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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/10/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7, 9, and 11-12 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.
Specifically, the charging and discharging feature is made obvious by Ogihara, as presented in the rejection below.
Additionally, the applicant has presented an argument of unexpected results, based on a comparison of their example 1 and their additional comparative example, asserting that the example demonstrates 13% greater capacity retention than the additional comparative example, with the only difference between the two examples being that example 1 comprises a second charging/discharging step, whereas the additional comparative example does not comprise a second charging/discharging step.
Here, the applicant asserts that the claimed invention is commensurate in scope with example 1. Specifically, the applicant asserts that claim 1 has been amended to specify Si as the silicon-based active material, as well as specifying amounts of active material, conductive material, and binder.
Based on this amendment, as well as further review of statements made in the affidavit submitted on November 20, 2025, example 1 remains non-commensurate in scope with the claimed invention, in the manner required by MPEP section 716.02(d), which recites “In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occur over the entire claimed range. In re Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980)”).
Here, the applicant has noted that the sole difference between example 1 and the additional comparative example is the inclusion of the second charge/discharge step. This is sufficient for the closest prior art comparison requirement in regards to an argument of unexpected results, but it is not sufficient to satisfy the commensurate in scope requirement, which compares the example to the claims.
Here, the commensurate in scope requirement requires that "objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support." (MPEP 716.02(d). The applicant has submitted in their arguments of 12/10/2025 that the claims and example 1 are commensurate in scope following the amendments of 12/10/2025. However, the applicant’s arguments cannot be considered evidence as per MPEP section 716.01(c)(II) “Arguments presented by the applicant cannot take the place of evidence in the record. In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965) and In re De Blauwe, 736 F.2d 699, 705, 222 USPQ 191, 196 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Examples of statements which are not evidence and which must be supported by an appropriate affidavit or declaration include statements regarding unexpected results, commercial success, solution of a long-felt need, inoperability of the prior art, invention before the date of the reference, and allegations that the author(s) of the prior art derived the disclosed subject matter from the inventor or at least one joint inventor.”
Accordingly, the applicant’s assertion that example 1 and claim 1 are commensurate in scope is not sufficient as evidence to overcome the differences between the claim 1 and example 1. Specifically, Example 1 requires a negative electrode slurry made from a silicon-based active material Si with an average particle diameter of 3 microns, with carbon black as a conductive material, and a mixture of polyvinyl alcohol and polyacrylic acid at a 66:34 weight ratio as a binder, mixed at a weight ratio of 75:10:25, mixed with water where solid content is 25 weight percent of the slurry. In comparison, the amended claim 1 requires that the negative electrode active material is a silicon based active material Si, which is present in an amount of 60-90 weight percent in the active material layer, a binder which is present in 5-30 weight percent, and a conductive material that is present in 5-20 weight percent. Here, where the negative electrode active material requires a specific particle diameter, no evidence has been submitted to indicate that the unexpected results would be applicable at all particle diameters, as is claimed. Additionally, where specific binder compositions are specified for the example, no evidence has been presented to indicate that the unexpected results would be applicable with all possible binder compositions. The same lack of evidence is present in regards to the identity of the conductive material, the specific mixing ratio of the active material, conductive material, and binder, and the amount of water which is included.
Additionally, in regard to the commensurateness in scope requirement, example 1 makes use of a copper current collector with an area density of 58.4mg/25 cm2 of active material, which is roll-pressed and dried in a vacuum oven at 130 degrees Celsius for 10 hours. The claims do not specify these requirements, and no evidence has been presented regarding the expectation of the unexpected results being present regardless of variation of these properties. Additionally, example 1 specifies a specific positive electrode, comprising LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2, carbon black as a conductive material, and PVdF as a binder at a weight ratio of 97:1.5:1.5, applied to an aluminum current collector at an area density of 459.4 mg/25 cm2. In comparison, claim 1 recites only “a positive electrode facing the negative electrode”.
The same is applicable for the separator feature of claim 1, which recites “a separator interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode”, whereas example 1 specifies a 17.5 micron thickness ethylene/propylene/ethylene tri-layered separator.
Further, the electrolyte feature of claim 1 is recited as “an electrolyte solution”, whereas example 1 requires a 1M solution of LiPF6 mixed with a 3 weight percent of vinylene carbonate with a 3-:70 volume ratio of fluoroethylene carbonate and diethyl carbonate, which is impregnated at a temperature of 25 degrees Celsius for a period of 24 hours. In comparison, claim 1 recites “impregnating the electrode assembly by injecting an electrolyte solution into the electrode assembly to form an impregnated electrode assembly”.
Further, example 1 undergoes three cycles of charging and discharging at 25 degrees Celsius as an activation step, whereas claim 1 requires at least 1 cycle of charging and discharging, without specification of the assembly’s temperature.
Additionally, example 1 undergoes a standing at a temperature of 60 degrees Celsius for a period of 24 hours, whereas claim 1 requires a temperature ranging from 40 to 80 degrees Celsius.
Additionally, example 1 undergoes a second cycle charging/discharging at a temperature of 25 degrees Celsius, at a pressure of 2.5 MPa, whereas claim 1 requires a temperature of 10 to 30 degrees Celsius, without specification of the system pressure.
For the reasons stated above, in the absence of evidence that the claimed invention is commensurate in scope with the claims, it is found that the claimed invention is not commensurate in scope with the claims.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (KR 20170033601 A1), in further view of Saito (JP 2017027727 A), Ogihara (US 20160308258 A1), and Ueno (US 20160268648).
Regarding Claim 1, Jeong is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a method for manufacturing a secondary battery (Abstract, “The present invention relates to a method for preparing a secondary battery,”), comprising forming an electrode assembly comprising a negative electrode comprising a silicon based active material (Abstract, “According to the present invention, provided is the method for preparing a secondary battery for capacity grading, which comprises: (i) a step of preparing an electrode assembly including a positive electrode, a negative electrode,”; Paragraph 0042, “Examples of such an anode active material include conductive polymers such as carbon, metal composite oxide, lithium metal, lithium alloy, silicon-based alloy, tin-based alloy, and polyacetylene; Li-Co-Ni-based materials, and silicon-based materials.”), as well as a positive electrode facing the negative electrode and a separator interposed between the negative electrode and the positive electrode (Paragraph 0074, “In the process (i), a stacked electrode assembly 30 is formed by laminating a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a separator interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and electrode tabs extending from the positive electrode and the negative electrode, .”).
Additionally, Jeong discloses structure wherein the silicon-based active material is Si (Paragraph 0042, “Examples of such an anode active material include conductive polymers such as carbon, metal composite oxide, lithium metal, lithium alloy, silicon-based alloy, tin-based alloy, and polyacetylene; Li-Co-Ni-based materials, and silicon-based materials.”), and Saito further discloses structure where their method additionally uses a silicon-based Si active material (Paragraph 0026, “Silicon-based materials, for example, a nano-silicon material. Nano Silicon material, and a silicon crystallites fluorine and nano-sized.”).
Additionally, Jeong discloses that their method includes impregnating the electrode assembly by injecting an electrolyte solution into the electrode assembly to form an impregnated electrode assembly (Paragraph 0045, “Next, in the step (ii), the electrode assembly is housed in a battery case, and after the electrolyte is injected, a formation process of applying a voltage and an aging process of leaving the electrode assembly at a constant temperature are performed.”). Jeong discloses structure such that the method includes impregnated electrode assembly by performing a first charging in at least one cycle (Paragraph 0048, “Such a primary activation process or a precharging process may include a first process of applying a voltage to a battery and may include aging at a constant SOC and temperature,”), so as to form an activated electrode assembly.
Additionally, Jeon is silent in regards to the charging and discharging process including a discharging step, and we therefore look to Ogihara, which is an analogous art to the instant application, being directed to the art of producing secondary batteries (Abstract, “A method for producing a lithium ion secondary battery”). Here, Ogihara discloses a secondary battery which comprises an electrode activation treatment which includes multiple charge-discharge cycles (Paragraph 0013, “According to the present invention, an activation treatment is carried out in a lithium ion secondary battery using a lithium-containing transition metal oxide represented by formula (1). In the first production method, charge-discharge is repeated multiple times, and discharge is carried out at a lower current density than the current density during charging, during each discharge of the multiple charges-discharges.”). Here, Ogihara discloses that this process allows for a more stable crystal structure, thereby suppressing deterioration of the battery (Paragraph 0013, “By activating a lithium ion secondary battery using these production methods, it is possible to increase the amount of lithium ions that return to the positive electrode active material even when using a solid solution positive electrode active material having Li.sub.2MnO.sub.3 as the parent structure, and to promote stabilization of the crystal structure. Accordingly, the surface structure of the positive electrode active material is stabilized, to thereby suppress deterioration of the battery. Therefore, it is possible to suppress deterioration of the battery even if a high-capacity battery is subjected to charge-discharge at high potential.”). Specifically, Ogihara discloses that their multiple charge-discharge activation process can allow for a stabilizing of the surface structure of the electrode active material, thereby relaxing the stress that results from crystal structure changes, and minimizing cracking (Paragraph 0077, “It is possible to create some leeway in time for relaxing the stress that accompanies crystal structure changes by such a battery activation step. In addition, it is possible to promote the arrangement of lithium atoms at prescribed sites in the crystal structure of the positive electrode active material by this battery activation step. Accordingly, it becomes possible to stabilize the surface structure of the positive electrode active material by carrying out the battery activation step.”). Further, Ogihara discloses that their method suppresses deterioration caused by repeated charge-discharge, allowing the formation of an SER while suppressing continuous electrolyte decomposition to prolong battery life (Paragraph 0081, “From this point of view, the present inventors have found an activation method that suppresses deterioration caused by repeating charge-discharge, and with which it is possible to form the SEI on the carbon material surface while suppressing continuous electrolyte decomposition, in order to prolong battery life.”).
Based on these benefits, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to make use of the activation method of Ogihara, which comprises multiple charge-discharge cycles (Paragraph 0084, “As shown, multiple charge-discharge intervals are provided in the present embodiment as a means of activation.”), thereby reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant chain which requires activating the impregnated electrode assembly by performing a first charging and discharging in at least one cycle.
Additionally, Jeong is silent in regards to the first charging/discharging being performed while pressurizing the impregnated electrode assembly. Therefore, we look to Saito, which is an analogous art to the instant application.
Here, Saito discloses a manufacturing method for lithium ion secondary batteries (Abstract, “A method of manufacturing the lithium ion secondary battery 1 includes: an initial charge/discharge step of performing initial charging/discharging of the lithium ion secondary battery 1;”), which comprises setting a pressure of the environment during the battery formation process, to 2 MPA (Paragraph 0008, “In this manufacturing method, by setting the maximum value of the surface pressure received by the case by the load added by the load application step and more than 2 MPa,”), so as to minimize lithium deposition and electrode wrinkling during the charging and discharging steps of the battery manufacturing method (Paragraph 0008, “Therefore, in this manufacturing method, it is possible to suppress the occurrence of lithium deposition and electrode wrinkles at the time of initial charging and discharging.”). Accordingly, based on this benefit, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to apply this methodology of Saito to the invention of Jeong, thereby making obvious a method in which the first charging/discharging is performed while pressurizing the impregnated electrode assembly to form an activated electrode assembly.
Additionally, Jeong discloses structure which comprises a step wherein the activated electrode assembly is allowed to stand at a temperature ranging from 40 to 80 degrees Celsius (Paragraph 0050, “Specifically, the aging process may include a high-temperature aging process performed at a temperature ranging from 50 ° C to 70 ° C for 0.5 to 1.5 days”). However, Jeong fails to disclose structure wherein the standing process occurs when the activated electrode assembly is charged to an SOC of 70% or higher, instead disclosing that the SOC of the aging step is within the range of 0% to 20% (Paragraph 0047, “Specifically, the step (ii) may be performed by setting the SOC to more than 0% and less than 20%, more specifically, setting the SOC to not less than 15% and not more than 20%.”).
Therefore, we look to Ueno, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a method for manufacturing a secondary battery (Abstract, “A manufacturing method for a non-aqueous secondary battery”) comprising forming an electrode assembly comprising a positive electrode, and a negative electrode (Abstract, “(a) Preparing an electrode body including a positive electrode having a positive electrode active material layer and a negative electrode having a negative electrode active material layer. (b) Constructing a battery assembly using the electrode body and a non-aqueous electrolyte.”), an initial activation charging/discharging step (Abstract, “(c) Initially charging the battery assembly.”), and a high temperature aging step (Abstract, “(d) Aging the battery assembly at a temperature of 60° C. or higher.”). Here, Ueno discloses that their high temperature aging step occurs at a temperature of 60 degrees or higher, at an SOC of 80% or higher (Paragraph 0046, “In the aging step (S 40 ), after the temperature of the initially charged battery assembly (typically, with the SOC being 65% or higher, e.g., 80% or higher) is raised to a high temperature region of about 60° C. or higher (e.g., 60±2° C.), the battery assembly is maintained (left to stand) in this high temperature region for a prescribed period”). Here, Ueno discloses that making use of their conditions for a standing step results in a high quality film formed on the surface of the negative electrode active material, which has a low resistance and is capable of suppressing a reaction with the non-aqueous electrolyte (Paragraph 0046, “Thereby, the film formed on the surface of the negative electrode active material can be modified as high quality film (i.e., a film having a low resistance and is capable of sufficiently suppressing the reaction with the non-aqueous electrolyte).”). Additionally, Ueno further discloses that this high quality film has the benefit of dissolving foreign metal substances and diffusing them as metal ions, thereby preventing internal short circuiting (Paragraph 0046, “Moreover, even in the case that foreign substance made of metal (e.g., Fe power, Cu power) is invaded from outside (typically, the components of the manufacturing apparatus), the metal foreign substance can also be dissolved and diffused as metal ions (e.g., Fe ions, Cu ions), and minute internal short circuit inside the electrode body can be prevented from occurring.”).
Here, where these benefits are compatible with the function of Jeong’s battery, where suppressing side reactions between electrolytes and electrodes, as well as reducing the effects of invading foreign metal objects are desirable attributes for a secondary battery, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to make use of the aging step conditions of Ueno so as to achieve these benefits, thereby making obvious structure where the aging step occurs at an SOC of 70% or higher.
Additionally, Jeong discloses that their method then includes removing a gas generated from the electrode assembly after allowing the activated electrode assembly to stand (Paragraph 0064, “meanwhile, the secondary battery according to the present invention is preferably a pouch-type lithium ion battery manufactured by injecting an electrolyte and performing a degassing process by pressure and vacuum after the activation process.”; Paragraph 0019, “(Iv) a degassing process for removing the gas generated in the processes;”).
Additionally, in regards to performing a second charging/discharging on the electrode assembly at a temperature ranging from 15 to 30 degrees Celsius, though Jeong does not specifically require this step, they do disclose that the battery is intended for use in a personal use electrical device (Paragraph 0066, “The device can be selected from a mobile phone, a notebook, a tablet PC, a wearable electronic device, an electric vehicle, a battery bicycle and a wireless aircraft, and is a device that requires a high density battery that realizes high capacity and high voltage,”). Here, where the battery is intended to be implemented in a battery that is going to be used, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to include a charging step before the battery is provided to the device which uses the battery pack, so that the battery pack is prepared for immediate use. Additionally, where the range presented by the instant claim encompasses room temperature, the second charging/discharging process would be the selected temperature, based on the previously specified temperature of Jeong, which was a second room temperature aging step (Paragraph 0051, “And after 4 days at room temperature aging (23 ° C to 27 ° C).”), further supported by it being obvious for a pre-use charging step to be conducted at the temperature conditions under which the battery would be used, which would be room temperature for personal electronic devices which make use of batteries.
Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim that requires structure wherein the silicon-based active material is present in an amount of 60 to 90 weight percent in the negative electrode active material layer, Jeong is silent in regards to said content range within the negative electrode active material. Accordingly, we look to Saito, who is an analogous art to the instant application, as discussed above. Here, Saito discloses structure which comprises a silicon negative electrode active material which comprises between 50 and 80 weight percent silicon (Paragraph 0027, “The content of silicon (silicon) of the anode active material layer 12b is not less than 30 wt%, preferably at least 50 wt%. The content of silicon in the anode active material layer 12b is preferably 80 mass% or less.”). Here, Saito also discloses that the negative electrode silicon content will result in an improved capacity, based on the inclusion of the silicon content (Paragraph 0027, “By using the active material of the silicon material in the negative electrode 12, than with the active material of the other material, it can be a lithium ion secondary battery 1 with a high capacity. In particular, the higher the fine silicon crystallites of nano-silicon materials, to improve cycle characteristics of the lithium ion secondary battery 1”). Accordingly, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to direct the content of the silicon in the negative electrode active material to the maximum value presented by Saito, thereby making obvious structure which comprises a silicon based active material in 80 weight percent in the negative electrode active material layer.
Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires structure wherein the binder is present in an amount of 5 to 30 weight percent in the negative electrode active material layer, Jeong discloses the presence of binder in the cathode active material (Paragraph 0039 ,” The binder is a component which assists in bonding of the active material to the conductive material and bonding to the current collector, and is usually added in an amount of 1 to 30% by weight based on the total weight of the mixture containing the cathode active material.””) and anode active material (Paragraph 0041, “The negative electrode is manufactured by applying and drying an anode active material on an anode current collector, and may optionally further include the components as described above.”). Here, Jeong discloses a range where the binder is present in 1 to 30 weight percent. Accordingly, where Jeong discloses that the binder acts to assist in bonding the active material to the conductive material and current collector (Paragraph 0039, “The binder is a component which assists in bonding of the active material to the conductive material and bonding to the current collector,”), it would therefore be obvious to optimize the content of the binder so as to achieve this benefit, thereby making obvious the range of the instant claim, wherein the content of the binder ranges from 5 to 30 weight percent.
Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires structure where the conductive material is present in an amount ranging from 5 to 20 weight percent, Jeong discloses structure where the active material comprises conductive material in a range of 1 to 30 weight percent (Paragraph 0038, “ The conductive material is usually added in an amount of 1% by weight to 30% by weight based on the total weight of the mixture including the cathode active material.”), where one ordinarily skilled in the art would find it obvious to optimize the content of the conductive material in the direction of the direction of the instant claim, as Saito makes obvious a content of 80 percent silicon, leaving a maximum value of 20% available, thereby making obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art a conductive material range of 1 to 20%, where it would further be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to optimize the conductive material content upwards, so as to improve the conductivity of the battery (Paragraph 0039, “Such a conductive material is not particularly limited as long as it has conductivity”), thereby making obvious the range of the instant claim which requires structures wherein the conductive material is present in an amount ranging from 5 to 20 percent.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Jeong discloses structure wherein the impregnating of the electrode assembly is performed at a temperature ranging from 15 to 30 degrees Celsius (Paragraph 0051, “In one specific example, step (ii) above is followed by 2 days of room temperature aging (23 ° C to 27 ° C)”), where Jeong discloses a temperature of 23 to 27 degrees Celsius, where the injection of their step ii followed by room temperature aging is the impregnation step.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Jeong discloses structure wherein the impregnation of the electrode is performed for a time range of 12 hours to 48 hours (Paragraph 0051, “In one specific example, step (ii) above is followed by 2 days of room temperature aging (23 ° C to 27 ° C)”), where Jeong discloses a time of 48 hours, where the injection of their step ii followed by room temperature aging is the impregnation step.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, as discussed above, Ogihara makes obvious structure where the first charging and discharging is performed in two or more cycles (Paragraph 0084, “As shown, multiple charge-discharge intervals are provided in the present embodiment as a means of activation.”).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, as discussed above, Saito makes obvious in combination with Jeong, structure wherein there is pressurization during the first charging and discharging. Saito additionally, discloses structure wherein said pressurization is performed at a pressure of 2 MPa (Paragraph 0008, “In this manufacturing method, by setting the maximum value of the surface pressure received by the case by the load added by the load application step and more than 2 MPa”), which falls within the required range of the instant claim, which is 1.5 to 3.5 MPa.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, as discussed above, Saito makes obvious in combination with Jeong, structure wherein there is pressurization during the first charging and discharging. Additionally, as discussed above, Saito discloses structure wherein the pressurization during the manufacturing process as able to suppress the occurrence of lithium deposition and electrode wrinkles in the battery (Paragraph 0008, “In this manufacturing method, by setting the maximum value of the surface pressure received by the case by the load added by the load application step and more than 2 MPa, the load during the initial charge-discharge process is applied to the appropriate electrode assembly within the case, the electrode assembly the positive electrode and the negative electrode of the solid are close to each other. Therefore, in this manufacturing method, it is possible to suppress the occurrence of lithium deposition and electrode wrinkles at the time of initial charging and discharging.”), thereby making obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art the application of said pressurization throughout the entirety of the manufacturing process, to achieve and maximize said benefits, where said pressurization would therefore additionally occur during the second charging/discharging step, which is the pre-use charging step.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Jeong makes obvious the limitations of Claim 1. Additionally, Jeong discloses structure wherein the standing is performed for a time range of 12 hours to 36 hours, disclosing that their aging step is performed for 0.5 to 1.5 days (Paragraph 0050, “Specifically, the aging process may include a high-temperature aging process performed at a temperature ranging from 50 ° C to 70 ° C for 0.5 to 1.5 days”).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Jeong discloses structure wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode current collector and the negative electrode active material layer on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (Paragraph 0041, “The negative electrode is manufactured by applying and drying an anode active material on an anode current collector,”), as well as structure wherein the negative electrode active material layer of Jeong comprises the silicon-based active material (Paragraph 0042, “Examples of such an anode active material include conductive polymers such as carbon, metal composite oxide, lithium metal, lithium alloy, silicon-based alloy, tin-based alloy, and polyacetylene; Li-Co-Ni-based materials, and silicon-based materials.”), and Saito further discloses structure where their method additionally uses a silicon-based Si active material (Paragraph 0026, “Silicon-based materials, for example, a nano-silicon material. Nano Silicon material, and a silicon crystallites fluorine and nano-sized.”). Additionally, Jeong discloses structure wherein their negative electrode active material layer comprises the binder and the conductive material (Paragraph 0036, “by coating a mixture of a positive electrode active material, a conductive material and a binder on a positive electrode current collector”; Paragraph 0041, “The negative electrode is manufactured by applying and drying an anode active material on an anode current collector, and may optionally further include the components as described above.”), where Jeong discloses the presence of the binder and conductive material in the positive and negative electrode active materials.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (KR 20170033601 A1), in further view of Saito (JP 2017027727 A), Ogihara (US 20160308258 A1), and Ueno (US 20160268648), as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Teranishi (US 20180233773 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 9. Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim which requires that the thickness of the negative electrode active material layer is between 35 and 50 microns, Jeong is silent in regards to the thickness of their negative electrode active material layer. Accordingly, we look towards Teranishi, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a lithium ion secondary battery comprising a negative electrode active material layer containing a silicon compound (Abstract, “A lithium ion secondary battery 10 includes at least one cell obtained by laminating a positive electrode 1, an electrolyte layer 2, and a negative electrode 3 in this order. The electrolyte layer 2 contains a fluoride. The negative electrode 3 has a negative electrode active material layer containing a silicon compound.”). Here, Teranishi discloses structure wherein their negative electrode active material has a thickness ranging from 5 to 50 microns (Paragraph 0019, “The thickness of each negative electrode active material layer is preferably, for example, 5 μm to 50 μm.”). Here, where active material thickness corresponds to battery capacity, it would therefore be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to maximize capacity through increasing the thickness to the maximum value disclosed by Teranishi, thereby making obvious structure wherein the negative electrode active material layer has a thickness of 50 microns.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (KR 20170033601 A1), in further view of Saito (JP 2017027727 A), Ogihara (US 20160308258 A1), and Ueno (US 20160268648), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamamoto (US 20170170476 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Jeong makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, in regards to the limitation of the instant claim, which requires structure where a ratio of the ratio of the discharge capacity per unit area of the negative electrode to the discharge capacity per unit area of the positive electrode (otherwise known as a capacity ratio) falls within a range of 1.5 to 3.5, Jeong, Saito, and Ueno fail to anticipate or make obvious said limitation.
Therefore, we look to Yamamoto, which is an analogous art to the instant application, disclosing a secondary battery and method of manufacturing (Paragraph 0168, “A description will now be given of a method of preparing a positive electrode active material and a negative electrode active material, and producing a positive electrode, a negative electrode and lithium-ion rechargeable batteries”). Here, Yamamoto discloses that their battery preferably has a capacity ratio (as defined by the instant claim’s formula 1, that is greater than 1.1 (Paragraph 0091, “The negative electrode 12 has a capacity which is 1.1 times of the capacity of the positive electrode 11. That is, the capacity ratio (capacity of the negative electrode 12/the capacity of the positive electrode 11) is not less than 1.1.”) and is preferably less than or equal to 2.0 or 1.8 (Paragraph 0097, “It is therefore preferable for the capacity ratio to be not more than 2.0, more preferable, to be not more than 1.8.”). Here, Yamamoto discloses that the rationale for the lower bound of their capacity ratio is that when the capacity ratio is less than 1.1, the rechargeable mattery makes use of a low SOC region, where the positive electrode has a high resistance, thereby resulting in deteriorating battery performance (Paragraph 0092, “When the capacity ratio becomes not less than 1.1 as previously described, the lithium-ion rechargeable battery 1 does not use the SOC region (low SOC region) in which the positive electrode 11 has a high resistance. This structure of the lithium-ion rechargeable battery 1 according to the first exemplary embodiment makes it possible to suppress the battery performance in the low SOC region from deteriorating.”).
Additionally, Yamamoto discloses that when the capacity ratio is higher than 2.0 or 1.8, the usable SOC region for battery cycling decreases, resulting in a decrease in capacity of the positive electrode (Paragraph 0097, “However, when the capacity ratio has a high value, a usable SOC region for the charge and discharge of the lithium-ion rechargeable battery 1 decreases. That is, the battery capacity of the positive electrode 11 decreases.”). Accordingly, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to make use of a battery capacity ratio which is high so as to avoid the low SOC region to as great an extent possible, while remaining outside of the capacity ratio range that would cause a decrease in positive electrode capacity, thereby making obvious the preferable capacity ratios of 1.8 and 2.0, thereby reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant claim which requires structure wherein the capacity ratio is from 1.5 to 3.5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN W ESTES whose telephone number is (571)272-4820. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 5:30.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 5712721453. 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.
/J.W.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725