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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/06/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 11/06/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 4-11 are currently pending. Claims 2-3 are canceled. Claim 1 is amended. Support for the amended claim is found in the claims as originally filed.
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.
Claims 1 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mimura et al. (US 20170133712 A1) in view of Yoshimura et al. (US 20020192559 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mimura discloses an electrode (paragraph 0009) comprising: an electrode mixture layer (paragraph 0011, figure 1, positive electrode active material layer 4); and an electrode current collector layer (paragraph 0067, figure 1, positive electrode collector 5), wherein the electrode current collector layer is in contact with the electrode mixture layer (figure 1, positive electrode active material layer 4 and positive electrode collector 5), the electrode mixture layer includes a solid electrolyte material and an active material (paragraphs 0011), the solid electrolyte material includes Li, M, and X, the M is at least one selected from the group consisting of metal elements other than Li and metalloid elements, the X is at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br, and I (paragraphs 0029-0030), the electrode current collector layer includes an aluminum alloy (paragraph 0246), and the electrode current collector layer has a surface material in contact with the electrode mixture layer (paragraph 0067, figure 1, layers are in contact with each other). Mimura is silent regarding a copper content in the surface material being less than 50 mass%, and the copper content in the surface material being 0.05 mass% or more and 0.20 mass% or less.
Yoshimura discloses a lithium secondary battery with a positive electrode current collector containing an aluminum alloy with 0.1 to 10 wt% copper, within the claimed range of less than 50 mass% (Yoshimura paragraphs 0023-0024), and teaches a collector comprising an aluminum alloy with 0.1 wt% copper (Yoshimura paragraphs 0128-0129, table 7, Example B11, Cu within the claimed range). Yoshimura further discloses that this alloy improves the strength of the positive electrode current collector, causing the positive electrode material to be more strongly held in the current collector, which improves the charge/discharge cycle performance of the battery (Yoshimura paragraphs 0023, 0129-0130). Yoshimura and Mimura are analogous because they both disclose secondary batteries comprising an active material layer on a metallic current collector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrode disclosed by Mimura to include the current collector disclosed by Yoshimura. Doing so would improve the current collector strength and battery cycle performance.
Regarding claim 6, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mimura further discloses that the current collector includes aluminum as a main component (paragraph 0246).
Regarding claim 7, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 6. Mimura further discloses that the electrode current collector layer further includes an element other than aluminum (paragraph 0246, aluminum with surface treatment or alloyed).
Regarding claim 8, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mimura further discloses that the active material is a lithium-containing transition metal oxide (paragraphs 0184-0185, 0192-0194).
Regarding claim 9, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 8. Mimura further discloses that the active material is lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide (paragraphs 0184-0185).
Regarding claim 10, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mimura further discloses a battery (paragraph 0003) comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; and an electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (paragraph 0067, figure 1, positive electrode active material layer 4, negative electrode active material layer 2, and inorganic solid electrolyte layer 3), wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of the positive electrode and the negative electrode is the electrode according to claim 1 (paragraph 0011).
Regarding claim 11, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 10. Mimura further discloses that the positive electrode is the electrode according to claim 1 (paragraph 0011).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mimura et al. (US 20170133712 A1) in view of Yoshimura et al. (US 20020192559 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Asano et al. (WO 2018025582 A1, US 20190088995 A1 used as an English equivalent).
Regarding claim 4, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mimura is silent regarding the solid electrolyte being represented by the composition formula LiαMβXγ, wherein α, β, and γ are each a value greater than 0.
Asano discloses a battery containing an electrode layer including a solid electrolyte (Asano paragraphs 0202-0204). Asano further discloses that the solid electrolyte is represented by the formula LiαMβXγ, wherein α, β, and γ are each a value greater than 0 (Asano paragraph 0021, Li3YX6). The reference further teaches that the electrolyte structure provides a solid electrolyte material with a high lithium ion conductivity that is stable in an assumed operation temperature range (Asano paragraph 0022).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrode disclosed by Mimura to include the electrolyte disclosed by Asano. Doing so would provide a stable electrolyte with a high lithium ion conductivity.
Regarding claim 5, modified Mimura discloses the limitations of claim 1. Mimura is silent with respect to the M including yttrium.
Asano discloses a battery containing an electrode layer including a solid electrolyte (Asano paragraphs 0202-0204). Asano further discloses that the solid electrolyte includes Li, M, and X, wherein the M includes Yttrium (Asano paragraph 0021, Li3YX6). The reference further teaches that the electrolyte structure provides a solid electrolyte material with a high lithium ion conductivity that is stable in an assumed operation temperature range (Asano paragraph 0022).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrode disclosed by Mimura to include the electrolyte disclosed by Asano. Doing so would provide a stable electrolyte with a high lithium ion conductivity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/06/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1-11, Applicant argues that Yoshimura fails to disclose an Example in which the aluminum alloy containing 0.05 to 0.20 mass% of copper is used as an electrode current collector. However, Yoshimura does disclose a positive electrode current collector comprising an Al-Mn-Cu alloy, in which the Al alloy contains 0.1 wt% copper (Yoshimura paragraphs 0127-0130, table 7, Example B11), within the claimed range.
Applicant further argues that the claimed range yields unexpected results. Applicant alleges that the examples disclosed within the present application which use collectors containing the claimed range of copper result in significantly improved cycle characteristics. However, the cited prior art discloses an aluminum alloy current collector containing an amount of copper within the claimed range. "[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated’ if one of them is in the prior art." Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citing In re Petering, 301 F.2d 676, 682, 133 USPQ 275, 280 (CCPA 1962)) (emphasis in original) (Claims to titanium (Ti) alloy with 0.6-0.9% nickel (Ni) and 0.2-0.4% molybdenum (Mo) were held anticipated by a graph in a Russian article on Ti-Mo-Ni alloys because the graph contained an actual data point corresponding to a Ti alloy containing 0.25% Mo and 0.75% Ni and this composition was within the claimed range of compositions.). "If the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, the prior art anticipates the claim." UCB, Inc. v. Actavis Labs. UT, Inc., 65 F.4th 679, 687, 2023 USPQ2d 448 (Fed. Cir. 2023). See also MPEP 2131.03 I. Further, Yoshimura discloses that the specified example provides improved cycle performance. Yoshimura teaches the claimed composition and disclosed advantages of the instant application. Since the example taught by Yoshimura is within the claimed range, the collector would necessarily provide the same properties, and therefore results. Titanium Metals v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN T LUSTGRAAF whose telephone number is (571)272-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/B.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights