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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-5, 8, 14-20, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (US 20200067085 A1) in view of Dremann (US 3551184 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Chae teaches the following elements:
A method of making a surface-modified alkali metal material for electrochemical use, (“According to the sixth embodiment of the present disclosure, there is provided a lithium metal laminate which includes: i) lithium metal foil; and ii) a buffer layer including carbonaceous material particles, inorganic compound particles, polymer compound particles or their combination, and coated on one surface of the lithium metal foil, wherein the buffer layer has a thickness of 2.5-32.5 μm.” Chae [0019]. In this case, the lithium metal foil is the alkali metal material and the applied buffer layer is the surface modification.)
While Chae teaches forming a buffer layer to lithium foil, it doesn’t explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 1, which require a tribochemical barrier formed via frictional contact.
the method comprising bringing an alkali metal substrate into frictional contact with a barrier agent to form a tribochemical barrier layer on the substrate.
However, Dremann teaches a method of depositing forming a modified film containing a metal layer and a lithium metal layer via a sliding method, which meets the additional limitations of claim 1:
the method comprising bringing an alkali metal substrate into frictional contact with a barrier agent to form a tribochemical barrier layer on the substrate. (“The method of the present invention comprises rubbing, with solid lithium metal, the Surface of a solid body of metal other than lithium having a temperature of at least 375 F., a melting point above said temperature and, at said temperature, a stable film thereon of oxide thereof and being incapable, at said temperature, of forming substantially immediately a eutectic with lithium, whereby areas contacted with and traversed by the lithium metal become coated with molten lithium, and thereafter cooling the assembly to solidify the lithium metal” Dremann page 1 column 1 lines 69-73 -and column 2 lines 1-7.)
Dremann and Chae are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of surface modifying metal and alkali metal materials by combining them to form a composite with two layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chae to use the method of Dremann to combine the lithium metal and the buffer layer by using a sliding method, as this is a known method in the art and would be well within the ambit of one of ordinary skill to use. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.)—in this case, the element substituted is the method of combining the two materials.
By using the sliding method of Dremann to form the electrode of Chae, the additional limitations of claims 2-5, 8, 14-20, and 26 would all be met without requiring further modification or motivation.
Regarding claim 2, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 2:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier agent and/or tribochemical barrier layer comprises a material capable of conducting ions derived from the alkali metal substrate. (“In addition, the buffer layer may have an ion conductivity of 10.sup.−1 to 10.sup.−7 S/cm or of 10.sup.−3 to 10.sup.−6 S/cm. When the buffer layer has an ion conductivity within the above-defined range, it is possible to carry out pre-lithiation at an adequate rate, not too fast and not too slow, while not causing any damage upon the negative electrode active material.” Chae [0035]. In this case, the buffer layer of Chae functions as the barrier layer of the instant claims.)
Regarding claim 3, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 3:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier agent is selected from a metal or metal compound, a non-metal or non-metal compound, or combinations thereof. (“The buffer layer may include, as a main ingredient, a particle-shaped carbonaceous material, particle-shaped inorganic compound or a particle-shaped polymer compound, alone or in combination. In an embodiment, the buffer layer uses a polymer compound as a binder polymer, wherein the carbonaceous material particles and/or the inorganic compound particles are bound by the binder polymer.” Chae [0038])
Regarding claim 4, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 4:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier agent comprises Li3N, Si, Zn, Al, C, S, P2S5, SiS2, Li2S, Li3PS4, Li3PO4 or combinations thereof. (“The buffer layer may include, as a main ingredient, a particle-shaped carbonaceous material, particle-shaped inorganic compound or a particle-shaped polymer compound, alone or in combination. In an embodiment, the buffer layer uses a polymer compound as a binder polymer, wherein the carbonaceous material particles and/or the inorganic compound particles are bound by the binder polymer.” Chae [0038])
Regarding claim 5, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 5:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier agent is particulate, (“The buffer layer may include, as a main ingredient, a particle-shaped carbonaceous material, particle-shaped inorganic compound or a particle-shaped polymer compound, alone or in combination.” Chae [0038])
Regarding claim 8, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae is silent on the following elements of claim 8:
The method of claim 1, wherein bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises sliding or rubbing between the barrier between the barrier agent and the substrate
However, Dremann teaches all of the elements of claim 8 that are not found in Chae:
The method of claim 1, wherein bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises sliding or rubbing between the barrier between the barrier agent and the substrate (“The method of the present invention comprises rubbing, with solid lithium metal, the Surface of a solid body of metal other than lithium having a temperature of at least 375 F., a melting point above said temperature and, at said temperature, a stable film thereon of oxide thereof and being incapable, at said temperature, of forming substantially immediately a eutectic with lithium, whereby areas contacted with and traversed by the lithium metal become coated with molten lithium, and thereafter cooling the assembly to solidify the lithium metal” Dremann page 1 column 1 lines 69-73 -and column 2 lines 1-7.)
Regarding claim 14, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae is silent on the following elements of claim 14:
The method of claim 1, performed in an inert atmosphere
However, Dremann teaches all of the elements of claim 14 that are not found in Chae:
The method of claim 1, performed in an inert atmosphere (“The method may be carried out in air, or in an inert atmosphere especially at the higher temperature” Dremann page 3 column 5 lines 69-71.)
Regarding claim 15, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae is silent on the following elements of claim 15:
The method of claim 1, wherein the frictional contact takes place in the absence of solvents or additives.
However, Dremann teaches all of the elements of claim 15 that are not found in Chae:
The method of claim 1, wherein the frictional contact takes place in the absence of solvents or additives. (“The method of the present invention comprises rubbing, with solid lithium metal, the Surface of a solid body of metal other than lithium having a temperature of at least 375 F., a melting point above said temperature and, at said temperature, a stable film thereon of oxide thereof and being incapable, at said temperature, of forming substantially immediately a eutectic with lithium, whereby areas contacted with and traversed by the lithium metal become coated with molten lithium, and thereafter cooling the assembly to solidify the lithium metal” Dremann page 1 column 1 lines 69-73 -and column 2 lines 1-7. In this case, the frictional contact by rubbing of Dremann is performed without any additional solvents or additives, thus meeting the limitations of claim 15.)
Regarding claim 16, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 16:
The method of claim 1, wherein the alkali metal substrate comprises or consists of lithium metal or a lithium alloy. (“According to the sixth embodiment of the present disclosure, there is provided a lithium metal laminate which includes: i) lithium metal foil; and ii) a buffer layer including carbonaceous material particles, inorganic compound particles, polymer compound particles or their combination, and coated on one surface of the lithium metal foil, wherein the buffer layer has a thickness of 2.5-32.5 μm.” Chae [0019]. In this case, the lithium metal foil is the alkali metal material)
Regarding claim 17, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 17:
The method of claim 1, wherein the alkali metal substrate comprises or consists of a foil of the alkali metal and/or wherein the alkali metal substrate comprises a polymeric support. (“According to the sixth embodiment of the present disclosure, there is provided a lithium metal laminate which includes: i) lithium metal foil; and ii) a buffer layer including carbonaceous material particles, inorganic compound particles, polymer compound particles or their combination, and coated on one surface of the lithium metal foil, wherein the buffer layer has a thickness of 2.5-32.5 μm.” Chae [0019]. In this case, the lithium metal foil is the alkali metal material)
Regarding claim 18, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 18:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer has a thickness in the range of from 0.5 to 10 microns. (“there is provided a lithium metal laminate which includes: i) lithium metal foil; and ii) a buffer layer including carbonaceous material particles, inorganic compound particles, polymer compound particles or their combination, and coated on one surface of the lithium metal foil, wherein the buffer layer has a thickness of 2.5-32.5 μm.” Chae [0019])
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 2.5-32.5 μm for the thickness of the barrier layer overlaps the claimed range of 0.5-10 μm for the same parameter. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 19, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 19:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier layer covers substantially the entirety of the substrate. (Chae figure 2 clearly depicts the buffer layer 400 covering the entire surface of lithium metal foil 300.)
PNG
media_image1.png
397
375
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae teaches all of the additional elements of claim 20:
The method of claim 1, wherein the substrate is sheet-like with opposed faces and the barrier layer is applied to one or both faces. (Chae figure 2 clearly depicts the lithium metal foil substrate as sheet-like, with the buffer layer applied to one of the faces. See above claim 19 for figure.)
Regarding claim 26, Chae teaches the following elements:
A method of making a surface-modified alkali metal material for electrochemical use, (“According to the sixth embodiment of the present disclosure, there is provided a lithium metal laminate which includes: i) lithium metal foil; and ii) a buffer layer including carbonaceous material particles, inorganic compound particles, polymer compound particles or their combination, and coated on one surface of the lithium metal foil, wherein the buffer layer has a thickness of 2.5-32.5 μm.” Chae [0019]. In this case, the lithium metal foil is the alkali metal material and the applied buffer layer is the surface modification.)
wherein the barrier agent comprises Li3N, Si, Zn, Al, C, S, P2S5, SiS2, Li2S, Li3PS4, Li3PO4 or combinations thereof, (“The buffer layer may include, as a main ingredient, a particle-shaped carbonaceous material, particle-shaped inorganic compound or a particle-shaped polymer compound, alone or in combination. In an embodiment, the buffer layer uses a polymer compound as a binder polymer, wherein the carbonaceous material particles and/or the inorganic compound particles are bound by the binder polymer.” Chae [0038])
and wherein the alkali metal substrate comprises or consists of lithium metal or a lithium alloy. (“According to the sixth embodiment of the present disclosure, there is provided a lithium metal laminate which includes: i) lithium metal foil; and ii) a buffer layer including carbonaceous material particles, inorganic compound particles, polymer compound particles or their combination, and coated on one surface of the lithium metal foil, wherein the buffer layer has a thickness of 2.5-32.5 μm.” Chae [0019]. In this case, the lithium metal foil is the alkali metal material)
Chae is silent on the following elements of claim 26:
the method comprising bringing an alkali metal substrate into frictional contact with a barrier agent to form a tribochemical barrier layer on the substrate,
bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises sliding or rubbing between the barrier agent and the substrate,
However, Dremann teaches all of the elements of claim 26 that are not found in Chae:
the method comprising bringing an alkali metal substrate into frictional contact with a barrier agent to form a tribochemical barrier layer on the substrate, (“The method of the present invention comprises rubbing, with solid lithium metal, the Surface of a solid body of metal other than lithium having a temperature of at least 375 F., a melting point above said temperature and, at said temperature, a stable film thereon of oxide thereof and being incapable, at said temperature, of forming substantially immediately a eutectic with lithium, whereby areas contacted with and traversed by the lithium metal become coated with molten lithium, and thereafter cooling the assembly to solidify the lithium metal” Dremann page 1 column 1 lines 69-73 -and column 2 lines 1-7.)
bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises sliding or rubbing between the barrier agent and the substrate, (“The method of the present invention comprises rubbing, with solid lithium metal, the Surface of a solid body of metal other than lithium having a temperature of at least 375 F., a melting point above said temperature and, at said temperature, a stable film thereon of oxide thereof and being incapable, at said temperature, of forming substantially immediately a eutectic with lithium, whereby areas contacted with and traversed by the lithium metal become coated with molten lithium, and thereafter cooling the assembly to solidify the lithium metal” Dremann page 1 column 1 lines 69-73 -and column 2 lines 1-7.)
Dremann and Chae are considered to be analogous for the reasons provided above in claim 1, no modifications would be required to meet the limitations of claim 26 that were not already justified above, in regards to claim 1 and 8, and therefore no further motivation is necessary.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (US 20200067085 A1) in view of Dremann (US 3551184 B1) and further in view of Kim (US 20190237750 A1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae and Dremann are silent on the following elements of claim 6:
The method of claim 1, wherein bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises forcing together the barrier agent and the substrate.
However, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 6 that are not found in Chae or Dremann:
The method of claim 1, wherein bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises forcing together the barrier agent and the substrate. (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, a method of applying pressure to a negative electrode in which lithium metal is stacked may be performed by passing the negative electrode through a pair of rollers or plates.” Kim [0020])
Kim is considered to be analogous to Chae and Dremann because it is within the same field of surface modifying lithium metal and negative electrode materials. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of producing the material of Chae including stacked lithium foil with a buffer layer by using the method of Kim, which includes forcing the materials together. This would be obvious because this method is known in the art and would be within the ambit of one of ordinary skill, and additionally Kim teaches that its method, specifically when including a pattern on the rollers applying pressure to the materials, improves the pre-lithiation efficiency (“This is because, if there is a pattern in the lithium metal bonded to the negative electrode 20, the speed of pre-lithiation is improved because the movement of lithium ions becomes faster.” Kim [0039] and “ It is also possible to form the pattern using rollers 40 having the form of stripes, meshes, waves, circles and lattices.” Kim [0040]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (US 20200067085 A1) in view of Dremann (US 3551184 B1) and further in view of Aono (US 4636455 A)
Regarding claim 7, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae and Dremann are silent on the following elements of claim 7:
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier agent and the substrate are forced together with a force in the range of from 0.1 to 1.0 kg/cm2 substrate.
However, Aono teaches all of the elements of claim 7 not found in Chae or Dremann. Specifically, Aono teaches a method of rolling an electrode body containing multiple layers with a pressure overlapping the claimed range
The method of claim 1, wherein the barrier agent and the substrate are forced together with a force in the range of from 0.1 to 1.0 kg/cm2 substrate. (“In another preferred embodiment, the positive and negative electrodes are rolled with the separator interposed between them into a swirl to form an electrode body. The roll-constituting pressure of the swirled electrode body is 1.0 to 5.0 kg/cm.sup.2.” Aono page 11 column 3 lines 24-27.)
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 1.0-5.0 kg/cm2 for the pressure applied to two electrode materials forced together --overlaps the claimed range of 0.1-1.0 kg/cm2 for the same parameter. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Aono is considered to be analogous to Chae and Dremann because it is within the same field of electrode materials being forced together to laminate/connect multiple layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pressing and sliding method of Dremann to be performed within the pressure range of Aono in order to optimize the quality of the pressed materials, as too high of a pressure can impact the ability of electrolyte to penetrate the electrode body (“On the other hand, in the battery J having the highest roll-constituting pressure (6.0 kg/cm.sup.2) of the electrode body, the penetration of the electrolyte into the electrode body is only small because of the high roll-constituting pressure and, therefore, the electrode body contained only a small amount of the electrolyte and, as a result, the reactive surface area of the electrode is limited.” Aono page 12 column 6 lines 57-64.)
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (US 20200067085 A1) in view of Dremann (US 3551184 B1) and further in view of Zhmud (US 20130104357 A1).
Regarding claim 10, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 8, as shown above. Chae and Dremann are silent on the following elements of claim 10:
The method of claim 8, wherein the barrier agent and the substrate are slid or rubbed together for a period in the range of from 2 to 10 minutes.
However, Zhmud teaches all of the elements of claim 8 that are not found in Chae of Dremann. Specifically, Zhmud teaches a method of tribocoating where the frictional contact between substrate and surface modifier occurs for a time within the claimed range:
The method of claim 8, wherein the barrier agent and the substrate are slid or rubbed together for a period in the range of from 2 to 10 minutes. (“A tool comprising metallic tungsten was used to produce a tungsten disulfide tribocoating on the surface of a camshaft for an automotive internal combustion engine. The camshaft in study was made of chilled cast iron, 470 HV hardness. The contact pressure between the tool and the camshaft was in the range of 100 to 200 MPa. The process liquid contained 3 wt. % tungsten and 1 wt. % active sulfur dissolved in a hydrocarbon solvent with a kinematic viscosity of 2 cSt at 100 C. The triboconditioning of the camshaft was run for 10 min at 100 rpm.” Zhmud [0071])
Zhmud is considered to be analogous to Dremann and the instantly claimed invention because it is within the same field of surface-modifying substrates by using frictional contact between the two. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sliding method of Dremann to be performed for 10 minutes as this has been shown in the art to be an effective method of forming a tribocoating, and provide a coating with desirable properties regarding smoothness, wear resistance, and low friction (“Such tribochemically deposited films present very attractive properties concerning smoothness, wear resistance and low friction.” Zhmud [0007]).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (US 20200067085 A1) in view of Dremann (US 3551184 B1) and further in view of Tokuda (US 20170125713 A1) and Gebhard et al (Tribology and Interface Engineering series, 2008, Elsevier B.V, vol. 55, chapter 18.5, pages 454-455).
Regarding claim 11, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 8, as shown above. Chae and Dremann are silent on the following elements of claim 11:
The method of claim 8 wherein the substrate is affixed and an applicator is employed to force the barrier agent against the substrate and to slide or rub the barrier agent along the substrate, whilst continuing to force the barrier agent against the substrate.
However, Tokuda teaches all of the elements of claim 11 that are not found in Chae or Dremann. Specifically, Tokuda teaches a method of applying a surface modifying layer to a substrate using a slide coating method. If this method were applied to the lithium foil substrate and buffer layer of Chae, all of the limitations of claim 11 would be met:
The method of claim 8 wherein the substrate is affixed and an applicator is employed to force the barrier agent against the substrate and to slide or rub the barrier agent along the substrate, whilst continuing to force the barrier agent against the substrate. (“After the formation of the substrate electrode 11, the organic functional layer 12 is formed. The organic functional layer 12 is produced by a well-known method. The organic functional layer 12 is produced by, for example, … a slide coating method,” Tokuda [0083]. In this case, slide coating is a method used in the art to form tribochemical barriers/layers in composite materials, as taught in Chapter 18.5 of Tribology and Interface Engineering Series by Gebhard et al.)
Tokuda is considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of surface modifying substrates in electrode materials with an additional layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chae to use the slide coating method to coat the lithium foil with the buffer layer, as this is a known method in the art and would be within the ambit of one of ordinary skill to use. Tokuda additionally teaches that by using its method, the power conversion efficiency is improved (“It is clear from the above that the fill factor FF and power conversion efficiency PCE of the OPV of Example B1 are improved in comparison with those of the OPV of Comparative Example.” Tokuda [0199]).
It would additionally be obvious to use the spray coating method of Tokuda for the reasons provided above, and therefore no additional modification or motivation would be needed to meet the limitations of claim 12, aside from using a spray coating method involving a pressurized fluid to create frictional contact, rather than a slide coating method.
Regarding claim 12, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae and Dremann are silent on the following elements of claim 12:
The method of claim 1, wherein bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises impinging a stream of pressurised fluid bearing the barrier agent onto the substrate.
However, Tokuda teaches all of the elements of claim 12 that are not found in Chae or Dremann. Specifically, Tokuda teaches a coating method of forming a protective layer (analogous to a buffer layer) by using a pressurized fluid.
The method of claim 1, wherein bringing the barrier agent into frictional contact with the substrate comprises impinging a stream of pressurised fluid bearing the barrier agent onto the substrate. (“After the formation of the substrate electrode 11, the organic functional layer 12 is formed. The organic functional layer 12 is produced by a well-known method. The organic functional layer 12 is produced by, for example, … a spray method” Tokuda [0083]. In this case, a spray method would involve forming the surface-modifying layer by spraying a stream of pressurized fluid onto the substrate. Thus meeting the limitations of claim 12.)
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chae (US 20200067085 A1) in view of Dremann (US 3551184 B1) and further in view of Xiao (US 20190363345 A1).
Regarding claim 13, modified Chae teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Chae and Dremann are silent on the following elements of claim 13:
The method of claim 1, comprising removing a passivation layer from the alkali metal substrate.
However, Xiao teaches all of the elements of claim 13 that are not found in Chae or Dremann. Specifically, Xiao teaches the removal of a passivation layer:
The method of claim 1, comprising removing a passivation layer from the alkali metal substrate. (“In certain aspects, the present disclosure provides a method for preparing a protective coating on an electrode having a first Li-containing surface. The method may include removing a passivation layer present on the first Li-containing surface of the electrode by applying a graphene source to the first Li-containing surface of the electrode; and forming a protective coating adjacent to at least a portion of the first Li-containing surface.” Xiao [0008] and “The present disclosure relates generally to lithium-containing electrodes, and more specifically, to forming a protective coating for lithium-containing electrodes, for example, negative lithium metal electrodes,” Xiao [0001])
Xiao is considered to be analogous to Chae because they are both within the same field of lithium-metal electrodes having coating layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material and method of Chae to remove a passivation layer formed in order to improve interfacial adhesion (“By removing the passivation layer, better interfacial adhesion between the protective coating 4 and the first Li-containing surface 5 can be achieved,” Xiao [0061]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET whose telephone number is (571)272-0156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6pm except for the first Friday of bi-week.
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 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.
/BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752