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
Claims 5 and 20 are canceled. Claims 6-10 and 13-16 are withdrawn. Claim 1 is amended to incorporate claim 5 and further limit the scope by the oxide layer being formed on “an entire” surface of the collector.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112a
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 1-4, 11-12 and 17-19 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 has been amended to recite in line 8 “an oxide layer is on an entire surface of the negative electrode current collector” (emphasis added). Applicant asserts that support for this amendment is found in the instant PGPUB (US20230039594) specifically [0015] and [0019]. The examiner respectfully disagrees. [0015] (annotated below for convenience)
PNG
media_image1.png
230
486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The highlighted portion merely teaches that the oxide layer is on the same side of the current collector as the lithiophilic material.
PNG
media_image2.png
70
478
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The highlighted portion emphasizes that the instant disclosure merely supports a description that the oxide layer is not on the entire surface i.e. formed on the same side of the collector but only where the lithiophilic material is not.
A search of the PGPUB for “entire” reveals in [0031] that the lithiophilic material can be on the entire surface which is not what is claimed. In [0066 and 0068] that lithium plating occurs over the entire surface again not what is claimed. [0078] explains that the electrode current collector is entirely oxidized but again notes that the lithiophilic material (an oxide) appears to be claimed distinctly from the oxide layer and further explains that the areas not coated by the lithiphilic are reformed (i.e. oxide layer forms). [0115] describes the entire surface coated with silver which references example 1 described in [0102] appears to reference the oxidation of the lithiophilic material (coating material) and supports [0031] and finally similarly described as the lithiophilic material on the entire surface in [0134]. The instant disclosure appears to support an oxide on the entire surface however this oxide includes both the lithiophilic material (lines 4-6) and the oxide layer (line 8). Claims 2-4, 11-12 and 17-19 are rejected as depending therefrom.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112b
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "a negative electrode" three times in lines 3-6 however claim 12 depends on claim 11 which recites the negative electrode in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Because claim 12 requires the electrode assembly of claim 11 it appears Applicant intends all electrodes in claim 12 to be the previously referenced. In an effort to promote compact prosecution the claims will be interpreted as such. Clarification is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1, line 6 requires that “the lithiophilic material be an oxidized product of a coating material”; given the broadest reasonable interpretation both a partially oxidized coating material layer and fully oxidized coating material read on the claim limitation. Wherein the limitation is interpreted as product by process and the intermediate coating material is not necessarily requires so long as an oxide lithiophilic material comprising at least one metal or metal oxide is present.
Claim 2 is given the broadest reasonable interpretation. A lithioiphilic capable of lithium plating occurring thereon reads on the instant claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 11-12 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Yamamoto (US20110020536).
As to claim 1, Yamamoto teaches a negative electrode for a lithium secondary battery ([0084]) comprising: a negative electrode current collector (11/12) and a lithiophilic material on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector (18), the lithiophilic material is an oxidized product (SiOx) of a metal (Si) ([0092]) and an oxide layer on an entire surface (90 and first 18 layer) of the current collector (11/12) comprising a portion coated (first 18) with the lithiophilic material (subsequent 18s) and a portion not coated with the lithiophilic material (90, [0026]) (fig. 15 and fig. 17b). Note that SiOx is a material the instant specification describes as lithiophilic (see instant claims 3-4 i.e. oxide of Si) moreover the instant specification explains that oxidation itself renders a material more lithiophilic (instant PGPUB [0022], [0054] for example).
Regarding claim 2, Yamamoto teaches a lithium ion battery wherein one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate operates by the movement of lithium ions from the cathode to the anode. Therefore, Yamamoto’s anode of claim 1 is capable of lithium plating occurring on the active material (lithiophilic material). Moreover, Yamamoto uses the claimed material see claims 3-4 below. Also see instant PGPUB ([0059]).
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto deposits a Si coating material (Fig. 15: 14; [0090]).
Regarding claim 4, Yamamoto oxidizes Si metal to form the lithiophilic material (Fig. 15: 18; [0090]).
Regarding claims 11 and 17-19, Yamamoto teaches an electrode assembly (negative/separator/positive) according to claims 1-4, respectively ([0139]).
Regarding claim 12, Yamamoto teaches a mono-cell including positive electrode, separator and the negative electrode are stacked ([0139] and fig. 9).
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 MIRIAM STAGG whose telephone number is (571)270-5256. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm.
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, Srilakshmi Kumar can be reached at (571) 272-7769. 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.
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724