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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/7/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Request for Continued Examination filed 8/7/2025 includes claim amendments and arguments corresponding to the new limitation(s). The 35 USC 112(b) set forth in the previous action has been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment to Claim 5.
Applicant argues the primary reference of the previous action (Ueno, US 20120115028 A1) does not disclose the new limitation of amended Claim 1, which now requires “the active material layer consists of an active material and a carbon material.” Applicant notes “the active material layer of above-amended Claim 1 consists of an active material and a carbon material, and does not contain a solid electrolyte material, unlike Ueno” (see page 2 of Applicant’s arguments).
Examiner agrees Ueno does not disclose an active material layer consisting only of an active material and a carbon material. However, Examiner does not agree the “consists of” limitation is supported by the portions of the disclosure identified by Applicant (instant Figs. 1 and 2). See Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 section below.
After an updated search and consideration, the claimed invention remains obvious, but over new art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 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.
Claim 1 recites “the active material layer consists of an active material and a carbon material” on line 7 of the claim. The instant disclosure does not provide adequate support for this limitation.
Applicant cites instant Figs. 1 and 2 as support for the “consists of” limitation, but neither drawing shows an active material layer having an active material and a carbon material. The instant disclosure at [0028] teaches the positive electrode active material layer 1B and the negative electrode active material layer 2B include an active material and a carbon material, but only the carbon material (element 11 in Fig. 2) is shown. The instant disclosure at [0028] also teaches the active material layer “may contain a conductive additive, an ion conductive assistant, a binder and the like,” none of which are shown in Figs. 1 and 2:
PNG
media_image1.png
582
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
274
532
media_image2.png
Greyscale
17/773,341 – Fig. 1 (left) and Fig. 2 (right)
Applicant’s examples do not teach an active material layer consisting only of an active material and carbon material. For example, [0083] of the instant specification teaches an active material layer composition of “15 parts of ethyl cellulose as a binder and 65 parts of dihydroterpineol as a solvent were added to 96 parts of the active material powder and 4 parts of the flat carbon material (graphite: TIMREX (registered trademark) Graphite: KS-6L) powder obtained, and mixed and dispersed to fabricate paste for the active material layer.”
Applicant is encouraged to identify corresponding sections of the written specification that support an active material layer consisting only of an active material and a carbon material.
Claims 2-5 and 7-20 are also rejected, as they depend upon Claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 9, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al, US 20160190546 A1, and further in view of Gruner et al., US 20150243452 A1 (see enclosed PTO-892 for both references).
Regarding Claims 1 and 8, Yoon discloses an all-solid-state battery (all-solid battery [0011-0015, 0026] Figs. 1-3) comprising:
an electrode layer having a current collector layer (metal current collector 200 [0026], Fig. 1) and an active material layer (layers/region of positive electrode composite 300 on metal current collector 200 [0026-0032], Fig. 1; see Examiner’s Drawing);
a solid electrolyte layer (layers/region of positive electrode composite 300 in contact with solid electrolyte layer 100 [0026-0032], Fig. 1; see Examiner’s Drawing); and
an intermediate layer provided at least in a part between the electrode layer and the solid electrolyte layer (central layers/region of positive electrode composite 300 not in contact with 100 or 200 [0026-0032], Fig. 2; see Examiner’s Drawing),
the active material layer consists of an active material and a conductive material (at the region coming in contact with the metal current collector 200, the electrolyte and the positive electrode material may be mixed at a ratio of about 0:100, conductive material may be present in the region at 1 to 10 wt % [0031]),
the intermediate layer has ionic conductivity (central region comprises the conductive material [0031], Fig. 2),
the content of the conductive material in the intermediate layer is less than the content in the active material layer (the content of the conductive material may be increased from the electrolyte layer 100 toward the metal current collector 200 [0028, 0031], Fig. 2),
wherein the conductive material contents in the active material layer, the solid electrolyte layer, and the intermediate layer are higher in the order of the active material layer, the intermediate layer, and the solid electrolyte layer (the content of the conductive material may be increased from the electrolyte layer 100 toward the metal current collector 200 [0028], Fig. 2), and
the conductive material content in the solid electrolyte layer is within the range of 100 ppm or more and 10,000 ppm or less (at the region coming in contact with the electrolyte layer 100, the conductive material may be contained at a content of about 0 to 1 wt % [0031]; the claimed range is equivalent to a percent-based range of 0.01 % to 1.0 %).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) [MPEP 2144.05].
PNG
media_image3.png
210
694
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Yoon – Fig. 2
PNG
media_image4.png
364
1198
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Drawing using Yoon disclosure
Yoon does not disclose details regarding the composition of the conductive material, and therefore does not disclose the conductive material is “a carbon material” as required by Claim 1. Yoon also does not disclose “the carbon material contains at least one selected from graphite and carbon nanotubes” as required by Claim 8.
Gruner teaches a composite electrode preferably comprises a carbon material as a conductive additive (carbon nanotubes [0015, 0024, 0057-0066, 0199-0201]; Fig. 7). Gruner teaches when the carbon nanotubes are used in the composite electrode, the battery will have a reduced overall weight, while also exhibiting improved electrical conductivity ([0052-0054, 0061-0063, 0165]; Figs. 35-37).
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have carbon nanotubes as the conductive material of Yoon, as Gruner teaches carbon nanotubes are conductive, lightweight, and improve electrical conductivity.
PNG
media_image5.png
154
682
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Gruner – Fig. 35
Regarding Claim 3, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon discloses the active material layer comprises 10,000 ppm to 100,000 ppm of carbon (Yoon, at the region coming in contact with the metal current collector 200, the conductive material may be present in the region at 1 to 10 wt % [0031]), and the solid electrolyte layer comprises 0 ppm to 10,000 ppm of carbon (at the region coming in contact with the electrolyte layer 100, the conductive material may be contained at a content of about 0 to 1 wt % [0031]).
As modified Yoon discloses the conductive material of the intermediate layer would have a content range between the ranges of the active material layer and solid electrolyte layer ([0028, 0031], Fig. 2), modified Yoon’s content would overlap with the claimed range (see Examiner’s Drawing).
PNG
media_image6.png
366
1196
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Drawing
Regarding Claim 4, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon discloses the intermediate layer is composed of elements contained the active material layer and elements contained in the solid electrolyte layer (Yoon, layer may comprise various amounts of conductive material/solid electrolyte/positive electrode active material [0016, 0028, 0031], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon discloses the content of the carbon material in the active material layer increases as the distance from a surface of the active material layer that is in contact with the intermediate layer increases (Yoon, the content of the conductive material may be increased from the electrolyte layer 100 toward the metal current collector 200 [0028, 0031], Figs. 1-3).
Regarding Claims 9 and 11-13, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon discloses the carbon content in the active material layer is within the range of 5,000 ppm or more and 100,000 ppm or less (Yoon, at the region coming in contact with the metal current collector 200, the conductive material may be present in the region at 1 to 10 wt % [0031]; the claimed range is equivalent to a percent-based range of 0.5 % to 10 %).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) [MPEP 2144.05].
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Yoon as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Endo et al., US 20150243966 A1 (previously cited).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon does not disclose “a ratio T1/ T2 of the thickness T1 of the intermediate layer to the thickness T2 of the active material layer satisfies 0.05 ≤ T1/T2 ≤ 1.2” as required by Claim 2. However, this limitation is taught by Endo et al.
Endo teaches a gradient-style positive electrode, wherein a ratio T1/ T2 of a thickness T1 of an intermediate layer (positive electrode active material layer 11) to a thickness T2 of an active material layer (positive electrode active material layer 12) is 0.1 ≤ T1/T2 ≤ 1.0 (1:10 to 5:5 [0023-0024], Annotated Fig. 1). Endo teaches a thickness within the range of 0.1 ≤ T1/T2 ≤ 1.0 results in a safe battery with high capacity, and a thickness ratio outside the range becomes difficult to manufacture or can result in poor current collector performance ([0024]).
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have a thickness ratio of the intermediate layer to the active material layer be within the claimed range, in the solid-state battery of modified Yoon, as Endo discloses an overlapping thickness ratio range brings capacity and safety benefits, while avoiding manufacturability issues and poor current collector performance.
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) [MPEP 2144.05].
PNG
media_image7.png
210
728
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Endo – Annotated Fig. 1
Regarding Claim 10, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon discloses the carbon content in the active material layer is within the range of 5,000 ppm or more and 100,000 ppm or less (Yoon, at the region coming in contact with the metal current collector 200, the conductive material may be present in the region at 1 to 10 wt % [0031]; the claimed range is equivalent to a percent-based range of 0.5 % to 10 %).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) [MPEP 2144.05].
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Yoon as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Okada et al., “Improvement of High Rate Performances for Ti-Doped Li3V2(PO4)3 Cathode Materials”, Electrochemistry, 2015, 83 (10), pg. 828–830 (previously cited).
Regarding Claims 14-20, modified Yoon discloses all limitations as set forth above. Modified Yoon does not disclose the composition of the active material (Yoon, positive electrode material [0026-0027]). However, a “vanadium phosphate titanium lithium” active material is taught by Okada.
Okada teaches a positive electrode mixture layer comprising a conductive material and a vanadium phosphate titanium lithium cathode active material (Li3-2x(V1-xTix)2(PO4)3 and acetylene black; pg. 828). Okada discloses the titanium-doped lithium vanadium phosphate, in combination with an amount of carbon within the claimed range (8 wt % acetylene black is 80,000 ppm of carbon material; pg. 828), is a positive electrode composition that exhibits high conductivity and high discharge capacity (pg. 829-830).
Before the effective filing date of the present invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a vanadium phosphate titanium lithium as the positive active material, as taught by Okada, in the solid-state battery of modified Yoon, as Okada teaches this active material is favorably paired with carbon to produce a battery with high discharge capacity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETHANY C GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)272-2475. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 0800 - 1730 MT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684. 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.
/BETHANY C GARCIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721