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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/17/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 has overcome the objection set forth in the previous Office Action.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Youssry.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiang (US 2018/0175428 A1; cited in the IDS filed 06/13/2022) in view of Kawasaki (US 2012/0258363 A1) and Lewis (WO 2016/153886 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chiang discloses a semi-solid electrode (cathode or anode, [0029]), comprising: about 35% to about 75% by volume of an active material ([0029]); about 0.5% to about 2% by volume of a conductive material (overlapping ranges of about 0% to about 10% by volume for a semi-solid anode and about 0.5% to about 8% by volume for a semi-solid cathode, [0029]); and wherein the active material and the conductive material are mixed with a non-aqueous electrolyte to form the semi-solid electrode ([0029]), and the semi-solid electrode has a conductivity of at least about 30 mS/cm (overlapping range of at least 10 mS/cm, [0130]).
Chiang teaches that the conductive material may comprise a combination of any kind of conductive material, including conductive carbon ([0057]), but does not disclose an embodiment wherein the semi-solid electrode comprises about 1% to about 5% by volume of a carbon additive, the carbon additive different from the conductive material; the active material, the conductive material, and the carbon additive are mixed with a non-aqueous electrolyte to form the semi-solid electrode; a volume ratio of the carbon additive to the conductive material in the semi-solid electrode is at least about 2.0; and the semi-solid electrode has a yield stress of no more than about 100 kPa.
Kawasaki teaches an electrode comprising a conductive material (carbon black, [0024]) and a carbon additive (fibrous carbon, [0024]) different from the conductive material; and a weight ratio of the carbon additive to the conductive material in the semi-solid electrode is at least about 2.0 (overlapping range of 2.3:1 to 0.05:1, [0042]).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the electrode of Chiang by adding a carbon additive, the carbon additive different from the conductive material, wherein the carbon additive is mixed with the other electrode components to form the semi-solid electrode because Kawasaki teaches that a pre-formed combination of fibrous carbon and carbon black can disperse well in the electrode, yielding high and stable conductivity ([0030]). Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the electrode of Chiang by optimizing the volume ratio of the carbon additive to the conductive material because Kawasaki teaches that the ratio of the carbon additive (fibrous carbon) to the conductive material (carbon black) should be high enough for the carbon additive to form a conductive network but not so high as to reduce a buffering effect of the conductive material ([0042]). In doing so, said artisan would arrive at a composition including about 1% to about 5% by volume of a carbon additive because the densities of carbon black and carbon fibers are substantially similar (see remarks filed 05/19/2025).
Lewis teaches that the yield stress of a semi-solid electrode results from the formation of a percolating conductive network ([0002],[0055]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode of Chiang in view of Lewis by optimizing the yield stress of the electrode, including to a range corresponding to “no more than about 100 kPa,” because Lewis teaches that semi-solid electrodes with a high yield stress have increased electronic conductivity but require increased pumping pressure ([0055]).
Regarding claim 2, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis teaches wherein the carbon additive includes at least one of carbon nanofibers, vapor-grown carbon fibers, or carbon nanotubes (Kawasaki: [0037]).
Regarding claim 5, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis teaches wherein the semi-solid electrode has a conductivity of at least about 100 mS/cm given that there is no distinction between the structure of the instant claims and the prior art [MPEP § 2112.01].
Regarding claim 6, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis teaches wherein the semi-solid electrode has a conductivity of at least about 130 mS/cm given that there is no distinction between the structure of the instant claims and the prior art [MPEP § 2112.01].
Regarding claim 7, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis teaches wherein the semi-solid electrode has a thickness between about 120 µm and about 2,000 µm (Chiang: 250 µm to 2500 µm, [0028]).
Regarding claim 8, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis teaches wherein the conductive material comprises at least one of carbon black, vapor-grown carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, or carbon nanofiber (Chiang: [0057], carbon black in example embodiment, [0160]).
Regarding claim 9, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis does not disclose an embodiment wherein the conductive material further comprises at least one of a metal, a metal carbide, a metal nitride, a metal oxide, an allotrope of carbon, carbon black, graphitic carbon, carbon fibers, carbon microfibers, vapor-grown carbon fibers (VGCF), fullerenic carbons, "buckyballs", carbon nanotubes (CNT's), multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWNT's), single wall carbon nanotubes (SWNT's), graphene sheets, aggregates of graphene sheets, materials comprising fullerenic fragments, electronically insulating organic redox compounds rendered electronically active by mixing or blending with an electronically conductive polymer, polyaniline based conductive polymers, polyacetylene based conductive polymers, poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT), polypyrrole, polythiophene, poly(p- phenylene), poly(triphenylene), polyazulene, polyfluorene, polynaphtalene, polyanthracene, polyfuran, polycarbazole, tetrathiafulvalene-substituted polystyrene, ferrocene-substituted polyethylene, carbazole-substituted polyethylene, polyoxyphenazine, polyacenes, or poly(heteroacenes).
However, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the semi-solid electrode of Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis by adding “electronically insulating organic redox compounds rendered electronically active by mixing or blending with an electronically conductive polymer, polyaniline based conductive polymers, polyacetylene based conductive polymers, poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT), polypyrrole, polythiophene, poly(p- phenylene), poly(triphenylene), polyazulene, polyfluorene, polynaphtalene, polyanthracene, polyfuran, polycarbazole, tetrathiafulvalene-substituted polystyrene, ferrocene-substituted polyethylene, carbazole-substituted polyethylene, polyoxyphenazine, polyacenes, or poly(heteroacenes)” to the conductive material because Chiang teaches these materials may reduce undesirable side reactions during battery operation ([0122]).
Regarding claim 10, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis teaches wherein the carbon additive comprises vapor-grown carbon fibers (Chiang: [0057], Kawasaki: [0037]).
Regarding claim 11, Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis does not disclose a specific embodiment wherein the carbon additive further comprises at least one of carbon nanofibers, carbon nanotubes, single-walled carbon nanotubes, or multi-walled carbon nanotubes. However, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have added at least one of carbon nanofibers, carbon nanotubes, single-walled carbon nanotubes, carbon black, or multi-walled carbon nanotubes to the semi-solid electrode of Chiang in view of Kawasaki and Lewis because Chiang teaches that the electrode may comprise a combination of carbon materials including those claimed ([0057],[0059]) and Kawasaki teaches that the fibrous carbon corresponding to the carbon additive may be formed of carbon nanofibers or carbon nanotubes ([0037]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE C. DISNEY whose telephone number is (703)756-1076. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 MT.
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.
/C.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723