DETAILED ACTION
Claims 60-71 and 74-86 are presented, wherein claims 60 and 86 are currently amended; claims 65-71, 74, and 76-85 and the subject matter of Species A.2-7, B.2-7 (including e.g. claims 70-71), C.2-6 (including e.g. claims 65-71 and 74), and D.2-5 are withdrawn; plus, claim 86 is newly added. Claims 1-59 and 72-73 are cancelled.
The objection to claim 86 is withdrawn, as a result of the amendment to said claim.
The 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection of claims 60-64, 75, and 86 I withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 60, from which the other claims depend.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 60-64, 75, and 86 over Adams is withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 60, from which the other claims depend.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 60-64, 75, and 86 over Jones is withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 60, from which the other claims depend.
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 (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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 60-64, 75, and claim 86 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Xiao et al (WO 2017/083633, published May 17, 2017, citations to US 2018/0323417).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 60, Xiao teaches an improved microporous membrane, which may be used as a battery separator membrane,
said microporous membrane may comprise one or more co-extruded “multi-layer membranes” (also annotated as “M”) of like polymers or co-polymers that may be laminated to other co-extruded multi-layer membranes (“M”),
wherein said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” (“PP” being polypropylene) that are composed of—for example—“PP/PP” and “PP homopolymer/PP homopolymer,” such as two coextruded microlayers,
wherein identical or similar PP homopolymers, copolymers, molecular weights, blends, mixtures, or the like layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes, may be used in many different combinations and subcombinations to form layers, sub-layers, membranes, or sub-membranes,
wherein additives, agents, fillers, and/or particles may be added or used and may form layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes; or, blends, mixtures, and/or the like thereof, used in combination with one or more PP layers or membranes,
wherein said separator may include “3 or more layers of individual coextruded microlayers or nanolayers,”
wherein said microlayers or nanolayers may include various additives in one or more layers; or, additives may be applied to outside microlayers to affect surface characteristics, examples including calcium stearate, lithium stearate, and/or siloxane,
wherein a total thickness of said separator may be less than “about 30 µm,”
wherein an outer polymer surface or layer composed of PP “with a higher molecular weight (MW)…may have improved puncture strength,”
wherein said microporous membrane “may surprisingly exhibit increased strength performance…when compared to known battery separators of the same (or greater) thickness…and also may exhibit improved Gurley as well as other improvements, such as improved puncture strength and so forth,”
wherein some relevant portions of the specification are reproduced below for ease of reference:
[0013] Also, identical, similar, distinct, or different PP or PE or PE+PP polymers, homopolymers, copolymers, molecular weights, blends, mixtures, co-polymers, or the like layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes, may be used in many different combinations and subcombinations to form layers, sub-layers, membranes, or sub-membranes. For example, identical, similar, distinct, or different molecular weight PP, PE, and/or PP+PE polymers, homopolymers, co-polymers, multi-polymers, blends, mixtures, and/or the like may be used in each layer or membrane or in each individual layer, microlayer, nanolayer, or membrane. As such, constructions may include various combinations and subcombinations of PP, PE, PP+PE, PP1, PP2, PP3, PE1, PE2, PE3, PP1+PP2, PE1+PE2, PP1+PP2+PP3, PE1+PE2+PE3, PP1+PP2+PE, PP+PE1+PE2, PP1/PP2, PP1/PP2/PP1, PE1/PE2, PE1/PE2/PP1, PE1/PE2/PE3, PP1+PE/PP2, or other combinations or constructions. For example, inventive membrane or separator properties can be improved, modified or optimized by, for example, adjusting the outer layer or membrane surface by using a particular polymer, blend, molecular weight polymer, and/or the like in just the outer layer or membrane surface. As a non-limiting example, an outer PE or PP+PE surface or layer may have improved pin removal (lower COF), a higher molecular weight (MW) polymer surface or layer (PP or PE) may have improved puncture strength, a PP or PP+PE surface or layer may have improved oxidation resistance, expensive raw materials (expensive polymers) can be used in limited layers to reduce cost, and/or the like. Further, although it may be preferred that each of the layers or microlayers or nanolayers be polyolefin (PO) such as PP or PE or PE+PP blends, mixtures, co-polymers, or the like, it is contemplated that other polymers (PY), additives, agents, materials, fillers, and/or particles (M), and/or the like may be added or used and may form layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes such as different outer or surface layers that may be used in combination with one or more PP or PE or PE+PP layers or membranes, and that coatings (CT) or nonwovens (NW) may be added.
…
[0015] In one embodiment of the invention, a multi-layer membrane may be extruded in the form of a PE homopolymer/PE homopolymer, or PP homopolymer/PP homopolymer, or one or more layers of such a multi-layer membrane may include a blend of two polymers, such as a blend of PEs/homopolymer PE, and so forth.
[0016] The microlayer membrane precursors may be bonded together via lamination or adhesion. The possibly preferred battery separators described herein may exhibit a total thickness of less than about 30 μm, less than about 25 μm, less than about 20 μm, less than about 16 μm, less than about 15 μm, less than about 14 μm, or less than about 10 μm, less than about 9 μm, less than about 8 μm, or less than about 6 μm (depending on the number of layers) and may surprisingly exhibit increased strength performance, as defined by reduced splittiness or reduced propensity to split, when compared to known battery separators of the same (or greater) thickness, especially when compared to known dry process battery separators of the same (or greater) thickness. The improvement in splitting or splittiness may be quantified by a test method disclosed herein as Composite Splittiness Index (CSI) and the novel or improved separators described herein may have an improvement in the CSI, and also may exhibit improved Gurley as well as other improvements, such as improved puncture strength and so forth.
…[0051] In accordance with at least selected embodiments, aspects or objects, the present application or invention may be directed to: a battery separator or separator membrane that comprises one or more co-extruded multi-layer membranes laminated or adhered to another polymer membrane and/or to another co-extruded multi-layer membrane, and/or such separators that may provide improved strength, for example, improved puncture strength, particularly at a certain thickness, and/or may exhibit improved shutdown and/or a reduced propensity to split.…
[0053] In accordance with at least certain embodiments, aspects or objects, the present application or invention may be directed to: a battery separator or separator membrane that comprises one or more co-extruded multi-layer microlayer and/or nanolayer membranes co-extruded, laminated or adhered to another polymer membrane and/or to another co-extruded multi-layer membrane, and/or such separators that may provide improved strength, for example, improved puncture strength, particularly at a certain thickness, and/or may exhibit improved shutdown and/or a reduced propensity to split.
…[0061] In accordance with at least selected embodiments, a battery separator or separator membrane comprises one or more co-extruded multi-microlayer membranes optionally laminated or adhered to another polymer membrane. The separators described herein may provide improved strength, for example, improved puncture strength, particularly at a certain thickness, and may exhibit improved shutdown and/or a reduced propensity to split.
(e.g. ¶¶ 0009-13, 15-16, 23, 50-51, and 53, emphasis added), reading on “microporous membrane,” said microporous membrane comprising:
said microporous membrane may comprise one or more co-extruded “multi-layer membranes” (also annotated as “M”) of like polymers or co-polymers that may be laminated to other co-extruded multi-layer membranes (“M”),
wherein said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” (“PP” being polypropylene) that are composed of—for example—“PP/PP” and “PP homopolymer/PP homopolymer,” such as two coextruded microlayers,
wherein identical or similar PP homopolymers, copolymers, molecular weights, blends, mixtures, or the like layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes, may be used in many different combinations and subcombinations to form layers, sub-layers, membranes, or sub-membranes
(e.g. supra), noting the scope of the teaching of said one or more co-extruded multi-layer membranes M laminated to other co-extruded multi-layer membranes M includes four co-extruded multi-layer membranes M, each co-extruded multi-layer membrane M directly laminated to its adjacent co-extruded multi-layer membranes M;
noting that in a laminate of four such membranes, the first and fourth M membranes correspond with the claimed “outer layers” and the second and third M membranes correspond with the claimed “two…inner layers,”
severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitations, “two outer layers” and “two or more inner layers,” see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on the limitation “two outer layers, each outer layer comprising a polyolefin;” and, the previously amended limitations “two or more inner layers, each inner layer comprising a polyolefin” and “each of the outer layers is laminated to an inner layer and each of the inner layers is laminated to at least one other inner layer,”
wherein the scope of the teaching of said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” includes two microlayers or nanolayers of PP, establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on the newly amended, previously added limitation “each inner layer and each outer layer comprises at least two co-extruded sublayers.”
Regarding the previously added limitation “the microporous membrane exhibits a puncture strength increase compared to a membrane having the same structure but not having at least two lamination interfaces,” Xiao teaches said microporous membrane “may surprisingly exhibit increased strength performance…when compared to known battery separators of the same (or greater) thickness…and also may exhibit improved Gurley as well as other improvements, such as improved puncture strength and so forth,” wherein
said microporous membrane may comprise one or more co-extruded “multi-layer membranes” (also annotated as “M”) of like polymers or co-polymers that may be laminated to other co-extruded multi-layer membranes,
wherein said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” (“PP” being polypropylene) that are composed of—for example—“PP/PP” and “PP homopolymer/PP homopolymer,” such as two coextruded microlayers,
wherein identical or similar PP homopolymers, copolymers, molecular weights, blends, mixtures, or the like layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes, may be used in many different combinations and subcombinations to form layers, sub-layers, membranes, or sub-membranes,
wherein additives, agents, fillers, and/or particles may be added or used and may form layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes; or, blends, mixtures, and/or the like thereof, used in combination with one or more PP layers or membranes,
wherein said separator may include “3 or more layers of individual coextruded microlayers or nanolayers,”
wherein said microlayers or nanolayers may include various additives in one or more layers; or, additives may be applied to outside microlayers to affect surface characteristics, examples including calcium stearate, lithium stearate, and/or siloxane,
wherein a total thickness of said separator may be less than “about 30 µm,”
wherein an outer polymer surface or layer composed of PP “with a higher molecular weight (MW)…may have improved puncture strength”
(e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach said previously added limitation “the microporous membrane exhibits a puncture strength increase compared to a membrane having the same structure but not having at least two lamination interfaces.”
However, Xiao teaches a substantially identical microporous membrane (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0033, 53, 67, 114, and 154), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitation, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01; and/or, the teaching of said co-extruded multi-layer membranes M laminated to other co-extruded multi-layer membranes M improving puncture strength reads on the claimed relative relationship “exhibits a puncture strength increase compared to”—or alternatively is sufficiently close to said claimed relative relationship to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed relative relationship, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claims 61-63, Xiao teaches the microporous membrane of claim 60, wherein said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” (“PP” being polypropylene) that are composed of—for example—“PP/PP” and “PP homopolymer/PP homopolymer,” such as two coextruded microlayers, wherein identical or similar PP homopolymers, copolymers, molecular weights, blends, mixtures, or the like layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes, may be used in many different combinations and subcombinations to form layers, sub-layers, membranes, or sub-membranes (e.g. supra), reading on “the each of the outer layers comprises a polypropylene…” (claim 61), “each outer layer comprises a polypropylene…” (claim 62), and “the each of the plurality of inner layers comprises a polypropylene…” (claim 63).
Regarding claim 64, Xiao teaches the microporous membrane of claim 60, wherein the scope of the teaching of said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” includes two microlayers or nanolayers of PP, reading on “there are two…inner layers.”
Regarding previously amended, previously added claim 75, Xiao teaches the microporous membrane of claim 60, wherein said microporous membrane “may surprisingly exhibit increased strength performance…when compared to known battery separators of the same (or greater) thickness…and also may exhibit improved Gurley as well as other improvements, such as improved puncture strength and so forth,” wherein
said microporous membrane may comprise one or more co-extruded “multi-layer membranes” (also annotated as “M”) of like polymers or co-polymers that may be laminated to other co-extruded multi-layer membranes,
wherein said “multi-layer membranes” (“M”) may be “made up of one or more microlayers or nanolayers of PP” (“PP” being polypropylene) that are composed of—for example—“PP/PP” and “PP homopolymer/PP homopolymer,” such as two coextruded microlayers,
wherein identical or similar PP homopolymers, copolymers, molecular weights, blends, mixtures, or the like layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes, may be used in many different combinations and subcombinations to form layers, sub-layers, membranes, or sub-membranes,
wherein additives, agents, fillers, and/or particles may be added or used and may form layers, microlayers, nanolayers, or membranes; or, blends, mixtures, and/or the like thereof, used in combination with one or more PP layers or membranes,
wherein said separator may include “3 or more layers of individual coextruded microlayers or nanolayers,”
wherein said microlayers or nanolayers may include various additives in one or more layers; or, additives may be applied to outside microlayers to affect surface characteristics, examples including calcium stearate, lithium stearate, and/or siloxane,
wherein a total thickness of said separator may be less than “about 30 µm,”
wherein an outer polymer surface or layer composed of PP “with a higher molecular weight (MW)…may have improved puncture strength”
(e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitations “the membrane has an increased or improved elasticity at or above 150° C. compared to a PP/PE/PP tri-layer microporous membrane having the same thickness, Gurley, porosity, and/or layer composition make-up as the membrane; the membrane has an increased or improved puncture resistance compared to a PP/PE/PP tri-layer microporous membrane having the same thickness, Gurley, porosity, and/or layer composition make-up as the membrane; the membrane has an increased or improved machine direction tensile at break compared to a PP/PE/PP tri-layer microporous membrane having the same thickness, Gurley, porosity, and/or layer composition make-up as the membrane; and the membrane has an increased or improved TD elongation compared to a PP/PE/PP tri-layer microporous membrane having the same thickness, Gurley, porosity, and/or layer composition make-up as the membrane.”
However, Xiao teaches a substantially identical microporous membrane (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0016, 33, 89, 94-96, 114, and 118), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01
Regarding previously added claim 86, Xiao teaches the microporous membrane of claim 60, wherein said microlayers or nanolayers may include various additives in one or more layers; or, additives may be applied to outside microlayers to affect surface characteristics, examples including calcium stearate, lithium stearate, and/or siloxane (e.g. supra), reading on “the membrane further comprises an additive, wherein the additive comprises a functionalized polymer, an ionomer, a cellulose nanofiber, an inorganic particle, a lubricating agent, a nucleating agent, a cavitation promoter, a fluoropolymer, a cross-linker, a x-ray detectable material, a polymer processing agent, a high temperature melt index (HTMi) polymer, an electrolyte additive, an energy dissipative non-miscible additive, or any combination thereof” (compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0052, 73-77, and 165); and/or,
said total thickness of said separator may be less than “about 30 µm” (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 244.05(I), reading on “the microporous membrane has a maximum average thickness ranging from 1 to 50 microns;” and/or,
the process limitations “the membrane has been machine direction stretched;” “the membrane has been transverse direction stretched;” “the membrane has been machine direction stretched and transverse direction stretched;” and/or “the microporous membrane has been transverse direction stretched and calendered” severably do not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, noting that the taught membrane is “microporous,” compared with the teachings in the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0013, 21, 94-96, and 123, see further e.g. MPEP § 2113;” plus, the process limitation “the membrane has been…calendered” does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see also instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0094-97, 118-120, and 124.
Xiao reading on “the microporous membrane has a maximum average thickness ranging from 1 to 50 microns; each layer comprises a maximum average thickness of 33%, 32%, 31%, 30%, 29%, 28%, or less than 28% of a total average thickness of the membrane; the membrane has been machine direction stretched; the membrane has been transverse direction stretched; the membrane has been machine direction stretched and transverse direction stretched; the microporous membrane has been transverse direction stretched and calendered; the membrane further comprises an additive, wherein the additive comprises a functionalized polymer, an ionomer, a cellulose nanofiber, an inorganic particle, a lubricating agent, a nucleating agent, a cavitation promoter, a fluoropolymer, a cross-linker, a x-ray detectable material, a polymer processing agent, a high temperature melt index (HTMi) polymer, an electrolyte additive, an energy dissipative non-miscible additive, or any combination thereof; or the membrane further comprises an additive, wherein the additive is a coating on the first outer layer, the second outer layer, or both the first and second layers.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 60-64, 75, and claim 86 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sakimoto et al (US 2018/0294455);
Song et al (US 2018/0043656);
Stokes et al (US 2017/0084898);
Zhang et al (US 2017/0033346);
Kikuchi et al (US 2016/0329609);
Adams, et al (US 2016/0329541);
Li et a (US 2016/0011127);
Humiston et al (US 2015/0266064);
Wei et al (US 2014/0287322);
Rhee et al (US 2012/0301698);
Okamoto (US 2012/0148901);
Zhang et al (US 2011/0223486);
Brant et al (US 2011/0206973);
Rhee et al (US 2011/0104468);
Rhee et al (US 2011/0064929);
Kikuchi et al (US 2009/0098450);
Kono et al (US 2008/0057389);
Masuda et al (US 2007/0178324);
Jones et al (US 2003/0035943);
Callahan (US 6602593); and,
Yu (US 6080507).
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