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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 2, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed February 2, 2026 has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended; support for the amendment can be found at least at Instant Specification page 12, lines 11-17 and Examples 1-3. Claim 5 has been cancelled. Claims 1, 3-4, 6-11, and 13 remain pending and have been examined on their merits in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 6, 2026 have been fully considered. Applicant argues that a) Son does not disclose an average thickness of the lithium layer is in a range of 5 µm to 30 µm as required by claim 1 and 9 and b) neither of the applied reference contemplates controlling the temperature of the lithium supply unit temperature so that the surface can be maintained uniform even if the lithiation retardation layer is made of a polymer having at least on of an acrylate repeating unit and a carbonate repeating unit, or the unexpected advantages demonstrate by the comparative evidence in the specification.
Regarding argument A, in the disclosure, Son does disclose when the total thickness of the electrode is about 100 μm, the thickness of the lithium layer 15 is 1 μm or more and less than 5 μm (see e.g., paragraph [0059]). However, Son teaches an embodiment in Example 1 wherein the thickness of the lithium metal layer is 5 µm (see e.g., Example 1 and paragraph [0106]). Son teaches in the case of Example 1, the negative electrode irreversible was completely compensated (see e.g., paragraph [0124]) with the largest number of cycles (Maintenance of 90% or less of capacity) (see e.g., Table 1). Therefore, Son teaches a lithium metal layer of 5 µm, which is included in Applicant’s claimed range. Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but is found not to be persuasive.
Regarding argument B, Son teaches controlling the temperature of the lithium supply unit temperature as Son teaches the lithium layer is deposited on the surface of the electrode by passing the surface of the electrode coated with the active material, while continuously supplying lithium gas generated by heating metal lithium 600° C (see e.g., paragraph [0058]). The fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage of the surface maintaining uniformity which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Regarding the comparative evidence in the specification, there are only two lithium supply unit temperatures provided (500 °C in Examples 1 and 2 and Comparative Examples 1 and 2 and 650 °C in Example 3 and Comparative Example 3); therefore, the criticality or the unexpected results of the temperature range of the lithium supply unit temperature is lacking as there are only two temperatures utilized in the examples and since Son does teach a temperature within that range.
Therefore, Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but is unpersuasive.
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 1, 3-4, 6-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (KR 20180057513 A, citations from corresponding Published U.S. Patent Application US 2019/0229380 A1), hereinafter referred to as Son, in view of Affinito et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 2013/0017441 A1), hereinafter referred to as Affinito.
Regarding claim 1, Son teaches an electrode and a lithium secondary battery comprising the same, in particularly an electrode comprising an electrode layer, a pre-lithiation prevention layer formed on the electrode layer, and a lithium layer formed on the pre-lithiation prevention layer (see e.g., Abstract). Son teaches a lithium secondary battery 10, wherein there is a separator 5 and electrolyte are present between the negative electrode 1 and the positive electrode 3 (see e.g., paragraph [0025]). Son teaches the electrodes 1 and 3 have a structure in which an electrode layer 11, a pre-lithiation prevention layer 13 (“a lithiation retardation layer on the negative electrode active material layer” and “wherein the lithiation retardation layer is a prelithiation retardation layer”) and a lithium layer 15 (“a lithium layer on the lithiation retardation layer”) are sequentially stacked, and are characterized in that the lithium layer 15 does not remain as a lithium in the form of metal after the initial activation charging (see e.g., paragraph [0027]). Son teaches the electrode layer 11 (“a negative electrode active material layer on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector”) is a layer in which a negative electrode lamination layer containing the negative electrode active material is formed on the negative electrode current collector (“a negative electrode current collector”) (see e.g., paragraph [0040]). Son teaches the pre-lithiation layer 13 is formed from a material having lithium ion conductivity while easily forming a coating film can be used as a material comprising polymethyl methacrylate, polymethoxy polyethylene glycol methacrylate, and combinations thereof (see e.g., paragraph [0035]) and a solvent capable of sufficiently dissolving monomers or polymers and an initiator can be used as the solvent such as a carbonate-based solvent (“wherein the lithiation retardation layer comprises a polymer having at least one of an acrylate repeating unit and a carbonate repeating unit”) (see e.g., paragraph [0070]).
Son teaches the thickness of the lithium layer 15 is 1 μm or more and less than 5 μm (see e.g., paragraph [0059]) and teaches an embodiment in which the thickness of the lithium metal layer is 5 μm (“wherein an average thickness of the lithium layer is in a range of 5 μm to 30 μm”)(see e.g., Example 1 and paragraph [0106]).
Son does not explicitly teach wherein in the lithium layer, an average surface roughness of an opposite surface of a surface contacting the lithiation retardation layer is 0.4 µm or less.
However, Affinito teaches a method for forming protected electrodes for use in electrochemical cells (see e.g., Abstract). Affinito teaches the electrode comprises an intervening layer 36 made of a conductive material such as lithium metal (“the lithium layer”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Affinito teaches the intervening layer are deposited through physical or chemical vapor deposition methods such as thermal evaporation (see e.g., paragraph [0147]). Affinito teaches the intervening layers have a RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm (“wherein in the lithium layer, an average surface roughness of a surface opposite of the surface contacting the lithiation retardation layer is 0.4 µm or less”) (see e.g., paragraph [0045]). Affinito teaches the intervening layer the above-mentioned range of surface roughness is used to cause even plating of the adjacent layers, by lowering the energy of plating and/or preventing or minimizing the formation of protrusions or indentations on the layer (see e.g., paragraph [0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the lithium layer of Son to have a RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm, as taught by Affinito, in order to cause even plating of the adjacent layers, by lowering the energy of plating and/or preventing or minimizing the formation of protrusions or indentations on the layer (see e.g., paragraph [0041]).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 3, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
The pre-lithiation layer 13, as taught by Son, is formed from a material having lithium ion conductivity while easily forming a coating film can be used as a material comprising polymethyl methacrylate, polymethoxy polyethylene glycol methacrylate, and combinations thereof (see e.g., paragraph [0035]) and a solvent capable of sufficiently dissolving monomers or polymers and an initiator can be used as the solvent such as a carbonate-based solvent (“wherein the lithiation retardation layer comprises a polymer having the carbonate repeating unit”) (see e.g., paragraph [0070]). The lithium layer, as taught by Affinito, has a RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm (“wherein in the lithium layer, an average surface roughness of a surface opposite of the surface contacting the lithiation retardation layer is in a range of 0.05 µm to 0.35 µm”) (see e.g., paragraph [0045]).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 4, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Son teaches the thickness of the pre-lithiation prevention layer ranges from 0.5 to 5 µm (“wherein an average thickness of the lithiation retardation layer is in a range of 0.1 µm to 5 µm”) (see e.g., paragraph [0037]).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because the thickness of 0.5 to 5 µm overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 6, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Son teaches the thickness of the pre-lithiation prevention layer ranges from 0.5 to 5 µm (“wherein a thickness of the lithiation retardation layer is in a range of 0.5 µm to 1.5 µm”) (see e.g., paragraph [0037]). Son teaches the thickness of the lithium layer 15 is 1 µm or more and less than 5 µm (see e.g., paragraph [0059]). Therefore, a ratio (B/A) of an average thickness (B) of the lithium layer to an average thickness (A) of the pre-lithiation prevention layer is 0.20 to 10 (“a ratio (B/A) of an average thickness (B) of the lithium layer to an average thickness (A) of the lithiation retardation layer is in a range of 3 to 7”).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because the thickness of 0.5 µm to 5 µm overlap and ratio (B/A) of 0.20 to 10 overlap with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 7, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Son teaches silicon as the negative electrode active material (“wherein a negative electrode active material present in the negative electrode active material layer is a silicon-containing negative electrode active material”) (see e.g., paragraph [0060]).
Regarding claim 8, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Son teaches the electrolyte solution of the lithium secondary battery 10 is a lithium salt-containing electrolyte solution which is a non-aqueous electrolyte consisting of a non-aqueous organic solvent electrolyte solution and a lithium salt (see e.g., paragraph [0091]). Son teaches the non-aqueous organic solvent may be aprotic organic solvents such as propylene carbonate, ethylene carbonate, butylene carbonate, dimethyl carbonate, diethyl carbonate, ethylmethyl carbonate (see e.g., paragraph [0092]). The polymethyl methacrylate (see e.g., paragraph [0035]) and the solvent capable of sufficiently dissolving monomers or polymers and an initiator can be used as the solvent such as a carbonate-based solvent such as polycarbonate (see e.g., paragraph [0070]) of the pre-lithiation layer as taught by Son are known to be well dissolved in a carbonate-containing electrolyte solution (see e.g., Instant Specification page 10, lines 5-11); therefore, the pre-lithiation layer of Son would be soluble in the electrolytic solution of Son (“wherein the lithiation retardation layer is soluble in a carbonate-containing electrolyte solution”).
Regarding claim 9, Son teaches an electrode and a lithium secondary battery comprising the same (see e.g., Abstract). Son teaches electrodes 1 and 3 have a structure in which an electrode layer 11, a pre-lithiation prevention layer 13 (“a lithiation retardation layer on the negative electrode active material layer” and “wherein the lithiation retardation layer is a prelithiation retardation layer”) and a lithium layer 15 are sequentially stacked, and are characterized in that the lithium layer 15 does not remain as a lithium in the form of metal after the initial activation charging (see e.g., paragraph [0027]). Son teaches the electrode layer 11 (“a negative electrode active material layer on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector” is a layer in which a negative electrode lamination layer containing the negative electrode active material is formed on the negative electrode current collector (“a negative electrode current collector”) (see e.g., paragraph [0040]). Son teaches an electrode layer 11 can be formed by applying a slurry prepared by mixing an electrode active material, an electrically conductive material and a binder in an organic solvent onto the electrode current collector and then drying it, and selectively performing compression molding onto the electrode current collector in order to improve the density of the electrode (see e.g., paragraph [0065]). Son teaches the electrode layer 11 on the electrode current collector is then coated with a coating solution that is formed by using a polymer material (“immersing a negative electrode precursor in a solution comprising an amorphous polymer”) (see e.g., paragraph [0038]). Son teaches the coating solution comprises a material comprising polymethyl methacrylate, polymethoxy polyethylene glycol methacrylate, and combinations thereof (see e.g., paragraph [0035]) and a solvent capable of sufficiently dissolving monomers or polymers and an initiator can be used as the solvent such as a carbonate-based solvent (“wherein during the forming of the lithiation retardation layer, the amorphous polymer comprises at least one of an acrylate repeating unit and a carbonate repeating unit as its repeating unit”) (see e.g., paragraph [0070]). Son teaches the pre-lithiation prevention layer 13 can be applied by a direct coating method or a laminating method after the preparation of the coating solution (see e.g., paragraph [0067]). Son teaches the lithium layer 15 is formed by introducing a lithium foil for the movement of the lithium metal or by a method of pre-doping the lithium metal directly on the pre-lithiation prevention layer 13 (“forming a lithium layer by depositing lithium on the lithiation retardation layer”) (see e.g., paragraph [0056]). Son teaches the thickness of the lithium layer 15 is 1 μm or more and less than 5 μm (see e.g., paragraph [0059]) and teaches an embodiment in which the thickness of the lithium metal layer is 5 μm (“wherein an average thickness of the lithium layer is in a range of 5 μm to 30 μm”)(see e.g., Example 1 and paragraph [0106]).
Son does not explicitly teach wherein in the lithium layer, an average surface roughness of an opposite surface of a surface contacting the lithiation retardation layer is 0.4 µm or less.
However, Affinito teaches a method for forming protected electrodes for use in electrochemical cells (see e.g., Abstract). Affinito teaches the electrode comprises an intervening layer 36 made of a conductive material such as lithium metal (“the lithium layer”) (see e.g., paragraph [0012]). Affinito teaches the intervening layer are deposited through physical or chemical vapor deposition methods such as thermal evaporation (see e.g., paragraph [0147]). Affinito teaches the intervening layers have a RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm (“wherein in the lithium layer, an average surface roughness of a surface opposite of the surface contacting the lithiation retardation layer is 0.4 µm or less”) (see e.g., paragraph [0045]). Affinito teaches the intervening layer the above mentioned range of surface roughness is used to cause even plating of the adjacent layers, by lowering the energy of plating and/or preventing or minimizing the formation of protrusions or indentations on the layer (see e.g., paragraph [0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the deposition of the lithium layer of Son to have a RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm, as taught by Affinito, in order to cause even plating of the adjacent layers, by lowering the energy of plating and/or preventing or minimizing the formation of protrusions or indentations on the layer (see e.g., paragraph [0041]).
It has been held in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” and because RMS surface roughness between 0.5 nm and 1 µm overlaps with the recited range, a “prima facie” case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05(l)).
Regarding claim 10, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Son teaches the lithium layer is deposited on the surface of the electrode by passing the surface of the electrode coated with the active material, while continuously supplying lithium gas generated by heating metal lithium 600° C under a vacuum condition on the order of 10 ton (“wherein the forming of the lithium layer is performed by thermal evaporation”) (see e.g., paragraph [0058]).
Regarding claim 11, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 10, as previously described.
Son teaches the lithium layer is deposited on the surface of the electrode by passing the surface of the electrode coated with the active material, while continuously supplying lithium gas generated by heating metal lithium 600° C (“wherein the thermal evaporation is performed in a temperature range of from 460 °C to 850 °C, based on a temperature of supplied lithium”) under a vacuum condition on the order of 10 ton (see e.g., paragraph [0058]).
Regarding claim 13, Son, as modified by Affinito, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Son teaches silicon as the negative electrode active material (“wherein a negative electrode active material present in the negative electrode active material layer is a silicon-containing negative electrode active material”) (see e.g., paragraph [0060]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katherine N Higgins whose telephone number is (703)756-1196. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays - Thursdays 7:30-4:30 EST, Fridays 7:30 - 11:30 EST.
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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/KATHERINE N HIGGINS/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728