CONDUCTING POLYMER NETWORK-ENABLED PARTICULATES OF ANODE ACTIVE MATERIAL PARTICLES FOR LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES

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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 7/06/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of amended claim(s) 1-2 under Zhamu and Liu have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Zhamu and the new prior art of Yushin et al. (US 2020/0235420 A1, hereafter Yushin) as necessitated by the amended claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-2, 5-9, 11, 15-21, and 23-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhamu (US 2012/0064409, hereafter Zhamu) in view of Yushin et al. (US 2020/0235420 A1, hereafter Yushin). With respect to claim 1, Zhamu teaches a nano graphene-enhanced particulate for use as a lithium-ion battery anode active material comprising fine active particles (which are claimed primary particles) which are mutually bonded [encapsulate/embrace] into an agglomerated particle [0039; figure 7]. The anode active material particles may have a dimension smaller than 1m [0048], which falls below the range of 20m, and one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the particle to have a size larger than 0.5nm thereby falling within the range with sufficient specificity. The anode active material may be lithium-containing titanium oxide [0041-0047]. The matrix material used to coat the active particles may be a sol gel graphite [0011] which may be a polymeric carbon [0050] which forms a core particle. The binder (matrix) used with the active material particles is a conductive binder [0015]. The particles may further have a graphite coating to form additional protection, which could be made from the graphene sheets [0071] which would form an exterior shell coating. Figure 7 depicts interior and exterior graphene sheets (dark lines) and Zhamu further teaches internal and external graphene sheets as they embrace the particles in and around the primary and secondary particles formed [0076]. The plurality of graphene sheets have a thickness of less than 100 nm [0014] which is less than 10m and one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the sheet to have a size larger than 0.5nm thereby falling within the range with sufficient specificity. Zhamu teaches a gel matrix material and teaches conductive binders are preferred [0011] but fails to teach the polymers of the instant claims. However, in the same field of endeavor Yushin teaches an electrode material including poly(heptadiyne) and poly(paraphenylene vinylene) as conducting polymers [0011, 0023-0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the conducting polymer such as the poly(heptadiyne) and poly(paraphenylene vinylene) of Yushin with the particulates of Zhamu for the benefit of increased electronic conductivity [Yushin 0200]. With respect to claim 2, Zhamu teaches a nano graphene-enhanced particulate for use as a lithium-ion battery anode active material comprising graphene sheets [which reads on the internal graphene sheets] and fine active particles (which are claimed primary particles) which are mutually bonded [embedded] into an agglomerated particle (PP 0039; figure 7). The particles may further have a graphite coating to form additional protection (encapsulation), which could be made from the graphene sheets (PP 0071) which would form an exterior shell coating. Figure 7 depicts interior and exterior graphene sheets (dark lines) and Zhamu further teaches internal and external graphene sheets as they embrace the particles in and around the primary and secondary particles formed (PP 0076). Zhamu teaches a gel matrix material [0011] fails to teach the polymers of the instant claims. However, in the same field of endeavor Yushin teaches an electrode material including poly(heptadiyne) and poly(paraphenylene vinylene) as conducting polymers [0011, 0023-0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the conducting polymer such as the poly(heptadiyne) and poly(paraphenylene vinylene) of Yushin with the particulates of Zhamu for the benefit of increased electronic conductivity [Yushin 0200]. With respect to claim 5, the graphene may be pristine graphene instead of graphene oxide [0055]. With respect to claim 6, the graphene may be pristine graphene instead of graphene oxide [0055]. With respect to claim 7, the graphene sheets may be formed by chemical vapor deposition (CVD) [0050]. With respect to claim 8, the graphene sheets are bonded to the particles [0071] through covalent or van de Walls bonds [0072] which are chemical bonds. With respect to claim 9, graphene sheets (which reads on the graphene sheets) may be mutually bonded (encapsulate/embrace) into an agglomerated particle with the fine active particles (which are claimed primary particles) [0039; figure 7]. With respect to claim 11, The anode active material may be lithium-containing titanium oxide [0041-0047]. With respect to claim 15, the anode active particles have a size smaller than 100 nm [0039]. With respect to claim 16, the anode active particles have a size smaller than 100 nm [0039]. With respect to claim 17, the anode active materials are mutually bonded to the graphene sheets [0039], which one of ordinary skill in the art would expect to result in an active material particle coating with a graphene layer. With respect to claim 18, the anode active materials are mutually bonded to the graphene sheets [0039], which one of ordinary skill in the art would expect to result in an active material particle coating with a graphene layer. With respect to claim 21, the particles may include LiF [0080]. With respect to claim 23, the particles may be formed in a powder [0123]. With respect to claim 24, the particles may be formed in a powder [0123]. With respect to claim 25, the anode active material may be used as an anode [0002]. With respect to claim 26, the anode active material may be used as an anode [0002]. With respect to claim 27, the anode active material may be used as an anode in a lithium-ion battery [0002]. With respect to claim 28, the anode active material may be used as an anode in a lithium-ion battery [0002]. Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhamu and Yushin as applied to claims 1-2, 5-9, 11, 15-19, 21, and 23-28 above, and further in view of Park et al. (US 2015/0147655 A1, hereafter Park). With respect to claim 19, modified Zhamu teaches the particles as discussed above, wherein Zhamu teaches the particles may include LiF to promote catalytic growth [0080], which reads on the lithium ion-conducting additive. Zhamu is silent to the amount of LiF used in the particles, however in the same field of endeavor, Park teaches the use of 0.1 to 0.5 weight percent LiF (which falls within and renders the claimed range obvious, see MPEP 2144.05) [0056]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to try the amount of LiF taught by Park with the particles of Zhamu for the benefit of minimizing lithium impurities [Park 0056-0057]. With respect to claim 20, Zhamu teaches the particles as discussed above, wherein the particles may include LiF to promote catalytic growth [0080], which reads on the lithium ion-conducting additive. Zhamu is silent to the amount of LiF used in the particles, however in the same field of endeavor, Park teaches the use of 0.1 to 0.5 weight percent LiF (which falls within and renders the claimed range obvious, see MPEP 2144.05) [0056]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to try the amount of LiF taught by Park with the particles of Zhamu for the benefit of minimizing lithium impurities [Park 0056-0057]. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhamu and Yushin as applied to claims 1-2, 5-9, 11, 15-19, 21, and 23-28 above, and further in view of Abe (US 2014/0242458, hereafter Abe). With regard to claim 22, modified Zhamu teaches the particulates as discussed above, but fail to teach the additives of the instant claim. Abe teaches a negative electrode active material for a lithium battery which may comprise an additive, such as lithium bis(oxalate)borate which add elasticity to the active material layer [0045]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use lithium bis(oxalate)borate as an additive in the anode active material particles of modified Zhamu for the benefit of enhancing battery characteristics after repeated charges discharges [Abe 0045]. Conclusion 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 BRENT C THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)270-7737. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible schedule, typical hours 11-7 M-F. 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)270-5256. 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. /BRENT C THOMAS/Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724