DETAILED ACTION
Claim 1-22 are presented for examination, wherein claim 1 is currently amended, plus claims 7-22 are withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1-6 over He as modified is withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 1, from which the other claims depend. However, see infra.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (US 2015/0064575) in view of He et al (US 2016/0294000, hereinafter “He II”).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 1, He teaches a cathode having selenium active material loaded in a cathode layer, wherein said selenium active material is impregnated into said cathode layer prior to said cathode layer being incorporated within a lithium-selenium battery (e.g. ¶¶ 0053-54, 87, 117, and 123-125), reading on “pre-selenized cathode for a rechargeable alkali metal-selenium cell,” alternatively the process limitation “pre-selenized” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention, e.g. MPEP § 2113; alternatively the preamble limitation “for a rechargeable alkali metal-selenium cell” is interpreted as merely intended use and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention, e.g. MPEP § 2111.02, said cathode comprising:
(1) a cathode active material of nano-scaled powder or coating of Se impregnated in pores of a graphite flakes or coated on graphite flake surfaces, wherein said graphite flakes, wherein said graphite flakes are formed from exfoliated graphite worms that are interconnected to form a porous, conductive graphite flake network, said pores having a size smaller than 100 nm, said conductive graphite flake network may have a surface area of greater than 500 m2/g, such as greater than 700 m2/g, and even greater than 1,000 m2/g (e.g. ¶¶ 0088, 91, 95, 97-98, 100-103, and 118), wherein said cathode active material is coated onto a current collector (e.g. ¶¶ 0119-120), reading on “an integral layer of mesoporous structure of a carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer…,”
alternatively, said cathode active material of Se is supported by a network of conductive nano filaments selected from carbon nano-tubes (CNT), carbon nano-fibers (CNF), graphene sheets (NGP), exfoliated graphite flakes, carbon black, or a combination thereof, wherein network of conductive nanofilaments is shaped in the form of a fabric, mat or paper, said nanofilaments with pores having a pore size preferably from 2 nm to 1 µm prior to being impregnated with selenium and a pore size preferably 2-50 nm after being impregnated with selenium (e.g. ¶¶ 0037 and 86-87), reading on said limitation;
(2) a nano-scaled powder or coating of Se, with a dimension of 2-10 nm, as a particle diameter or as a coating thickness (e.g. supra and e.g. ¶¶ 0088, 91, and 106), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the previously amended, previously amended claimed range, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on the previously amended, previously amended limitation “nanoparticles or nanocoating of selenium or metal selenide having a diameter or thickness from 0.5 nm to 20 nm,” see also instant claims 4-6 plus instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0029, 37-38, 42-43, 77, 100, 109-110, specifically noting that throughout the instant specification, the preferred, more preferred, and further preferred thicknesses/diameters are <10 nm, <5 nm, and <3 nm respectively, and furthermore the teachings provide that thinner/smaller thicknesses/diameters result in the improved properties of the instant invention,
wherein the amount of the powder or coating of Se disposed/impregnated in said pores is in the range of 70% to 95% by weight of said active material and network, preferably no less than 80% by weight (e.g. supra and e.g. ¶¶ 0088, 117, and 125), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “said selenium or metal selenide resides in said mesoscaled pores and occupies an amount from 50% to 99% by weight based on the total weight of said selenium or metal selenide and said integral layer of mesoporous structure combined.”
Regarding (1), He does not expressly teach the previously amended, previously amended limitation “an integral layer of mesoporous structure of a carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer…wherein said carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer is selected from metal-coated nanowire or nanofiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire or nanofiber, or a combination thereof.”
However, He II teaches a preloaded cathode layer comprising (a) an integral porous structure of an electronically conductive material and (b) an active material preloaded within pores of said porous structure, wherein said integral porous structure may be formed of graphite flakes, exfoliated graphite flakes, exfoliated graphite worm, carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofiber, graphene sheets, carbon black, metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber, or a combination thereof; and, wherein said porous structure has a surface area of >100 m2/g, preferably >1,500 m2/g, and includes meso-scaled pores (2-50 nm, preferably 2-10 nm), said porous structure resulting in a great amount of surface area to enable a large surface area over which physical contact with electrolyte and capturing/releasing lithium from/to said electrolyte during battery charges/discharges (e.g. ¶¶ 0024, 29-30, 69, 76-77, 81, 86-87, 89, 92, and 101).
As a result it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the graphite flakes, exfoliated graphite flakes, exfoliated graphite worm, carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofiber, graphene sheets, or carbon black of He with said integral porous structure composed of a combination of at least two of metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber of He II, since He II teaches said integral porous structure results in a great amount of surface area to enable a large surface area over which physical contact with electrolyte and capturing/releasing lithium from/to said electrolyte during battery charges/discharges and further since said metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber are equivalent porous structures for holding active material therein as that of the graphite flakes, exfoliated graphite flakes, exfoliated graphite worm, carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofiber, graphene sheets, carbon black, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.06(II).
Said integral porous structure of He as modified providing for said combination of at least two of metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber (e.g. supra), wherein
a first (of said combination of at least two) of said taught metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber corresponds with the claimed (A) “said carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer is selected from metal-coated nanowire or nanofiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire or nanofiber;” and,
a second (of said combination of at least two) of said taught metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber corresponds with the claimed (c) “conductive filler selected from the group consisting of carbon or graphite whiskers, carbon nanowires, expanded graphite flakes, metal-coated nanowires or nanofibers, conductive polymer-coated nanowires or nanofibers, and combinations thereof,”
said first of said combination of at least two of metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber corresponds with the claimed (A) “said carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer is selected from metal-coated nanowire or nanofiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire or nanofiber,” reading on the previously amended, previously amended limitation “an integral layer of mesoporous structure of a carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer…said carbon, graphite, metal, or conductive polymer is selected from metal-coated nanowire or nanofiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire or nanofiber, or a combination thereof,”
wherein the taught surface area of preferably >100 m2/g, preferably >1,500 m2/g, and having said meso-scaled pores (2-50 nm, preferably 2-10 nm), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), “said mesoporous structure has mesoscaled pores having a pore size of 0.5-50 nm and a specific surface area from 100 to 3,200 m2/g,”
wherein He teaches the amount of the powder or coating of Se disposed/impregnated in said pores is in the range of 70% to 95% by weight of said active material and network, preferably no less than 80% by weight (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “said selenium or metal selenide resides in said mesoscaled pores and occupies an amount from 50% to 99% by weight based on the total weight of said selenium or metal selenide and said integral layer of mesoporous structure combined.”
(3) regarding the newly amended, previously amended, previously amended, previously added limitation “(c) a conductive filler selected from the group consisting of carbon or graphite whiskers, carbon nanowires, expanded graphite flakes, and combinations thereof,” He II teaches said integral porous structure of He as modified providing for said combination of at least two of metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber.
Further, He II teaches said integral porous structure of He as modified is composed of an electronically conductive material, wherein multiple particles, platelets or filaments of said conductive material form a 3-D network of interconnected electron-conducting paths, with or without a conductive filler, wherein said conductive material may be said metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber; and in one disclosure, may further include carbon or graphite whiskers (e.g. ¶0076).
As a result, it would have been obvious to incorporate carbon whiskers and/or graphite whiskers as said second composition or a third composition of said combination of at least two compositions of said integral porous structure, since He II teaches said carbon whiskers and/or graphite whiskers are equivalent electronically conductive material in its integral porous structure to said metal-coated nanowire, metal-coated nano-fiber, conductive polymer-coated nanowire, and conductive polymer-coated nano-fiber,
wherein each of said carbon whiskers and/or graphite whiskers severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the limitations “conductive” and “filler,” since each is severably identical/substantially identical to the instantly claimed conductive filler (see e.g. instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0021, 42-43, 53, 75, and 79-81), see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01,
said carbon whiskers and/or graphite whiskers corresponds with the newly amended limitation (c) “conductive filler selected from the group consisting of carbon or graphite whiskers, carbon nanowires, expanded graphite flakes, and combinations thereof,” reading on said newly amended, previously amended, previously amended, previously added limitation.
Regarding claims 2-3, He as modified teaches the cathode of claim 1, wherein He teaches the amount of the powder or coating of Se is in the range of 70% to 95% by weight of said active material and network, preferably no less than 80% by weight as provided supra, severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “said selenium or metal selenide particles or coating occupy a weight fraction of at least 80%” (claim 2) and “said selenium or metal selenide particles or coating occupy a weight fraction of at least 90%.”
Regarding claims 4-5, He as modified teaches the cathode of claim 1, wherein He teaches said Se is nano-scaled powder or coating of Se, with a dimension of 2-10 nm, as a particle diameter or as a coating thickness, as provided supra, severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “said selenium or metal selenide particles or coating have a thickness or diameter smaller than 10 nm” (claim 4) and “said selenium or metal selenide particles or coating have a thickness or diameter smaller than 5 nm” (claim 5).
Regarding claim 6, He as modified teaches the cathode of claim 1, wherein He teaches the amount of the powder or coating of Se is in the range of 70% to 95% by weight of said active material and network, preferably no less than 80% by weight; and, said Se is nano-scaled powder or coating of Se, with a dimension of 2-10 nm, as a particle diameter or as a coating thickness, as provided supra, severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “said selenium or metal selenide particles or coating occupy a weight fraction of at least 70% and have a thickness or diameter smaller than 10 nm.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicants allege the art does not teach the newly amended limitation.
In response, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicants’ disclosure.
Liu et al (Liu et al, Porous Carbon Composites for Next Generation Rechargeable Lithium Batteries (2017));
Lai et al (Lai et al, Metal-organic frameworks-derived mesoporous carbon for high performance lithium–selenium battery (2014));
Luo et al (Luo et al, Selenium@Mesoporous Carbon Composite with Superior Lithium and Sodium Storage Capacity (2013));
Yang et al (Yang et al, An Advanced Selenium–Carbon Cathode for Rechargeable Lithium–Selenium Batteries (2013));
He et al (US 2019/0312311);
Guo et al (US 2019/0280285);
Mitlin et al (US 2019/0097275);
Xue et al (US 2018/0090751);
Eissler et al (US 2017/0301914);
Zhamu et al (US 2017/0077546);
Zhamu et al (US 2016/0344035);
Zhamu et al (US 2016/0344010);
He et al (US 2016/0308208);
He et al (US 2016/0240841);
He et al (US 2016/0240840);
Guo et al (CN 103700820);
Fan et al (CN 103825000); and,
Guo et al (CN 103178246).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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-THOMPSON 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723