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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/31/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 4 – 14, and 16 – 17 are amended. Claims 2 – 3, 15, and 18 – 19 are canceled. Claims 1, 4 – 14, 16 – 17 and 20 are pending in the current Office action.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn.
A new grounds of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment {i.e. amended claim 1 now requires the electrolyte solution to comprise lithium difluorophosphate and thus further narrows the scope of the invention in a manner that was not previously considered}.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of prior art being used in the current rejection. Specifically, in the new grounds of rejection below, the previously cited prior art is further modified by newly cited prior art: Ji (US PG pub. 2020/0388885 A1) to render obvious the claimed electrolyte composition.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: The recitation “wherein the electrolyte solution comprises” should recite “wherein the electrolyte solution further comprises”, for clarity/consistency since claim 1, from which claim 16 depends on, recites/establishes that the electrolyte solution comprises lithium difluorophosphate. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, Claim 17 recites: "An electronic device, comprising an electrochemical device, the electrochemical device comprises a negative electrode plate, the negative electrode plate comprising: an electrolytic solution, the electrolytic solution comprises lithium difluorophosphate”. As such, the limitation appears to require the negative electrode plate to include the electrolytic solution.
Although the instant specification supports the use of electrolytic solution (See [0033 – 0034];[0050 – 0051]), the instant specification does not appear to support including the electrolyte solution in/as a part of the negative electrode plate as required by claim 17. Instead, it appears that the electrolytic solution is included in the electrochemical device, see [0033 – 0034];[0050 – 0051] of the instant specification. Therefore, Claim 17 is introducing new matter.
For the sake of compact prosecution, and in light of the instant specification teaching including electrolyte in the electrochemical device and thus not necessarily limiting the electrolyte’s location to a particular component of the battery (See [0033 – 0034];[0050 – 0051), the examiner is interpreting the limitation “An electronic device, comprising an electrochemical device, the electrochemical device comprises a negative electrode plate, the negative electrode plate comprising: an electrolytic solution, the electrolytic solution comprises lithium difluorophosphate” to recite -- An electronic device, comprising an electrochemical device, the electrochemical device comprising an electrolytic solution comprising lithium difluorophosphate and a negative electrode plate, the negative electrode plate comprising:--.
Claim 20 is similarly rejected due to its dependency on claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 4 – 8, 11 – 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (CN111710832A, cited in previous Office action mailed 07/03/2025) in view of Ji (US PG pub. 2020/0388885 A1) and Hatanaka (CN111902969A, EP counterpart EP3780158A1 used as English translation, cited in previous Office action mailed 07/03/2025).
Regarding Claims 1, 4 – 5 and 11, Huang discloses an electrochemical device (lithium ion secondary battery; [0048 – 0049]), comprising a positive electrode plate ([0049 – 0050]); a negative electrode plate ([0007];[0010 – 0014];[0049]); a separator dispose between the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate ([0049]; and an electrolytic solution ([0049];[0052]).
Huang generally teaches the electrolytic solution of the battery including lithium salts, solvents, and additives, such as one or more of lithium hexafluorophosphate, carbonates, carbonate esters, and carboxylic acid esters; and that any lithium ion-secondary battery electrolyte known in the art can be used ([0049];[0052]).
Huang does not explicitly disclose the electrolytic solution comprising lithium difluorophosphate.
Ji, directed to electrolytes for energy storage devices having a silicon-based anodes (Abstract), particularly teaches using battery electrolyte compositions including lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) as a lithium salt ([0005];[0046]). The use of LiPO2F2 in the electrolyte of batteries including Si-dominant anodes allows for reduced electrolyte reactions by stabilizing the solid/electrolyte interface, prevents Si anode volume expansion, protect transition metal ion dissolution from NCM or NCA cathodes, stabilizes the subsequent structure changes, enhances thermal stability of LCO cathodes, reduces flammability and enhances the thermal stability of organic electrolytes and increases the safety of electrolyte solutions ([0046]). Furthermore, Ji teaches that presence of lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) and an electrolyte additive can result in a SEI and/or CEI layer on the surface of electrodes with improved performance and thus facilitates reduction in capacity fade and/or the generation of excessive gaseous byproducts during operation of the lithium ion battery ([0073]).
Therefore, since Huang teaches a battery including a silicon-based anode and cathode materials also taught by Ji (Huang: [0010 – 0013];[0050]; Ji:[0049]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the LiPO2F2-containing electrolyte as taught by Ji, and thus obtain an electrolytic solution within the claimed scope, with a reasonable expectation of success that such an electrolyte would be suitable for Huang’s battery and with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a battery with improved electrochemical performance and safety.
Huang further discloses the negative electrode plate comprising: a negative current collector ([0011]); a porous composite layer ([0012];[0016]) which reads on the claimed bonding layer because it possesses a function to firmly adhere the negative electrode active material layer to the collector like the claimed bonding layer (Huang: [0050]; Instant Specification: [0015 – 0016]); and a negative electrode active material layer ([0013]), wherein the bonding layer is disposed between the negative current collector and the negative active material layer (Fig. 2; [0013 – 0014];[0061]).
Huang teaches the porous composite layer comprising one or more polymer materials selected from cellulose acetate propionate, cellulose acetate, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinylidene fluoride, polycarbonate, polypropylene, polymethyl methacrylate, carboxymethyl cellulose, polyamide, polyimide, polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-trichloroethylene, polyacrylonitrile, polyvinyl, pyrrolidone, sodium alginate, polyvinyl acetate, polyethylene-co-vinyl acetate, polyethylene oxide, cellulose acetate butyrate, polyvinyl chloride, butadiene-co-acrylonitrile, tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride, ethylene-co-acrylic acid, styrene-butadiene rubber, and polyacrylonitrile ([0020]). Polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, and tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride, by including hexafluoropropylene as a monomer, are copolymers that read on comprising at least a propylene monomer. Furthermore, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene further comprises a vinylidene difluoride group and tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene further comprises an ethylene group.
Huang does not explicitly disclose a working embodiment of the bonding layer {i.e. porous composite layer} comprising a copolymer formed from monomers comprising at least a propylene monomer and further at least one selected from the groups consisting of ethylene, vinylidene difluoride, chloroethylene, butadiene, isoprene, styrene, acrylonitrile, ethylene oxide. propylene oxide, acrylate, vinyl acetate and caprolactone (Claim 11).
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select a copolymer within the claimed scope of claims 1 and 11 {i.e. polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene or tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene} from Huang’s taught selection, because such a copolymer would be a selection of adhesive polymer material from Huang’s finite list and thus would have a reasonable expectation of success in being a suitable selection of adhesive polymer for the porous composite layer [MPEP 2143(I)(E)].
In working examples, Huang further teaches porous composite layer coating weights of 4 g/m2 (Example 1; [0084]), 10 g/m2 (Example 2; [0092]), 0.3 g/m2 (Example 3; [0100]), 1 g/m2 (Examples 4 – 5; [0108];[0116]), 15 g/m2 (Example 6; [0124]), and 8 g/m2 (Example 7; [0132]); therefore, Huang exemplifies weights of bonding layer per unit area of the negative current collector {i.e. claimed X value} ranging from 3 x 10-4 mg/mm2 – 150 x 10-4 mg/mm2, which overlap the claimed ranges of 1 ≤ X ≤ 30 and 1 ≤ X ≤ 10.5 (Claim 4).
Hatanaka teaches an electrode with an undercoat layer between the electrode active material layer and the collector ([0011]). The undercoat layer of Hatanaka is taught to be conductive and allow for higher adhesion between the active material layer and the electrode collector ([0009];[0011]; [0013]). Hatanaka further teaches a coating weight for the undercoat layer ranging from preferably 1 mg/mm2 {i.e. 0.01 x 10-4 mg/mm2} to 1000 mg/m2 {i.e. 10 x 10-4 mg/mm2} to ([0041]), which overlaps both the range taught by Huang and is within the claimed range. The coating weight range taught by Hatanaka allows for an undercoat thickness capable of reducing internal resistance and further ensures that the undercoat layer is capable of performing its intended function {i.e. sufficiently adhering active material to collector and reducing resistance} battery characteristics ([0040 – 0041]). Hatanaka additionally teaches that a drawback of increasing the weight per unit surface area of the undercoat layer is that the battery becomes heavier and larger ([0003]).
Huang further teaches that the addition of the porous composite layer can increase the adhesion between the silicon-containing negative electrode material layer and the current collector by 0.5-100 N/m, preferably 1-80 N/m ([0023];[0055]), and because it is the porous composite layer achieving the improvement in adhesion, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the adhesive force increase taught by Huang to correspond to the bonding force/performance of the porous composite layer. As such, Huang suggests a bonding force between the negative current collector and the bonding layer that would encompass or at least significantly overlap the claimed range of 1 ≤ K ≤ 100 N/m (Claim 5).
Huang teaches a preference for achieving bonding force increases between 1 – 80 N/m and indicates that bonding force increase of 0.5 – 100 N/m, and further 1 – 80 N/m, provides sufficient adhesion of active material to the collector by the porous composite layer ([0055];[0149 – 0151]).
Furthermore, since the bonding force and the weight of Huang’s porous composite layer per unit area of the collector overlaps the claimed bonding force (K) and weight (X) ranges , one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect Huang’s X/K values to overlap or at least encompass the claimed range of 0.1 ≤ X/K ≤ 0.75.
Selection of a coating weight X, bonding force K and X/K within the overlapping portion of Huang’s suggested bonding forces K and X/K values and the claimed bonding forces K and X/K values would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the adhesive strength and thickness of the porous composite layer in view of the battery weight and/or size, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claims 6 – 7, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. In examples, Huang further teaches porous composite layer coating weights of 4 g/m2 (Example 1; [0084]), 10 g/m2 (Example 2; [0092]), 0.3 g/m2 (Example 3; [0100]), 1 g/m2 (Examples 4 – 5; [0108];[0116]), 15 g/m2 (Example 6; [0124]), and 8 g/m2 (Example 7; [0132]). The coating weights exemplified by Huang overlap the coating weight range taught/claimed by the applicant (Instant specification: [0017]).
Hatanaka teaches an electrode with an undercoat layer between the electrode active material layer and the collector ([0011]). The undercoat layer of Hatanaka is taught to be conductive and allow for higher adhesion between the active material layer and the electrode collector ([0009];[0011]; [0013]). Hatanaka further teaches a coating weight for the undercoat layer ranging from preferably 1000 mg/m2 {i.e. 10 x 10-4 mg/mm2} to 1 mg/mm2 {i.e. 0.01 x 10-4 mg/mm2} ([0041]), which overlaps both the range taught by Huang and the claimed range. The coating weight range taught by Hatanaka allows for an undercoat thickness capable of reducing internal resistance and further ensures that the undercoat layer is capable of performing its intended function {i.e. sufficiently adhering active material to collector and reducing resistance} battery characteristics ([0040 – 0041]). Hatanaka additionally teaches that a drawback of increasing the weight per unit surface area of the undercoat layer is that the battery becomes heavier and larger ([0003]).
With respect to capacity of the negative electrode material, Huang teaches having the silicon-containing material have a capacity ranging from 300 – 4000 mAh/g ([0031]). Huang further teaches controlling the amount of silicon-containing active material to obtain a high-capacity electrode ([0034]), and, as established above, the amount taught by Huang overlaps the amount claimed/disclosed by the applicant (See claim 12 and Instant Specification: [0025]). Additionally, the applicant teaches that the higher the capacity per unit area of the negative active material layer, the larger the coating amount of active material (Instant Specification: [0018]). Huang teaches controlling the thicknesses of the active material coating and porous composite layer, which one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate relates to coating amount, to ensure that bonding strength is sufficient and expansion of the silicon-containing negative active material is suppressed ([0026]). Huang further teaches that when the proportion of silicon-containing negative active material is low {i.e. porous composite layer high}, the energy density of the electrode is low and when the proportion of silicon-containing negative active material is high {i.e. porous composite layer low}, the bonding strength is weakened and the expansion of the silicon-containing negative active material is not effectively suppressed ([0026]).
In the instant specification, the applicant teaches controlling the relationship X/C, where C represents the capacity per unit area of the negative electrode active material, to be within the range 3 to 350, and further 3 to 100, to obtain sufficient bonding force and optimized energy density (Instant specification: [0025]).
Therefore, since Huang teaches an overlapping coating weight range, and further indicates a desire to optimize the bonding strength, energy density, and expansion suppression capabilities of the negative electrode by controlling the proportion of negative active material to porous composite layer, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the X/C of Huang’s negative electrode to be overlapping or at least encompassing the claimed range of 3 ≤ X/C ≤ 350 (Claim 6) and further 3 ≤ X/C ≤ 100 (Claim 7).
Selection of a X/C within the overlapping portion of Huang’s range and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the porous composite layer coating weight effects established above {i.e. resistance due to thickness, bonding strength, etc.}, capacity, and amount of active material {i.e. affects energy density and expansion suppression capabilities}, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 8, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. Huang teaches a bonding force between the negative current collector and the bonding layer of 0.5 - 100 N/m, which, as established above, significantly overlaps the bonding force range claimed/disclosed by the applicant (See claim 5 and Instant Specification: [0017]).
Huang further teaches a preference for bonding forces between 1 – 80 N/m and indicates that bonding forces of 0.5 – 100 N/m, and further 1 – 80 N/m, provide sufficient adhesion of active material to the collector by the porous composite layer ([0055];[0149 – 0151]).
With respect to resistance, Huang teaches a desire to obtain an electrode with a low internal resistance ([0018];[0034]). Huang teaches controlling the mass ratio of polymer material/inorganic conductive material in the porous composite layer to optimize bonding strength and resistance, and that high polymer content {i.e. low conductive material content} provides lower conductivity and higher internal electrode resistance while low polymer content {i.e. high conductive material content} provides decreased bonding strength ([0018]).
In the instant specification, the applicant teaches obtaining a balance between bonding strength and resistance by controlling the relationship K/(R1-R2), where R1 represents the total resistance of the bonding layer and negative current collector and R2 represents the resistance of the negative current collector, to be within the range 0.2 to 100 ([0019]).
Since Huang teaches an overlapping bonding force range, a desire to obtain a low internal resistance for the electrode, and a similar current collector material to the applicant’s material (Huang: [0015]; Instant Specification: [0027]), one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the K/(R1-R2) of Huang’s negative electrode to be overlapping or at least encompassing the claimed range of 0.2 ≤ K/(R1-R2) ≤ 100.
Selection of a K/(R1-R2) within the overlapping portion of Huang’s range and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the internal resistance of the electrode and bonding strength between the current collector and active material layer by the porous composite layer, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 12, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. Huang further discloses wherein the negative active material layer comprises a silicon-based material ([0028]).
Based on the total weight of the active material layer, Huang teaches a content of silicon-containing negative electrode material of 90 – 99 wt%, which overlaps the claimed range of 5 ≤ Y ≤ 95.
The range taught by Huang allows for maintained adhesion between active material powder particles, improved conductivity, and ensures a high-capacity electrode ([0034]). Huang further teaches that reducing the content of silicon-containing active material reduces the volume and mass energy density of the battery and that a content greater than 99 wt% increases the risk of the electrode sheet powdering as well as the increases the internal resistance and reduces battery capacity ([0034]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have utilize an amount of silicon-containing active material within the overlapping portion of Huang’s taught range and the claimed range to optimize the energy density, resistance, and capacity as well as the electrode sheet’s adhesion between active material powder particles, conductivity, and high-capacity capabilities, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 13, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. Huang further discloses wherein the bonding layer further comprises a conductive agent ([0019]).
The conductive material is taught by Huang to be one or more selected from a metal material and a carbon material, and the conductive carbon material is taught to be selected from nanocarbon, carbon black, graphite, and carbon nanotubes ([0019]); therefore, Huang teaches a selection of conductive agent that overlaps the claimed group of at least one selected from carbon black, Ketjen black, graphene, carbon nanotubes, and carbon fiber.
Since Huang teaches a finite list of conducive materials for the porous composite layer, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to select a conductive material within the overlapping portion of the Huang’s selection and the claimed selection, with a reasonable expectation of success that such a selection would be a suitable conductive material for the porous composite layer [MPEP 2143(I)(E)].
Regarding Claim 14, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. As established above, Based on the total weight of the active material layer, Huang teaches a content of silicon-containing negative electrode material of 90 – 99 wt%, which overlaps the applicant’s claimed/disclosed range of 5 ≤ Y ≤ 95 (See claim 12 and Instant Specification: [0025]).
The range taught by Huang allows for maintained adhesion between active material powder particles, improved conductivity, and ensures a high-capacity electrode ([0034]). Huang further teaches that reducing the content of silicon-containing active material reduces the volume and mass energy density of the battery and that a content greater than 99 wt% increases the risk of the electrode sheet powdering as well as the increases the internal resistance and reduces battery capacity ([0034]).
With respect to resistance, Huang teaches a desire to reduce internal resistance of the electrode material layer to obtain improvements in battery capacity by including a relatively larger amount of active material and conductive agent than binder material in the active material layer ([0034 – 0035];[0037]). As such, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the resistance of the active material layer to be relatively low.
In the instant specification, the applicant teaches obtaining a relatively low negative active material resistance when controlling the relationship between W/Y, where W represents the resistance of the negative electrode active material layer, to be within the range 0.1 to 50 (Instant specification: [0025]).
Therefore, since Huang teaches an overlapping amount of silicon-containing active material, and further teaches a desire to obtain an active material layer with low resistance like the claimed layer, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the W/Y of Huang’s negative electrode active material layer to be overlapping or at least encompassing the claimed range of 0.1 ≤ W/Y ≤ 50.
Selection of a W/Y within the overlapping portion of Huang’s and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the resistance of the active material layer and the additional effects of the active material content {i.e. volume/mass energy density, capacity, electrode powdering risk}, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 16, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. The electrolytic solution of modified Huang is an LiPO2F2-containing electrolytic solution as taught by Ji.
Ji further teaches, in addition to LiPO2F2, including at least one electrolyte additive compound selected from the group consisting of cyclic and linear carbonates, anhydrides, sufonates, sulfates, compounds having a alkyne or alkynyl group, ethers, cyclic sulfur-oxygen compounds (such as sultones), cyclic boron-oxygen compounds (such as borocanes and boroxins), linear boron-oxygen compounds (such as borates, boronic acids and boric acids), phosphites, phosphates, isocyanurates, oxysilanes, silyloxy compounds, and nitriles; each of which may be optionally partially or fully fluorinated and/or optionally substituted (Ji: [0066 – 0067]). Ji further provides a finite list of example electrolyte additive compounds which include the nitriles succinonitrile, adiponitrile, and pimelonitrile ([0070 – 0071]). One with ordinary skill in the art would recognize the nitriles additives to be organic compounds containing a cyano group which are within the claimed selection of compounds including a propionate, an organic compound containing a cyano group, or the compound with the chemical structure shown in (d). The inclusion of the additional additives are taught to be reduced or self-polymerize on the surface of Si anode to form a SEI layer that can reduce or prevent the crack and/or the continuous reduction of electrolyte solutions as the silicon containing anode expands and contracts during cycling and further form CEI layers that suppress or minimize further decomposition of the electrolyte on the surface of the cathode ([0073]).
it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, when modifying Huang to include Ji’s taught electrolyte compositions, to select a composition that further includes a nitrile additive from Ji’s taught selection, because such a compound would be a selection of electrolyte additive from Ji’s finite list and thus would have a reasonable expectation of success in being a suitable electrolyte additive for Huang’s battery and further would have a reasonable expectation in achieving SEI and CEI layers in Huang’s battery that improve electrochemical performance [MPEP 2143(I)(E)].
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (CN111710832A), Ji (US PG pub. 2020/0388885 A1) and Hatanaka (CN111902969A, EP counterpart EP3780158A1 used as English translation), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Matsumura (US PG Pub. 2018/0277848 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 07/03/2025).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. As established above, the propylene containing copolymers taught by Huang include polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, and tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride ([0020]). The primary function of the porous composite layer is to firmly bond the negative electrode active material layer to the collector ([0016];[0055]).
Modified Huang does not explicitly disclose wherein the copolymer possesses at least one of the following characteristics (a) the propylene monomer accounts for 30 mol% to 96 mol% of an aggregate of the monomers that form the copolymer; (b) the copolymer is particles, and an average particle diameter of the particle is 50 µm or less; (c) a softening point of the copolymer is 70°C to 90°C; (d) an isotacticity of the copolymer is 35% to 80%; (e) a weight-average molecular weight of the copolymer is 500 – 1,000,000; and (f) a swelling degree of the copolymer in diethyl carbonate is 40% or less.
Matsumura teaches a conductive, adhesive undercoat layer for a secondary battery electrode where the copolymer of the conductive, adhesive paste that forms the undercoat layer has a weight average molecular weight of 10,000 – 170,000 ([0027];[0182]). Matsumura teaches that such a range allows for excellent peel strength and further allows for sufficient dispersion of the conductive additive in the layer ([0071]).
Since Matsumura and Huang teach similar conductive, adhesive layer compositions (Huang: [0016];[0019 – 0020] and Matsumura: [0055 – 0056];[0062];0067];[0132 – 0133]) with a similar function, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to control the weight average molecular weight of Huang’s copolymer to be within the range taught by Matsumura {i.e. 10,000 – 170,000}, and thus obtain a copolymer with an average molecular weight within the claimed range of 500 – 1,000,000, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining sufficient dispersion of Huang’s conductive material in the porous composite layer and excellent peel strength.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (CN111710832A), Ji (US PG pub. 2020/0388885 A1) and Hatanaka (CN111902969A, EP counterpart EP3780158A1 used as English translation), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang (US PG Pub. 2014/0072873 A1, cited in previous Office action mailed 07/03/2025).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Huang discloses all limitation as set forth above. As established above, the propylene containing copolymers taught by Huang include polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, and tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride ([0020]).
Modified Huang does not particularly disclose the copolymer comprising a polar functional group, and the polar functional group comprising at least one selected from the group consisting of a hydroxyl group, an amino group, a carboxyl group, and an ester group.
Wang teaches an electrode including a primer layer positioned between a conductive support and an electroactive material layer ([0005 – 0007];[0043 – 0044]). For the primer layer, Wang teaches using polymeric materials that comprise a hydroxyl functional groups ([0007];[0025]). Wang further teaches that the hydroxyl functional group allows for good adhesion to conductive supports such as aluminum foil and/or aluminized polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film ([0050]).
Since Huang teaches using conductive metal foil materials also taught by Wang (Huang: [0015]; Wang: [0065]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a hydroxyl functional group in the copolymer of Huang, as taught by Wang, and thus obtain the claimed polar functional group, with a reasonable expectation of success in further improving the adhesion of Huang’s porous composite layer to the metal foil collector of the electrode.
Claim(s) 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (CN111710832A) in view of Ji (US PG pub. 2020/0388885 A1), Kim (US PG Pub. 2017/0288268 A1) and Hatanaka (CN111902969A, EP counterpart EP3780158A1 used as English translation).
Regarding Claims 17 and 20, Huang discloses an electrochemical device (lithium ion secondary battery; [0049]), the electrochemical device comprising an electrolytic solution ([0049];[0052]) and a negative electrode plate ([0007];[0010 – 0014]), the negative electrode plate comprising: negative current collector ([0011]); a bonding layer (porous composite layer; [0012];[0016]); and a negative electrode active material layer ([0013]), wherein the bonding layer is disposed between the negative current collector and the negative active material layer (Fig. 2; [0013 – 0014];[0061]).
Huang generally teaches the electrolytic solution of the battery including lithium salts, solvents, and additives, such as one or more of lithium hexafluorophosphate, carbonates, carbonate esters, and carboxylic acid esters; and that any lithium ion-secondary battery electrolyte known in the art can be used ([0049];[0052]).
Huang does not explicitly disclose the electrolytic solution comprising lithium difluorophosphate.
Ji, directed to electrolytes for energy storage devices having a silicon-based anodes (Abstract), particularly teaches using battery electrolyte compositions including lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) as a lithium salt ([0005];[0046]). The use of LiPO2F2 in the electrolyte of batteries including Si-dominant anodes allows for reduced electrolyte reactions by stabilizing the solid/electrolyte interface, prevents Si anode volume expansion, protect transition metal ion dissolution from NCM or NCA cathodes, stabilizes the subsequent structure changes, enhances thermal stability of LCO cathodes, reduces flammability and enhances the thermal stability of organic electrolytes and increases the safety of electrolyte solutions ([0046]). Furthermore, Ji teaches that presence of lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) and an electrolyte additive can result in a SEI and/or CEI layer on the surface of electrodes with improved performance and thus facilitates reduction in capacity fade and/or the generation of excessive gaseous byproducts during operation of the lithium ion battery ([0073]).
Therefore, since Huang teaches a battery including a silicon-based anode and cathode materials also taught by Ji (Huang: [0010 – 0013];[0050]; Ji:[0049]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the LiPO2F2-containing electrolyte as taught by Ji, and thus obtain an electrolytic solution within the claimed scope, with a reasonable expectation of success that such an electrolyte would be suitable for Huang’s battery and with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a battery with improved electrochemical performance and safety.
Huang teaches the porous composite layer comprising one or more polymer materials selected from cellulose acetate propionate, cellulose acetate, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinylidene fluoride, polycarbonate, polypropylene, polymethyl methacrylate, carboxymethyl cellulose, polyamide, polyimide, polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-trichloroethylene, polyacrylonitrile, polyvinyl, pyrrolidone, sodium alginate, polyvinyl acetate, polyethylene-co-vinyl acetate, polyethylene oxide, cellulose acetate butyrate, polyvinyl chloride, butadiene-co-acrylonitrile, tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride, ethylene-co-acrylic acid, styrene-butadiene rubber, and polyacrylonitrile ([0020]). Polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, and tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene fluoride, by including hexafluoropropylene as a monomer, are copolymers that read on comprising at least a propylene monomer.
Huang does not explicitly disclose a working embodiment of the bonding layer {i.e. porous composite layer} comprising a copolymer formed from monomers comprising at least a propylene monomer.
However, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select a copolymer including a propylene monomer {i.e. polyimide-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene or tetrafluoroethylene-co-hexafluoropropylene-co-vinylidene} from Huang’s taught selection, because such a copolymer would be a selection of adhesive polymer material from Huang’s finite list and thus would have a reasonable expectation of success in being a suitable selection of adhesive polymer for the porous composite layer [MPEP 2143(I)(E)].
Huang does not explicitly disclose an electronic device comprising the electrochemical device above.
Kim teaches that lithium ion secondary batteries have application in small portable electronic devices ([0003]).
Therefore, since the battery taught by Huang is a lithium ion secondary battery ([0049]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the battery taught by Huang in an electronic device, as taught by Kim, with a reasonable expectation that the battery taught by Huang would be suitable for such a device.
In working examples, Huang teaches porous composite layer coating weights of 4 g/m2 (Example 1; [0084]), 10 g/m2 (Example 2; [0092]), 0.3 g/m2 (Example 3; [0100]), 1 g/m2 (Examples 4 – 5; [0108];[0116]), 15 g/m2 (Example 6; [0124]), and 8 g/m2 (Example 7; [0132]); therefore, Huang exemplifies weights of bonding layer per unit area of the negative current collector {i.e. claimed X value} ranging from 3 x 10-4 mg/mm2 – 150 x 10-4 mg/mm2, which overlap the claimed ranges of 1 ≤ X ≤ 30.
Hatanaka teaches an electrode with an undercoat layer between the electrode active material layer and the collector ([0011]). The undercoat layer of Hatanaka is taught to be conductive and allow for higher adhesion between the active material layer and the electrode collector ([0009];[0011]; [0013]). Hatanaka further teaches a coating weight for the undercoat layer ranging from preferably 1 mg/mm2 {i.e. 0.01 x 10-4 mg/mm2} to 1000 mg/m2 {i.e. 10 x 10-4 mg/mm2} to ([0041]), which overlaps both the range taught by Huang and is within the claimed range. The coating weight range taught by Hatanaka allows for an undercoat thickness capable of reducing internal resistance and further ensures that the undercoat layer is capable of performing its intended function {i.e. sufficiently adhering active material to collector and reducing resistance} battery characteristics ([0040 – 0041]). Hatanaka additionally teaches that a drawback of increasing the weight per unit surface area of the undercoat layer is that the battery becomes heavier and larger ([0003]).
Huang further teaches that the addition of the porous composite layer can increase the adhesion between the silicon-containing negative electrode material layer and the current collector by 0.5-100 N/m, preferably 1-80 N/m ([0023];[0055]), and because it is the porous composite layer achieving the improvement in adhesion, one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect the adhesive force increase taught by Huang to correspond to the bonding force/performance of the porous composite layer. As such, Huang suggests a bonding force between the negative current collector and the bonding layer that would encompass or at least significantly overlap the claimed range of 1 ≤ K ≤ 100 N/m (Claim 20).
Huang teaches a preference for achieving bonding force increases between 1 – 80 N/m and indicates that bonding force increase of 0.5 – 100 N/m, and further 1 – 80 N/m, provides sufficient adhesion of active material to the collector by the porous composite layer ([0055];[0149 – 0151]).
Furthermore, since the bonding force and the weight of Huang’s porous composite layer per unit area of the collector overlaps the claimed bonding force (K) and weight (X) ranges , one with ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect Huang’s X/K values to overlap or at least encompass the claimed range of 0.1 ≤ X/K ≤ 0.75.
Selection of a coating weight X, bonding force K and X/K within the overlapping portion of Huang’s taught/suggested coating weights X, bonding forces K and X/K values and the claimed coating weights X, bonding forces K and X/K values would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the adhesive strength and thickness/resistance of the porous composite layer in view of the battery weight and/or size with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 at (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.
/A.Y.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 6/25/2026
Prosecution Insights