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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 26 February 2026 has been entered.
Claim Amendments
Claims 1, 3-5, 7- 10, 12, and 14 are amended. Claims 6, 11, and 21 are cancelled. Claims 17 and 19 stand withdrawn. Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 12-16, 18 and 20 are examined herein. No new matter is added.
Response to arguments
The objection to claim 21 is withdrawn in light of cancellation.
Regarding the rejection under 35 USC 103, Applicant argues that the Mimura teaches away from amended claim 1 ([0076] of Mimura, relying on particles of a specific diameter to provide steric hinderance) and that Mimura does not teach or suggest “dissolved”, which is required in amended claim 1. Applicant further argues that Example s4 of Mimura does not teaches the limitation of amended claim 1, “4 or more carbon atoms”. Applicant’s arguments are moot in light of a newly cited reference, Yoon.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner notes that in the instant specification, the term “low adsorption binders” is defined at ([0046]) of the instant specification as binders that exhibit an adsorption rate of less than 60% with respect to an inorganic solid electrolyte.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 7-10, 12-16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon (US 20170214051 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yoon teaches an inorganic solid electrolyte-containing composition (abstract: electrode active material slurry … includes… a solid electrolyte) comprising:
an inorganic solid electrolyte exhibiting ion conductivity for a metal belonging to Group I or Group 2 in the periodic table; ([0020] solid electrolyte, [0058] sulfide based solid electrolyte … particularly, Li2S-P2S5 … known to have high lithium ion conductivity as compared to other inorganic compounds.
a polymer binder; ([0015] second binder …. selected from the group consisting of … SBR…)
a dispersion medium, ([0070] solvent; [0106] NBP-xylene solution)
wherein the polymer binder is dissolved in the dispersion medium, ([0106] NBP-xylene solution). At [0066] Yoon teaches the binder may be selected from candidates including NBR, SBR, and SBS. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that because NPB is dissolved in xylene, that SBR, SBS, or other styrene-containing polymers would also be dissolved in xylene, therefore rendering obvious a styrene-containing polymer dissolved in xylene.
wherein … polymer …. has a constitutional component represented by Formula (1-1), where in the formula, R1 represents a hydrogen atom or an alkyl group, and R2 represents a group having a hydrocarbon group having 4 or more carbon atoms. ([0066] the binder may be any one selected from … styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), styrene butadiene styrene block polymer (SBS), styrene ethylene butadiene block polymer (SEB), styrene-(styrene butadiene)-styrene block polymer) Examiner notes that a polymer containing styrene meets the instant claim limitation.
Yoon is silent on adsorption and therefore does not explicitly teach wherein the polymer binder includes a low adsorption binder of which an adsorption rate with respect to the inorganic solid electrolyte in the dispersion medium is less than 60%. However, the inorganic solid electrolyte-containing composition of Yoon is substantially similar to that of Claim 1 (as laid out above). Accordingly, absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, it is understood that the binder of Yoon’s composition as set forth above would inherently have the claimed low adsorption rate.
Regarding claim 4, Yoon teaches all of the limitations set forth above, and Yoon further teaches the polymer having a constitutional component which is a styrene, which is an example of an aryl group, which is a candidate within the scope of the claimed list of alternatives.
Regarding claim 5, Yoon teaches all of the limitations set forth above, and Yoon further teaches wherein in the polymer, a content of the constitutional component having the functional group selected from the Group (a) of functional groups is 0.0 1% to 50% by mole. ([0066] styrene-(styrene butadiene)-styrene block polymer, which meets the instant claim limitation.)
Regarding claim 7, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon further teaches wherein in the polymer has, in a main chain, a polymeric chain of carbon- carbon double bond, which is a candidate within the scope of the claimed list of alternatives. ([0066] styrene-(styrene butadiene)-styrene block polymer, which meets the instant claim limitation.)
Regarding claim 8, Yoon teaches all of the limitations set forth above. Yoon further teaches wherein the inorganic solid electrolyte-containing composition contains two or more kinds of low adsorption binders and at least one kind of a polymer that forms the low adsorption binders is a fluorine-based polymer. ([0104] the addition of 2 wt. % of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) to the slurry) Examiner notes that claim 8 does not require the second low adsorption polymer to be dissolved in the dispersion medium.
Regarding claim 9, Yoon teaches all of the limitations set forth above, however Yoon is silent on contact angle and does not explicitly teach wherein a contact angle of the dispersion medium with respect to a polymer film prepared from the polymer that forms the low adsorption binder is 40 degrees or less.
The cathode active material slurry (as set forth in claim 1 and incorporated herein by reference) is comparable to working example S-16 of the instant invention (see Table 1-1 and Table 2-4), except a different non-polar solvent is used. Because the chemistry of Yoon’s dispersion is substantially similar in chemistry to that of the instant invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have expected, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, that Yoon’s dispersion will also meet the instant contact angle limitation.
Regarding claim 10, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon teaches at ([0066]) that the second binder may be a mixture of the candidates listed, therefore Yoon contemplates the use of two or more kinds of second binder. Yoon at [0066] teaches the selection of styrene-(styrene butadiene)-styrene block, which is a hydrocarbon-based polymer. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select more than one of the Yoon’s binder candidates based on Yoon’s teaching that multiple binders may be used.
Regarding claim 12, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon further teaches wherein the polymer binder further includes a particulate binder having an average particle diameter of 1 to 1,000 nm. ([0050] first binder … 0.01µm to 1µm)
Regarding claim 13, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon teaches the composition further comprises an active material. ([0020] electrode active material).
Regarding claim 14, Yoon teaches all of the limitations set forth above, however Yoon is silent on wherein the low adsorption binder has an adsorption rate of 90% or less with respect to the active material.
The cathode active material slurry (as set forth in claim 1 and incorporated herein by reference) is comparable to working example S-16 of the instant invention (see Table 1-1 and Table 2-4), except a different non-polar solvent is used. Because the chemistry of Yoon’s dispersion is substantially similar in chemistry to that of the instant invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have expected, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, that Yoon’s dispersion will also meet the instant limitation of low adsorption with respect to the active material.
Regarding claim 15, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon teaches further comprising a conductive auxiliary agent. ([0059] conductive material … graphite)
Regarding claim 16, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon teaches wherein the inorganic solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte. ([0058])
Regarding claim 18, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon teaches sheet for an all-solid state secondary battery comprising a layer in which a film is formed from the inorganic solid electrolyte-containing composition according to claim 1. ([0103-0108] manufacture of a cathode)
Regarding claim 20, Yoon teaches all of the limitations as set forth above, and Yoon teaches all-solid state secondary battery ([0109]) comprising, in the following order: a positive electrode active material layer; a solid electrolyte layer; and a negative electrode active material layer, wherein at least one layer of the positive electrode active material layer, the solid electrolyte layer, or the negative electrode active material layer is a layer in which a film is formed from the inorganic solid electrolyte-containing composition according to claim 1.([0097], cathode made from instant composition disclosed at ([0103-0108] manufacture of a cathode)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon (US 20170214051 A1), with evidentiary support from Mihara (US 20170129780 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Yoon teaches all of the limitations set forth above. However, Yoon does not explicitly teach wherein a difference in SP value between a polymer that forms the polymer binder of which the adsorption rate is less than 60% and the dispersion medium is 3 or less.
While Yoon does not explicitly teach this limitation, the dispersion Yoon’s binder in xylene, a non-polar solvent (as set forth in claim 1 and incorporated herein by reference) is comparable to Example s4 (methacrylate binder in heptane) of the instant invention (see Table 2-4, which reports SP values of 19.1 and 18.0 for example s4). Because the chemistry of Yoon’s dispersion is substantially similar to that of the instant invention, example s4, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have expected, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, that Yoon’s dispersion will also meet the limitations of claim 1 with respect to SP values.
Mihara, which discloses a resin (polymer) dissolved in a solvent, provides evidence at [0089] that “It is known that the smaller the absolute value of the difference from the average of the SP values, the higher the dissolving properties.” Mihara further states “In view of this, the absolute value of the difference from the average of the SP values is preferably 3.0 or less, most preferably 2.0 or less.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE A RUTISER whose telephone number is (571)272-1969. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Leong can be reached on 571-270-1292. 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.
CLAIRE A. RUTISER
Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/C.A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
