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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments have been entered. Amendments do overcome the 112(b) rejection and overcome the 102 rejection previously set forth in non-final Office Action, but a new grounds of rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are set forth below.
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.
Claims 1- 4, 6 and 31are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1), hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’, in view of (US-7618724-B2) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’
Regarding Claim 1,
Kise teaches an electrode (Kise, positive electrode, 1, Fig. 1) , comprising :a layer of film material (Kise, positive electrode current collector , 4, Fig. 1) ; an electrode material disposed on the layer of film material (Kise, active material layer, 6, Fig. 1), the PTC material configured to resist a flow of current through at least a portion of the PTC material when a temperature of the at least a portion of the PTC material exceeds a threshold temperature (Kise, “ For example, it has such PTC characteristics that the rate of change in resistivity abruptly increases at about a prescribed temperature”, Col.5 lin. 7).
Kise does not teach the layer film material including at least a portion of a pouch ; and a positive temperature coefficient (PTC) material disposed at least partially between and directly coupled to the layer of film material and the electrode material.
Kim teaches the layer of film material (Kim, casing and region 5, Fig. 1) including at least a portion of a pouch and a positive temperature coefficient material disposed at least partially between and directly coupled to the layer of film material and the electrode material (Kim, “Then, the battery was enclosed with a pouch-type casing in such a manner that the PTC portion is present inside of the casing as shown in FIG. 6 a. Particularly, in order to minimize the loss of energy density, the lead was folded so that the PTC sheet is disposed between the stacked surface (surface having the lead) of the electrode assembly and the casing.”, see Example 2)(see annotated figures below).
PNG
media_image1.png
528
1163
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
292
446
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that this arrangement allows for the minimization of energy loss in the cell (Kim, “Particularly, in order to minimize the loss of energy density, the lead was folded so that the PTC sheet is disposed between the stacked surface (surface having the lead) of the electrode assembly and the casing.”, see Example 2.
Kise and Kim are analogous as they are both of the same field of PTC and pouch cells.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the clamed invention to have modified the cell a taught in Kise to have the arrangement as taught in Kim in order to minimize energy loss.
Regarding Claim 2,
Modified Kise teaches the electrode of claim 1, further comprising an electrode tab coupled to the PTC material and the electrode film (Kise, current collector, 4, Fig. 1) (Kise, “current collecting tab was spot welded to each of the positive and the negative electrode current collectors”, see Col 9. Line 23) .
Regarding Claim 3,
Modified Kise teaches the electrode of claim 1, wherein the PTC material includes a conductive polymer (Kise, “The PTC layer 8 is a layer comprising an electron conductive material containing a conductive filler and a resin”, Col. 5 lin. 4) (Kise, “An electron conductive material which was an electrically conductive polymer”, Col 8 lin. 36)
Regarding Claim 4,
Modified Kise the electrode of claim 1, wherein the PTC material includes at least one of a bimetal inorganic material, a ceramic material, or a polymer with conductive filler particles dispersed therein (Kise, “The PTC layer 8 is a layer comprising an electron conductive material containing a conductive filler and a resin”, Col. 5 lin. 4) (Kise, “An electron conductive material which was an electrically conductive polymer”, Col 8 lin. 36).
Regarding Claim 6,
Modified Kise teaches The electrode of claim 1, wherein the PTC material extends along a full length of the electrode material (Kise, PTC layer, 8, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 31,
Modified Kise teaches The electrochemical cell of claim 2, wherein the PTC material is directly coupled to the electrode tab, the PTC material configured to deform and interrupt an electrical connection between the electrode tab and the electrode material when a temperature of the at least a portion of the PTC material exceeds the threshold temperature (Kim,, “ It is an object of the present invention to provide an electrochemical device, which comprises a protection device activated immediately in response to an increase in temperature of the electrochemical device to interrupt electric current ”, see Col 3, lin. 8).
Claims 16- 19, 24, 29, and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1), hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’, in further view of (US-20210013513-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’.
Regarding Claim 16,
Kise teaches an electrode (Kise, positive electrode, 1, Fig. 1) , comprising: a layer of film material (Kise, separator, 3, Fig. 1) ; an electrode material disposed on the layer of film material (Kise, active material layer, 6, Fig. 1) ; and a positive temperature coefficient (PTC) material disposed on the electrode material (Kise, PTC layer, 8, Fig. 1) , the PTC material configured to resist a flow of current through at least a portion of the PTC material when a temperature of the at least a portion of the PTC material exceeds a threshold temperature (Kise, “ For example, it has such PTC characteristics that the rate of change in resistivity abruptly increases at about a prescribed temperature”, Col.5 lin. 7); and an electrode tab directly coupled to the PTC material, the electrode tab configured to be connected to a voltage source (Kise, current collector, 4, Fig. 1) (Kise, “current collecting tab was spot welded to each of the positive and the negative electrode current collectors”, see Col 9. Line 23).
Kise does not teach the PTC material configured to discontinue a flow of current
Li teaches the PTC material configured to discontinue a flow of current (Li, “so that the electric resistance between the metal current collector and the electrode active material layer is increased or even power supply is interrupted, thereby achieving the security effect of preventing the electrochemical reaction from proceeding.”, see [0028])
Li teaches this arrangement allows for the effect of the PTC to work effectively through blocking the current collector flow (Li, “The inventors have found that, still other studies have provided a separate layer of PTC material (safety coating) between the metal current collector and the electrode active material layer of the battery ..the resistance of the PTC material layer increases, so that the electric resistance between the metal current collector and the electrode active material layer is increased or even power supply is interrupted, thereby achieving the security effect of preventing the electrochemical reaction from proceeding”, see [0028])
PNG
media_image3.png
186
747
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kise and Li are analogous as they are both of the same field of PTC layers.
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 layers as taught in Kise with the arrangement as taught in Li in order to full block the current collector and prevent charge, effectively preventing thermal runaway.
Regarding Claim 17,
Modified Kise teaches The electrode of claim 16, wherein the PTC material includes a conductive polymer (Kise, “The PTC layer 8 is a layer comprising an electron conductive material containing a conductive filler and a resin”, Col. 5 lin. 4) (Kise, “An electron conductive material which was an electrically conductive polymer”, Col 8 lin. 36).
Regarding Claim 18,
Modified Kise teaches The electrode of claim 16, wherein the PTC material includes at least one of a bimetal inorganic material, a ceramic material, or a polymer with conductive filler particles dispersed therein (Kise, “The PTC layer 8 is a layer comprising an electron conductive material containing a conductive filler and a resin”, Col. 5 lin. 4) (Kise, “An electron conductive material which was an electrically conductive polymer”, Col 8 lin. 36)
Regarding Claim 19,
Modified Kise teaches the electrode of claim 16, wherein the PTC material extends along a full length of the electrode material (Kise, PTC layer, 8, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 24,
Modified Kise teaches an electrochemical cell (Kise see Fig. 8), comprising: a first electrode material disposed on a first electrode film (Kise, active material layer, 6, Fig. 9) ; a second electrode material disposed on a second electrode film (Kise, active material layer, 7, Fig. 9) ;a separator disposed between the first electrode material and the second electrode material (Kise, separator, 3, Fig. 9); a first electrode tab electrically coupled to the first electrode (Kise, current collector, 4, Fig. 1) (Kise, “current collecting tab was spot welded to each of the positive and the negative electrode current collectors”, see Col 9. Line 23); a PTC material directly coupled to the second electrode material (Kise, PTC layer, 9, Fig. 9) the PTC material configured to resist a flow of current through at least a portion of the PTC material when a temperature of the at least a portion of the PTC material exceeds a threshold temperature (Kise, “ For example, it has such PTC characteristics that the rate of change in resistivity abruptly increases at about a prescribed temperature”, Col.5 lin. 7); and a second electrode tab directly coupled the PTC material (Kise, current collector, 5, Fig. 1) (Kise, “current collecting tab was spot welded to each of the positive and the negative electrode current collectors”, see Col 9. Line 23).
Kise does not teach the PTC material configured to discontinue a flow of current
Li teaches the PTC material configured to discontinue a flow of current (Li, “so that the electric resistance between the metal current collector and the electrode active material layer is increased or even power supply is interrupted, thereby achieving the security effect of preventing the electrochemical reaction from proceeding.”, see [0028])
Li teaches this arrangement allows for the effect of the PTC to work effectively through blocking the current collector flow (Li, “The inventors have found that, still other studies have provided a separate layer of PTC material (safety coating) between the metal current collector and the electrode active material layer of the battery ..the resistance of the PTC material layer increases, so that the electric resistance between the metal current collector and the electrode active material layer is increased or even power supply is interrupted, thereby achieving the security effect of preventing the electrochemical reaction from proceeding”, see [0028])
PNG
media_image3.png
186
747
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kise and Li are analogous as they are both of the same field of PTC layers.
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 layers as taught in Kise with the arrangement as taught in Li in order to full block the current collector and prevent charge, effectively preventing thermal runaway.
Regarding Claim 29,
Modified Kise teaches The electrochemical cell of claim 24, wherein the threshold temperature is between about 80 °C and about 150 °C (Kise, “Temperature at which the PTC function is manifested can be set at a temperature in a range of from 90° to 160° C”, see Col. 5, lin. 41).
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 90 to 150 degrees Celsius broadly overlaps the claimed range of 80 °C and about 150 °C. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding Claim 32,
Modified Kise teaches The electrochemical cell of claim 16, wherein the PTC material is configured to uncouple from the electrode tab and the when the temperature of the at least a portion of the PTC material exceeds the threshold temperature (Li, “The inventors have found that after the inorganic filler is added and the volume of the polymer matrix material expands, both of the inorganic filler and the expanded polymer matrix material can function to block the conductive network”, see [0031]).
Regarding Claim 33,
Modified Kise teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 24, wherein the PTC material is configured to uncouple from the electrode tab and the when the temperature of the at least a portion of the PTC material exceeds the threshold temperature (Li, “The inventors have found that after the inorganic filler is added and the volume of the polymer matrix material expands, both of the inorganic filler and the expanded polymer matrix material can function to block the conductive network”, see [0031]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’ , in view of in view of (US-7618724-B2) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’ , in view of (US-20200014025-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Zagars’
Regarding Claim 5,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the electrode material includes a semi-solid electrode material.
Zagaras teaches wherein the electrode material includes a semi-solid and/or binderless electrode material (Zagars, “In some embodiments, the semi-solid electrodes described herein are binderless and/or do not use binders that are used in conventional battery manufacturing”, see [0035]).
Zagars teaches that less binder allows for more electroactive material which increases energy density (Zagars, “2) active material, which has the effect of increasing the charge capacity of the battery”, see [0035]).
Kise and Zagars are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electroactive material as taught in Kise with the binderless electrode as taught in Zagars in order to improve the energy density of the cell.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’ , in view of (US-20210013513-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’, in view of (US-20200014025-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Zagars’
Regarding Claim 30,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the electrode material includes a semi-solid electrode material.
Zagaras teaches wherein the electrode material includes a semi-solid electrode material (Zagars, “In some embodiments, the semi-solid electrodes described herein are binderless and/or do not use binders that are used in conventional battery manufacturing”, see [0035]).
Zagars teaches that less binder allows for more electroactive material which increases energy density (Zagars, “active material, which has the effect of increasing the charge capacity of the battery”, see [0035]).
Kise and Zagars are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electroactive material as taught in Kise with the binderless electrode as taught in Zagars in order to improve the energy density of the cell.
Claims 7- 9, 11-12, and 13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’, in view in view of (US-7618724-B2) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’ , in view of ‘Facile and Effective Positive Temperature Coefficient (PTC) Layer for Safer Lithium-Ion Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’
Regarding Claim 7,
Modified Kise does not teach , wherein the PTC material includes microcapsules encapsulated by conductive coatings.
Jin teaches PTC material includes microcapsules encapsulated by conductive coatings (Jin, “The PTC layer used was a carbon-coated-LFP (C-LFP)/PVDF/Super P (SP) composite material”, see Introduction).
Jin teaches that this capsule with the conductive coating successfully prevents thermal runaway and is easy to process and practical for commercial applications (Jin, “Such a PTC layer-containing cell design not only shows outstanding safety performance during overheating scenarios but also has no degradation on cell performance. Furthermore, the PTC layer has good processability and is a convenient and practical material layer for commercial applications.”, see Abstract)
Kise and Jin are analogous as they both are from the same field of PTC materials and layers for electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the PTC layer as taught in Kise with the microcapsules as taught in Jin in order to prevent thermal runaway, improve processibility, and for commercial applications.
Regarding Claim 8,
Modified Kise teaches The electrode of claim 7, wherein the microcapsules include at least one of a resin, a gas, or a liquid (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 9,
Modified Kise teaches the electrode of claim 7, wherein the microcapsules include at least one of a plastic, an oligomer, a monomer, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polyester, polyethylene oxide (PEO), or a polypropylene (PP) (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 11,
Modified Kise teaches The electrode of claim 7, wherein the conductive coatings include at least one of copper, nickel, titanium, stainless steel, or carbon (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 12,
Modified Kise teaches The electrode of claim 7, wherein the conductive coatings include at least one of aluminum, platinum, gold, carbon, graphite, or carbon (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 13,
Modified Kise teaches the electrode of claim 7, wherein the microcapsules include a shell with a fill material and matrix particles disposed therein (Kise, see particles in Fig. 1 ).
Claims 20-22, and 25- 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’,, (US-20210013513-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’, in view of ‘Facile and Effective Positive Temperature Coefficient (PTC) Layer for Safer Lithium-Ion Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’
Regarding Claim 20,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the PTC material includes microcapsules encapsulated by conductive coatings.
Jin teaches PTC material includes microcapsules encapsulated by conductive coatings (Jin, “The PTC layer used was a carbon-coated-LFP (C-LFP)/PVDF/Super P (SP) composite material”, see Introduction).
Jin teaches that this capsule with the conductive coating successfully prevents thermal runaway and is easy to process and practical for commercial applications (Jin, “Such a PTC layer-containing cell design not only shows outstanding safety performance during overheating scenarios but also has no degradation on cell performance. Furthermore, the PTC layer has good processability and is a convenient and practical material layer for commercial applications.”, see Abstract)
Kise and Jin are analogous as they both are from the same field of PTC materials and layers for electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the PTC layer as taught in Kise with the microcapsules as taught in Jin in order to prevent thermal runaway, improve processibility, and for commercial applications
Regarding Claim 21,
Modified Kise teaches wherein the microcapsules include at least one of a resin, a gas, or a liquid (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract)
Regarding Claim 22,
Modified Kise teaches wherein the microcapsules include at least one of a plastic, an oligomer, a monomer, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polyester, polyethylene oxide (PEO), or a polypropylene (PP) (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 25,
Modified Kise does not teach , wherein the PTC material includes microcapsules encapsulated by conductive coatings.
Jin teaches PTC material includes microcapsules encapsulated by conductive coatings (Jin, “The PTC layer used was a carbon-coated-LFP (C-LFP)/PVDF/Super P (SP) composite material”, see Introduction).
Jin teaches that this capsule with the conductive coating successfully prevents thermal runaway and is easy to process and practical for commercial applications (Jin, “Such a PTC layer-containing cell design not only shows outstanding safety performance during overheating scenarios but also has no degradation on cell performance. Furthermore, the PTC layer has good processability and is a convenient and practical material layer for commercial applications.”, see Abstract)
Kise and Jin are analogous as they both are from the same field of PTC materials and layers for electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the PTC layer as taught in Kise with the microcapsules as taught in Jin in order to prevent thermal runaway, improve processibility, and for commercial applications
Regarding Claim 26,
Modified Kise teaches wherein the microcapsules include at least one of a resin, a gas, or a liquid (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Regarding Claim 27,
Modified Kise teaches, wherein the microcapsules include at least one of a plastic, an oligomer, a monomer, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polyester, polyethylene oxide (PEO), or a polypropylene (PP) (Jin, “as a composite of the carbon-coated LiFePO4(C-LFP), poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)”, see Abstract).
Claims 10is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’ in view of, in view of ((US-7618724-B2) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’ , in further view of ‘Facile and Effective Positive Temperature Coefficient (PTC) Layer for Safer Lithium-Ion Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’, in further view of ‘New Polyurethane/Docosane Microcapsules as Phase-Change Materials for Thermal Energy Storage’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Castro’
Regarding Claim 10,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the microcapsules include silicone oil and/or fluorine oil.
Castro teaches wherein the microcapsules include silicone oil and/or fluorine oil (Castro, “First, polyurethane microcapsules based on silicone oil core”, see Abstract).
Castro teaches that the silicon oil microcapsules were notably stable under cycling and showed good morphology (Castro, “Capsules with the silicone oil/poly(ethylene glycol)/4,4′-diphenylmethane diisocyanate 10/20/20 wt % ratio showed the best morphological features and shell stability”, see Abstract)
Modified Kise and Castro are analogous as they both relate to the same field of energy storage using microcapsules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the microcapsules of modified Kise with silicon oil as taught in Castro, in order to improve their stability during cycling.
Claims 23, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’ in view of, in view of (US-20210013513-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’, ‘Facile and Effective Positive Temperature Coefficient (PTC) Layer for Safer Lithium-Ion Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’, in further view of ‘New Polyurethane/Docosane Microcapsules as Phase-Change Materials for Thermal Energy Storage’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Castro’
Regarding Claim 23,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the microcapsules include silicone oil and/or fluorine oil.
Castro teaches wherein the microcapsules include silicone oil and/or fluorine oil (Castro, “First, polyurethane microcapsules based on silicone oil core”, see Abstract).
Castro teaches that the silicon oil microcapsules were notably stable under cycling and showed good morphology (Castro, “Capsules with the silicone oil/poly(ethylene glycol)/4,4′-diphenylmethane diisocyanate 10/20/20 wt % ratio showed the best morphological features and shell stability”, see Abstract)
Modified Kise and Castro are analogous as they both relate to the same field of energy storage using microcapsules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the microcapsules of modified Kise with silicon oil as taught in Castro, in order to improve their stability during cycling.
Regarding Claim 28,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the microcapsules include silicone oil and/or fluorine oil.
Castro teaches wherein the microcapsules include silicone oil and/or fluorine oil (Castro, “First, polyurethane microcapsules based on silicone oil core”, see Abstract).
Castro teaches that the silicon oil microcapsules were notably stable under cycling and showed good morphology (Castro, “Capsules with the silicone oil/poly(ethylene glycol)/4,4′-diphenylmethane diisocyanate 10/20/20 wt % ratio showed the best morphological features and shell stability”, see Abstract)
Modified Kise and Castro are analogous as they both relate to the same field of energy storage using microcapsules.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the microcapsules of modified Kise with silicon oil as taught in Castro, in order to improve their stability during cycling.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-6623883-B1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kise’ , in view (US-7618724-B2) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’ , in view of, ‘Facile and Effective Positive Temperature Coefficient (PTC) Layer for Safer Lithium-Ion Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Jin’, in further view of (US-20210043928-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Yamamoto’
Regarding Claim 14,
Modified Kise does not teach wherein the fill material includes a flame-retardant material .
Yamamoto teaches wherein the fill material includes a flame-retardant material (Yamamoto, “examples of the volatile organic compound include non-flammable or flame-retardant compounds”, see [0059])
Yamamoto teaches that this can improve the safety of the cell in a case of thermal runaway (Yamamoto, “. Furthermore, in consideration of the safety inside the battery, examples of the volatile organic compound include non-flammable or flame-retardant”, see [0059])
Kise and Yamamoto are analogous as they are of the same field of microcapsules and safety mechanism for batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file date of the claimed invention to modify the fill as taught in Modified Kise with the flame retardant in order to improve the safety of the battery in case of thermal runaway.
Regarding Claim 15,
Modified Kise does not teach, wherein the microcapsules include PTC particles disposed therein, the PTC particles configured to expand upon a temperature increase and rupture the microcapsules.
Yamamoto teaches, wherein the microcapsules include PTC particles disposed therein, the PTC particles configured to expand upon a temperature increase and rupture the microcapsules (Yamamoto, “a volatile expanding agent that includes a hydrocarbon having a boiling point of 100° C. or less and that is enclosed in the outer shell.”,) (Yamamoto, “Furthermore, the boiling point of the volatile expanding agent is preferably selected so that the volume expansion start temperature of the thermally expandable microcapsule is higher than the softening point of the polymer particle.”, see [0059])(The examiner notes the temperature difference between the polymer and fill would allow the gas to escape while the polymer softens or bursts)
Yamamoto teaches that the expansion of the capsule allows for the inhibition of the conductive state and therefore the prevention of a short circuit (Yamamoto, “thermally expandable microcapsule is disposed in the battery in order to inhibit a conductive state in the battery”, see [0003])
Modfied Kise and Yamamoto are analogous as they are of the same field of battery safety materials.
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 particles as taught in Modified Kise to expand and burst as taught in Yamamoto in order to decrease the conductivity of the battery and prevent thermal runaway.
Response to Arguments
Arguments filed on 8/22/2025 have been entered. Arguments are fully considered.
On pg. 8 the applicant argues:
“As discussed in the interview, the cited references do not disclose the combination of elements recited in claim 1. Moreover, this provides the unexpected benefits of exclusion of a separate current collector that is not realized by any of the cited references.”
This argument is partially convincing. The reference Kise does not teach the layering of the PTC layers as described in claim 1. However, additional search has revealed the reference ‘Li’ and ‘Kim’, which teaches the given limitations, and a related motivation for the layer structure.
On pg. 9, the applicant argues:
“As discussed in the interview the cited references neither disclose nor suggest the combination of features recited in claim 24.”
This argument is partially convincing. The reference Kise does not teach that the PTC discontinues layers as described in claim 24. However, additional search has revealed the reference ‘Li’ and ‘Kim’, which teaches the given limitations, and a related motivation for the discontinuation of the electric flow.
Ong pg. 10, the applicant argues:
“None of the cited references disclose, teach, the combination of elements described in claims 32 and 33. Moreover, claims 32 and 33 are allowable ”
This argument is partially convincing. The reference Kise does not teach that the PTC discontinues layers as described in claim 32 and 33. However, additional search has revealed the reference ‘Li’and ‘Kim’, which teaches the given limitations, and a related motivation for the discontinuation of the electric flow through the first claim.
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 SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 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, 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752