (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 1 rejection).
3. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the carbonized organic fibers include heat-treated oxidized polymer (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 1 rejection).
4. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the unit is a single layer (only 1 layer made). Li abstract, [0026]-[0033].
6. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the unit is a chlor-alkali diaphragm (this is intended use, see the end of the claim rejection) configured with sufficient electrical conductivity to (a) make produced cell liquor substantially free of hypochlorite and (b) limit production of chlorine gas and hydrogen gas to maintain hydrogen gas concentration below about 4% (because the Applicant’s specification teaches that partially carbonized fibers provide these properties, Li’s partially carbonized fibers and membrane would also inherently provide these properties; see claim 1 rejection, App. Spec. [0006]-[0007]).
The “chlor-alkali” recitation is intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP § 2114. Because the cited prior art teaches the structural limitations of the claim, the prior art is also structurally capable of performing the claimed intentions and therefore reads on the claimed language. See id.
14. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the carbonized organic fibers include fibers having different lengths (a person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that Li’s electrospinning would create fibers of different lengths). Li [0009]-[0010].
16. The diaphragm unit of claim 1, wherein the unit is a non-asbestos (no asbestos used; Li abstract, [0007]-[0013]) chlor-alkali (this is intended use, see the end of the claim rejection) diaphragm.
The “chlor-alkali” recitation is intended use. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. MPEP § 2114. Because the cited prior art teaches the structural limitations of the claim, the prior art is also structurally capable of performing the claimed intentions and therefore reads on the claimed language. See id.
17. A diaphragm unit comprising a non-asbestos chlor-alkali diaphragm having thermally treated under inert atmosphere and partially conductive oxidized polyacrylonitrile fibers (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 1 rejection).
19. The diaphragm unit of claim 17, wherein the unit is configured with sufficient electrical conductivity to (a) make produced cell liquor substantially free of hypochlorite and (b) limit production of chlorine gas and hydrogen gas to maintain hydrogen gas concentration below about 4% (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 6 rejection).
26. The diaphragm unit of claim 17, wherein the fibers include fibers having different lengths (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 14 rejection).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hosung Chung whose telephone number is (571)270-7578. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM CT.
Examiner interviews are available by telephone and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. Applicant can schedule an interview online using 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, James Lin can be reached on (571) 272-8902. 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.
/HOSUNG CHUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights