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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 – 5, 9-10, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (KR2014-0070199A), in view of Kim et al. (KR2001-0037100A).
As to claim 1, Yu discloses a lithium secondary battery which comprises a first electrode and a second electrode having a polarity opposite to each other, and a solid-liquid hybrid electrolyte membrane (porous separator) interposed between the first electrode and the second electrode [0025],
wherein the solid-liquid hybrid electrolyte membrane comprises a non-woven web substrate and a porous layer formed on at least one surface of the non-woven web substrate [0013],
and the non-woven web substrate has a microporous structure formed by a microstructure of polymer fibrils (polymer microfibers, [0015]),
wherein in the porous layer, solid polymer particles are packed and are in contact with one another (fig. 2), a pore structure is formed between the solid polymer particles (fig. 2 [0022]), and a liquid electrolyte surrounds portions where the solid polymer particles are in contact with one another; or surfaces of the solid polymer particles (Electrolyte injection into the battery would surround the non-woven web substrate and porous layer [0046] fig. 2),
and solid polymer particles are dispersed in the microporous structure (fig. 1 [0039]) or a liquid electrolyte is incorporated into the microporous structure (electrolyte injection [0046]);
Yu does not explicitly disclose a content of the liquid electrolyte is 50-70 wt% based on 100 wt% of the total weight of the solid polymer particles and the liquid electrolyte,
In the same field of endeavor Kim discloses a secondary battery [0031] and teaches ( the ratio of the sum of the crosslinked polymer particles and the polymer binder material and the sum of the ionic salt and the electrolyte is not particularly limited, but is preferably in the range of 1: 2-10, which is the amount of the ionic salt and the electrolyte [0219-0221] Where 1:2 provides 50% which overlaps the claimed range, and it should be note 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
and the solid-liquid hybrid electrolyte membrane has an ion conductivity of
2 x 10-3 S/cm. [Kim, 298-299] It should be note 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding the porous layer is directly coated and formed independently on each of the first electrode and the second electrode. This configuration provides a first electrode, separator, and second electrode within the claimed lithium secondary battery, and Yu discloses this structure [0025]. Where the porous layer is claimed to be coated on the first and second electrode independently is simply a duplication of parts and the mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
As to claim 3, Yu discloses the polymer fibrils comprise any one selected from the group consisting of polyolefin, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) [0019], polyethylene naphthalene (PEN), polyester, nylon, polyimide, polybenzoxazole, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyarylene ether sulfone, polyether ether ketone and copolymers thereof, or a mixture of two or more selected therefrom.
As to claim 4, Yu discloses the solid polymer particle is an engineering plastic resin. (the high hardness polymer particles may be particles prepared from one or two or more kinds of mixtures selected from the group consisting of the above heat resistant polymers [0021]…heat resistant polymer representative samples are engineering plastics (EP), such as polyester resins, and polyamides (PA). ) Resins, polyimide (PI) -based resins, fluorine resins, and the like. [0018])
As to claim 5, Yu discloses the solid polymer particle comprises any one selected from polyphenylene oxide, polyetherether ketone, polyimide, polyamideimide, liquid crystal polymer, polyether imide, polysulfone, polyarylate, polyethylene terephthalate, polybutylene terephthalate [0021], polyoxymethylene, polycarbonate, polypropylene, polyethylene and polymethyl methacrylate, or two or more selected therefrom.
As to claim 9, modified Yu discloses porous nonwoven substrate made of a high heat resistant polymer; And a porous coating layer including a high hardness polymer particle [0013] (solid-liquid hybrid electrolyte membrane)…porous membrane has a thickness of 20 µm [0026]…the nonwoven substrate has a thickness of 9-30 µm [0031] and taken together provide a solid-liquid hybrid thickness of 29 to 50 µm). It should be note 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
As to claim 10, Yu discloses a lithium ion secondary battery [0025] or a solid-state battery.
As to claim 21, Yu discloses the solid-liquid hybrid electrolyte membrane is free of a binder polymer. [Abstract], [0006], [0010], and [0023] no binder polymer or very low content.
Claim(s) 2, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (KR2014-0070199A), in view of Kim et al. (KR2001-0037100A), and in further view of Kamiyama et al. (JP2019-197702A)
As to claim 2, Yu discloses the polymer fibrils have an average diameter in a range of 0.005_-to_5 m, (0.5 to about 10 µm, [Yu,0015]) and the non-woven web substrate has pores having a diameter in a range of 0.05_-to 30 µm (0.1 to 70 µm [Yu, 0015]). Yu does not explicitly disclose a porosity of 50_-to_80%. However Kamiyama discloses secondary battery (Examples 1 to 3, initial charge/discharge capacity in battery performance [0362]) and teaches (The porosity of the nonwoven fabric is preferably 40 to 60%. [0268]) It should be note 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Kamiyama teaches the high void structure of the nonwoven fabric itself allows smooth ion movement, and is a factor for achieving charge / discharge efficiency and long life. [0268-0270]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the application was filed to modify Yu with the porosity of Kamiyama to provide smooth ion movement and achieve charge/discharge efficiency and long life
As to claim 6, modified Yu discloses the non- woven web substrate has a thickness in a range of 5_-to_100 µm ( 9-30 µm [0031], and the porous structural layer has a thickness in a range of 5_-to_500 µm (10-20 µm, [Kamiyama, 0289-0290]).
Claim(s) 7, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (KR2014-0070199A), in view of Kim et al. (KR2001-0037100A), and in further view of Kondo et al. (US2008/0052900A1)
As to claim 7, Yu discloses, (porous nonwoven substrate made of a high heat resistant polymer; And a porous coating layer including a high hardness polymer particle [0013] (solid-liquid hybrid electrolyte membrane)…porous membrane has a thickness of 20 µm [0026]…the nonwoven substrate has a thickness of 9-30 µm [0031] and taken together provide a solid-liquid hybrid thickness of 29 to 50 µm). It should be note 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Yu does not explicitly teach the first electrode and the second electrode comprise a solid electrolyte, in the same field of endeavor Kondo discloses a secondary battery [Abstract] and further teaches, (Seeing that the cathode 3 and the anode 4 have the same configuration in the present embodiment [0144]… By using the mixture of the electrode active material and the solid electrolyte material as the electrode material 32, it becomes possible to increase the ion-conducting bonding interface between particles of the electrode active material and the electrolyte particles which constitute the cathode 3 (electrode), and also to increase the interface bonding force (adhesion) between the cathode 3 and the electrolyte layer 5. [0161]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the application was filed to modify Yu with the solid electrolyte of Kondo to increase the ion-conducting bond and adhesion between the cathode and electrolyte.
As to claim 11, modified Yu discloses each of the first electrode and the second electrode independently comprises or does not comprise a solid electrolyte. (The mixing of the active material with the solid electrolyte for both the respective cathode and anode [Kondo, 0161] would provide the first and the second electrode independently with solid electrolyte.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, page 8, neither Yu nor Kim teach the limitation the porous layer is directly coated and formed independently on each of the first electrode and the second electrode. This argument is unpersuasive as Kim teaches a polymer electrolyte is bonded to both sides of a negative electrode and positive electrode [0248-0254] Where bonding on a surface would support formed independently.
Applicant argues, page 8, the product-by-process characterization does not apply for two reasons; 1) the recited limitation is not a process artifact but defines a structural configuration, which requires the porous layer to be formed directly on, and independently on, each of the two electrodes. The office respectfully disagrees as the product is a battery having a first electrode, separator and second electrode as claimed in claim 1 which Yu discloses as discussed above, the additional limitation requiring the porous layer to be directly formed on the electrodes is a product-by-process limitation and as discussed above a duplication of parts as the electrodes do not function without the configuration of the battery, and the battery is disclosed by Yu and Kim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Takigawa et al. (JP2001-1283815A) Battery with separator on electrode.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BART A HORNSBY whose telephone number is (313)446-6637. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-6:00 EST.
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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
BART HORNSBY
Examiner
Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights