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 .
Status of Claims
The Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 03/27/2026, has been entered. Claims 1 and 6 are amended; claims 3, 7-9, and 15-16 stand as originally or previously presented; claims 2 and 4-5 are canceled; and claims 10-14 are withdrawn. Support for the amendments is found in the original filing, and there is no new matter.
Upon considered said amendments and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C.103 rejection and Claim Objection set forth in Office Action mailed 12/29/2025 has been withdrawn. Amended and new grounds of rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 citing to newly cited art and the originally cited art are set forth below as necessitated by the claim amendments.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-7, 9, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN 104852025 A, hereinafter Cai), from IDS dated 05/06/2022, in view of Swager et al. (US 20120116094 A1, hereinafter Swager) and Tang et al. (“Bottom-up Synthesis of Large-Scale Graphene Oxide Nanosheets,” hereinafter Tang), from IDS dated 03/12/2025.
Regarding Claim 1, Cai discloses the limitations regarding a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]), comprising:
a positive electrode active material (Cai, cathode material comprising sulfur particle composite material, acetylene black, and polyvinylidene fluoride, [0034]); and
graphene oxides coated on a surface of the positive electrode active material (Cai, graphene oxide-coated sulfur particle composite cathode material, [0006]).
Cai is silent regarding a bottom-up graphene oxide, wherein the bottom-up graphene oxides are crosslinked with each other through a hydrocarbon compound containing a cationic functional group, wherein
the hydrocarbon compound containing the cationic functional group comprises at least 2 cationic functional groups and 4 to 20 carbon atoms, and wherein
the hydrocarbon compound containing the cationic functional group is bonded to a surface of the bottom-up graphene oxides by a carbon atom included in the hydrocarbon compound.
Swager discloses a graphene oxide composition used as cathode materials in batteries (Swager, [0070]), and graphene oxides are crosslinked with each other through a hydrocarbon compound containing a cationic functional group (Swager, graphene oxide that is surface functionalized with a plurality of functional groups attached via carbon-carbon bond linkages, [0055]), wherein
the hydrocarbon compound containing the cationic functional group comprises at least 2 cationic functional groups and 4 to 20 carbon atoms (Swager, 3 functional groups and 6 carbon atoms, Annotated Figure 10 below; the disclosed 3 functional groups and 6 carbon atoms falls within the claimed range of at least 2 functional groups and 4 to 20 carbon atoms, respectively). the Examiner notes that the number of cationic functional groups may be 1-3 and the number of carbon atoms depends on the alkyl length, which would at least overlap the claimed range of at least 2 cationic functional groups and 4 to 20 carbon atoms), and wherein
the hydrocarbon compound containing the cationic functional group is bonded to a surface of the graphene oxides by a carbon atom included in the hydrocarbon compound (Swager, graphene oxide that is surface functionalized with a plurality of functional groups attached via carbon-carbon bond linkages, and G of the structure comprises a carbon atom of the graphene oxide, [0048-0050, 0055]).
PNG
media_image1.png
325
966
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Swager teaches that the functional groups may increase the ability of the carbon-based nanostructure material to associate with and/or store redox active species (e.g., between interlayer spaces). In some cases, the redox active species may be lithium (Swager, [0070]).
Cai and Swager are analogous to the current invention as they are directed towards a cathode material.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the graphene oxide that is surface functionalized with a plurality of functional groups attached via carbon-carbon bond linkages of Swager as the graphene oxide of Cai, in order to increase the ability of the carbon-based nanostructure material to associate with and/or store redox active species.
While modified Cai discloses graphene oxide, modified Cai is silent regarding bottom-up graphene oxide. Tang discloses graphene oxide nanosheets that may be produced through a bottom-up method, which allows for the fabrication of environmentally friendly, facile as well as large-scale graphene oxide nanosheets at a low cost. In addition, the thickness, electrical, optical, and structural properties of bottom-up graphene nanosheets may be adjusted during its fabrication using the bottom-up method (Tang, Page 5682, Conclusion).
Modified Cai and Tang are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards graphene oxide.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the graphene oxide of modified Cai to be fabricated through the bottom-up method, as taught by Tang, in order to fabricate environmentally friendly, facile as well as large-scale graphene oxide nanosheets at a low cost.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]), wherein the cationic functional group comprises at least one cation selected from nitrogen cation, oxygen cation and sulfur cation (Swager, nitrogen cation and oxygen cation, Annotated Figure 2 above), and is capable of trapping and adsorbing lithium polysulfide (Swager, the functional groups may increase the ability of the carbon-based nanostructure material to associate with and/or store redox active species (e.g., between interlayer spaces). In some cases, the redox active species may be lithium, [0070]; the Examiner notes that lithium polysulfide is a redox active species).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]), wherein the hydrocarbon compound containing the cationic functional group has a structure of -(CH2)x-NR1R2-(CH2)m-NR3R4-(CH2)o-, wherein x, m, and o are each independently an integer of 0 to 6, and R1, R2, R3, and R4 are each independently hydrogen or an alkyl group having 1 to 4 carbon atoms (Swager, the at least one functional group associated with graphene or graphene oxide has the structure:
PNG
media_image2.png
120
130
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
wherein R1, R2, R3 can be the same or difference can be the same or different and each are independently heteroalkyl, any of which is optionally substituted, R3 is N(CH3)2, NH-phenyl, or NH-biphenyl, and G comprises a carbon atom of the graphene oxide, "heteroalkyl" is given its ordinary meaning in the art and refers to alkyl groups as described herein in which one or more atoms is a heteroatom (e.g., oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and the like), and substituents include halogens, [0048-0050, 0118, 0122]; the Examiner notes that the hydrocarbon of Annotated Figure 10 above may have “Me2N” functional groups substituted for the “OMe” groups, which would follow the claimed structure).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]), further comprising a halogen anion as a counter-ion to the cation contained in the cationic functional group (Swager, the at least one functional group associated with graphene or graphene oxide has the structure:
PNG
media_image2.png
120
130
media_image2.png
Greyscale
,
wherein R1, R2 can be the same or difference can be the same or different and each are independently heteroalkyl, any of which is optionally substituted, R3 is N(CH3)2, NH-phenyl, or NH-biphenyl, and G comprises a carbon atom of the graphene oxide, "heteroalkyl" is given its ordinary meaning in the art and refers to alkyl groups as described herein in which one or more atoms is a heteroatom (e.g., oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and the like), and substituents include halogens, [0048-0050, 0118, 0122]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]), wherein the positive electrode active material is a sulfur-carbon composite (Cai, cathode material comprising sulfur particle composite material, acetylene black, and polyvinylidene fluoride, [0034]).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a lithium secondary battery (Cai, lithium-sulfur battery, [0001]), comprising:
the positive electrode (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]);
a lithium metal negative electrode (Cai, lithium metal sheets as the negative electrode, [0034]);
a separator between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Cai, polypropylene porous membrane as the battery separator, [0034]); and
an electrolyte (Cai, DOL+DME solution containing 1 mol/L LiTFSI (volume ratio 1:1) as the electrolyte, [0034]).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a lithium secondary battery, wherein the lithium secondary battery is a lithium-sulfur battery (Cai, lithium-sulfur battery, [0001]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (CN104852025 A, hereinafter Cai), in view of Swager et al. (US 20120116094 A1, hereinafter Swager) and Tang et al. (“Bottom-up Synthesis of Large-Scale Graphene Oxide Nanosheets,” hereinafter Tang), from IDS dated 03/12/2025, as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Konishi et al. (US 20180277829 A1, hereinafter Konishi).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Cai discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Cai discloses the limitations regarding a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (Cai, cathode materials for lithium-sulfur batteries, [0001]), wherein the bottom-up graphene oxides (Tang, graphene oxide nanosheets that may be produced through a bottom-up method, which allows for the fabrication of environmentally friendly, facile as well as large-scale graphene oxide nanosheets at a low cost, Page 5682, Conclusion) are coated on the surface of the positive electrode active material (Cai, graphene oxide-coated sulfur particle composite cathode material, [0006])
Modified Cai is silent regarding the bottom-up graphene oxides coated on the surface of the positive electrode active material is included in an amount of more than 1% by weight and less than 5% by weight relative to the total weight of the positive electrode active material.
Konishi discloses graphene oxides coated on the surface of the positive electrode active material is included in an amount of more than 1% by weight and less than 5% by weight relative to the total weight of the positive electrode active material (Konishi, the amount of graphene or graphene oxide added in the positive electrode is preferably 0.1 parts by weight or more and 5 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of the positive electrode active material, [0067]; the disclosed graphene oxide range of 0.1 to 5 parts by weight overlaps the claimed range of more than 1% by weight and less than 5% by weight).
Konishi teaches that if the amount is less than 0.1 parts by weight, electron conductivity of the surface of the positive electrode active material tends to be low. On the other hand, if the amount exceeds 5 parts by weight, graphene or graphene oxide tends to aggregate, and a part that thickly adheres to the positive electrode active material increases, so that the ion conductivity tends to be low (Konishi, [0067]).
Modified Cai and Konishi are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards a positive electrode comprising graphene oxide.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include bottom-up graphene oxide in the positive electrode active material of modified Pope in an amount of 0.1 parts by weight or more and 5 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of the positive electrode active material, as taught by Konishi, in order to prevent the ionic conductivity from decreasing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 5-9, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 9, 15, and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cai et al. (CN104852025 A, hereinafter Cai), in view of Swager et al. (US 20120116094 A1, hereinafter Swager) and Tang et al. (“Bottom-up Synthesis of Large-Scale Graphene Oxide Nanosheets,” hereinafter Tang), as noted above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:50 - 7:50 ET.
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, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/K.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights