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 .
Examiner’s Comments
Applicants’ response filed on 11/11/2025 has been fully considered. Claims 3 and 10 are cancelled, claims 21-22 are new and claims 1-2, 4-9 and 11-22 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 16-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:.
The phrase “protective coating” in line 2 of claim 16 should be changed to the phrase “protective particle coating”.
The phrase “conductive additive” has been repeated in line 14 of claim 17.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]), the electrode assembly comprising: a current collector (positive electrode current collector; paragraph [0093]); and an electroactive material layer disposed near or adjacent to a surface of the current collector (positive electrode active material layer formed on positive electrode current collector; paragraph [0093]), the electroactive material layer comprising a plurality of electroactive material particles represented by: LiM1xM2yM3zO2 where M1 comprises nickel and M2 is selected from cobalt (Co) and M3, is selected from manganese (Mn) where 0 <x<1, 0 < y < 1, and 0 < z < 1 (positive electrode active material layer comprising particles of a lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide of LiaNibCocMndO2 where 0 ≤ a ≤ 1.1, 0.1 ≤ b ≤ 5, 0 ≤ c ≤ 0.9 and 0.1 ≤ d ≤ 0.5; paragraphs [0107]-[0108]), at least a portion of the electroactive material particles of the plurality of electroactive material particles comprising a protective particle coating (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated where the carbon-containing layers are formed using a graphite material; paragraph [0050]) and the protective particle coating being a carbon coating comprising a carbonaceous material being graphite (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated where the carbon-containing layers are formed using a graphite material; paragraph [0050])
The electrode assembly being for use in an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions is an intended use limitation.
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.
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.
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Iwasaki discloses the electrode assembly of claim 13 as noted above and Iwasaki discloses the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating being a continuous or discontinuous coating covering greater than 0 % to less than or equal to about 100 % of a total surface area of each electroactive material particle of the plurality of electroactive material particles (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated; paragraph [0050]).
Iwasaki does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating has an average thickness greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers.
However, it would have been obvious to adjust the average thickness of the carbon-containing layer to be greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers because doing so provides the active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer with improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki) while not using excess material as a means for reducing cost.
Regarding claim 16, Iwasaki discloses the electrode assembly of claim 13 as noted above.
Iwasaki does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating has an average thickness greater than 0 micrometers to less than or equal to about 20 micrometers.
However, it would have been obvious to adjust the average thickness of the carbon-containing layer to be greater than 0 micrometers to less than or equal to about 20 micrometers because doing so provides the active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer with improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki) while not using excess material as a means for reducing cost.
Claims 1-2, 4-9 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boovaragavan et al (US 2018/0090767 A1) in view of Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Boovaragavan discloses an electrode assembly (cell material; paragraph [0075]) comprising: a current collector (cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1307; paragraph [0075]); a protective coating disposed near or adjacent to a surface of the current collector (a continuous layer of a carbon-containing material disposed directly on a top surface of the cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0075]), the protective coating being a carbon layer comprising a carbonaceous material selected from graphene (continuous layer of a carbon-containing material including graphene; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0077]); and an electroactive material layer disposed near or adjacent to a surface of the protective coating opposite to the current collector (a cathode active material disposed directly on a top surface of the continuous layer of a carbon-containing material; Fig. 13B #1309; paragraph [0071]).
The electrode assembly being for use in an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions is an intended use limitation.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer comprising an electroactive material represented by: LiM1xM2yM3zM4(1-x-y-z)O2 where M1 comprises nickel and M2, M3, and M4 are each a transition metal independently selected from the group consisting of: manganese (Mn), cobalt (Co), aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), and combinations thereof, where 0 <x<1, 0 < y < 1, and 0 < z < 1.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the electroactive material layer comprising an electroactive material represented by: LiM1xM2yM3zO2 where M1 comprises nickel and M2 is selected from cobalt (Co) and M3, is selected from manganese (Mn) where 0 <x<1, 0 < y < 1, and 0 < z < 1 (positive electrode active material layer comprising a lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide of LiaNibCocMndO2 where 0 ≤ a ≤ 1.1, 0.1 ≤ b ≤ 5, 0 ≤ c ≤ 0.9 and 0.1 ≤ d ≤ 0.5; paragraphs [0107]-[0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki because having the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles as the positive electrode active material provides a material with high battery voltage (paragraph [0107] of Iwasaki).
Regarding claim 2, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 1 and Boovaragavan discloses the electrode assembly comprising the protective coating being a continuous coating covering greater than or equal to about 85% of the surface of the current collector (a continuous layer of a carbon-containing material disposed directly on a top surface of the cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0075]); and the protective coating has an average thickness greater than 0 micrometer and less than or equal to 20 micrometers (thickness of coating is between about 1 nm and about 30 µm; paragraph [0054]).
The thickness of the coating being between about 1 nm and 30 µm overlaps the claimed range for the protective coating having an average thickness of greater than 0 micrometers and less than 20 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select any portion of the disclosed ranges including the instantly claimed ranges from the ranges disclosed in the prior art reference in order to have dense packing of layers that produce compact and durable coatings (paragraph [0053] of Boovaragavan). It has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” Please see MPEP 2144.05, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); and In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 4, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 1 and Boovaragavan discloses the electrode assembly comprising the current collector comprising an electrically conductive material selected from aluminum (cathode current collector is aluminum; Fig. 13B #1307; paragraph [0071]).
Regarding claim 5, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 1.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer being defined by a plurality of electroactive material particles where at least a portion of the electroactive material particles comprise a protective a protective particle coating.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the electroactive material layer being defined by a plurality of electroactive material particles where at least a portion of the electroactive material particles comprise a protective a protective particle coating (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated; paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki coated with a carbon-containing layer because having active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer provides improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki).
Regarding claim 6, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 5 and Boovaragavan discloses the electrode assembly comprising the carbonaceous material being a first carbonaceous material (carbonaceous material derived from graphite; paragraph [0048]).
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating being a carbon coating comprising a second carbonaceous material selected from graphite.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the protective particle coating being a carbon coating comprising a second carbonaceous material selected from graphite (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated where the carbon-containing layers are formed using a graphite material; paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki coated with a carbon-containing layer because having active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer provides improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki).
Regarding claim 7, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 6 and Boovaragavan discloses the electrode assembly comprising the carbonaceous material being a first carbonaceous material (carbonaceous material derived from graphite; paragraph [0048]).
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the first carbonaceous material and the second carbonaceous material being the same.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the protective particle coating being a carbon coating comprising a second carbonaceous material selected from graphite (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated where the carbon-containing layers are formed using a graphite material; paragraph [0050]).
The first and second carbonaceous materials are the same due to the carbonaceous material of Boovaragavan and the material of the carbon-containing layer of Iwasaki each being graphite.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki coated with a carbon-containing layer because having active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer provides improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki).
Regarding claim 8, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 5 as noted above.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating being a continuous or discontinuous coating covering greater than 0 % to less than or equal to about 100 % of a total surface area of each electroactive material particle of the plurality of electroactive material particles.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the protective particle coating being a continuous or discontinuous coating covering greater than 0 % to less than or equal to about 100 % of a total surface area of each electroactive material particle of the plurality of electroactive material particles (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated; paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki coated with a carbon-containing layer because having active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer provides improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki).
Regarding claim 9, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 5 as noted above.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating has an average thickness greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising a protective particle coating (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated; paragraph [0050]).
Iwasaki does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating has an average thickness greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers.
However, it would have been obvious to adjust the average thickness of the carbon-containing layer to be greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers because doing so provides the active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer with improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki) while not using excess material as a means for reducing cost.
Regarding claim 21, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 1 as noted above.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material represented by LiNixCoyMn1-x-yO2 where 0.6 ≤ x ≤ 1 and 0 ≤ y ≤ 0.4.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the electroactive material represented by LiNixCoyMn1-x-yO2 where 0.6 ≤ x ≤ 1 and 0 ≤ y ≤ 0.4 (positive electrode active material layer comprising a lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide of LiaNibCocMndO2 where 0 ≤ a ≤ 1.1, 0.1 ≤ b ≤ 5, 0 ≤ c ≤ 0.9 and 0.1 ≤ d ≤ 0.5; paragraphs [0107]-[0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki because having the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles as the positive electrode active material provides a material with high battery voltage (paragraph [0107] of Iwasaki).
Claims 11, 17-19 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boovaragavan et al (US 2018/0090767 A1) in view of Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1) in further view of Endo (US 2021/0135229 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 1 as noted above.
Boovaragavan does do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer comprising greater than or equal to about 50 wt% to less than or equal to about 99 wt% of an electroactive material and greater than or equal to about 0.5 wt% to less than or equal to about 30 wt% of an conductive additive.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising an electroactive material layer comprising greater than or equal to about 50 wt% to less than or equal to about 99 wt% of an electroactive material (positive electrode active material particles within a range of 80 to 95 mass%; paragraph [0112]) and greater than or equal to about 0.5 wt% to less than or equal to about 30 wt% of an conductive additive (3 to 18 mass% of conductive additive; paragraph [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode electrode material of Boovaragavan for the positive electrode active material layer of Iwasaki because having the positive electrode active material layer provides a material with high battery voltage (paragraph [0107] of Iwasaki).
Boovaragavan and Iwasaki do do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the conductive additive comprising a first conductive additive having a first aspect ratio and a second conductive additive having a second aspect ratio and the first and second aspect ratios are different.
However, Endo discloses a positive electrode (paragraph [0014]) comprising a conductive additive (conductive agent; paragraph [0028]) comprising a first conductive additive having a first aspect ratio (carbon black; paragraph [0028]) and a second conductive additive having a second aspect ratio (graphite; paragraph [0028]).
Carbon black and graphite are different materials with carbon black being spherical and graphite having a layered structure and would therefore have different aspect ratios
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan and Iwasaki to substitute the conductive additive of Iwasaki for the conductive agents of Endo because having a combination of conductive agents provides enhanced electrical properties for a positive electrode mixture layer (paragraph [0028] of Endo).
Regarding claim 17, Boovaragavan discloses an electrode assembly (cell material; paragraph [0075]) comprising: a current collector (cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1307; paragraph [0075]); an electroactive material layer disposed parallel with the current collector (a cathode active material disposed directly on a top surface of the continuous layer of a carbon-containing material; Fig. 13B #1309; paragraph [0071]), a protective coating disposed between the current collector and the electroactive material layer (continuous layer of a carbon-containing material including graphene; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0077]), the protective coating being a carbon layer comprising a second carbonaceous material of graphene (continuous layer of a carbon-containing material including graphene; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0077]).
The electrode assembly being for use in an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions is an intended use limitation.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer comprising a plurality of electroactive material particles and conductive additive dispersed with the electroactive material particles where the electroactive material layer comprises an electroactive material represented by: LiM1xM2yM3zM4(1-x-y-z)O2 where M1 comprises nickel and M2, M3, and M4 are each a transition metal independently selected from the group consisting of: manganese (Mn), cobalt (Co), aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), and combinations thereof, where 0 <x<1, 0 < y < 1, and 0 < z < 1.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the electroactive material layer comprising a plurality of electroactive material particles (positive electrode active material layer comprising particles of a lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide of LiaNibCocMndO2 where 0 ≤ a ≤ 1.1, 0.1 ≤ b ≤ 5, 0 ≤ c ≤ 0.9 and 0.1 ≤ d ≤ 0.5; paragraphs [0107]-[0108]) and conductive additive dispersed with the electroactive material particles (paragraph [0112]), the electroactive material layer comprising an electroactive material represented by: LiM1xM2yM3zO2 where M1 comprises nickel and M2 is selected from cobalt (Co) and M3, is selected from manganese (Mn) where 0 <x<1, 0 < y < 1, and 0 < z < 1 (positive electrode active material layer comprising a lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide of LiaNibCocMndO2 where 0 ≤ a ≤ 1.1, 0.1 ≤ b ≤ 5, 0 ≤ c ≤ 0.9 and 0.1 ≤ d ≤ 0.5; paragraphs [0107]-[0108]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki because having the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles as the positive electrode active material provides a material with high battery voltage (paragraph [0107] of Iwasaki).
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer being defined by a plurality of electroactive material particles where at least a portion of the electroactive material particles comprise a protective a protective particle coating where the protective particle coating is a carbon coating comprising a first carbonaceous material.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the electroactive material layer being defined by a plurality of electroactive material particles where at least a portion of the electroactive material particles comprise a protective a protective particle coating where the protective particle coating is a carbon coating comprising a first carbonaceous material (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated where the carbon-containing layers are formed using a graphite material; paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki coated with a carbon-containing layer because having active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer provides improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki).
Boovaragavan and Iwasaki do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the conductive additive comprising a first conductive additive having a first aspect ratio and a second conductive additive having a second aspect ratio and the first and second aspect ratios are different.
However, Endo discloses a positive electrode (paragraph [0014]) comprising a conductive additive (conductive agent; paragraph [0028]) comprising a first conductive additive having a first aspect ratio (carbon black; paragraph [0028]) and a second conductive additive having a second aspect ratio (graphite; paragraph [0028]).
Carbon black and graphite are different materials with carbon black being spherical and graphite having a layered structure and would therefore have different aspect ratios
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan and Iwasaki to substitute the conductive additive of Iwasaki for the conductive agents of Endo because having a combination of conductive agents provides enhanced electrical properties for a positive electrode mixture layer (paragraph [0048] of Yang).
Regarding claim 18, Boovaragavan, Iwasaki and Endo disclose the electrode assembly of claim 17 as noted above.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating being a continuous or discontinuous coating covering greater than 0 % to less than or equal to about 100 % of a total surface area of each electroactive material particle of the plurality of electroactive material particles.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising the protective particle coating being a continuous or discontinuous coating covering greater than 0 % to less than or equal to about 100 % of a total surface area of each electroactive material particle of the plurality of electroactive material particles (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated; paragraph [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode active material of Boovaragavan for the lithium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide particles of Iwasaki coated with a carbon-containing layer because having active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer provides improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki).
Iwasaki does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the protective particle coating has an average thickness greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers.
However, it would have been obvious to adjust the average thickness of the carbon-containing layer to be greater than 0 nanometers to less than or equal to about 1,000 nanometers because doing so provides the active material particles coated with a carbon-containing layer with improved electron conductivity, improved input and output characteristics under a high current, suppressed generation of overvoltage for an electrode and excellent cycle characteristic for a nonaqueous secondary battery (paragraph [0050] of Iwasaki) while not using excess material as a means for reducing cost.
Regarding claim 19, Boovaragavan, Iwasaki and Endo disclose the electrode assembly of claim 17 and Boovaragavan discloses the electrode assembly comprising the protective coating being a continuous coating covering greater than or equal to about 85% of the surface of the current collector (a continuous layer of a carbon-containing material disposed directly on a top surface of the cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0075]); and the protective coating has an average thickness greater than 0 micrometer and less than or equal to 20 micrometers (thickness of coating is between about 1 nm and about 30 µm; paragraph [0054]).
The thickness of the coating being between about 1 nm and 30 µm overlaps the claimed range for the protective coating having an average thickness of greater than 0 micrometers and less than 20 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select any portion of the disclosed ranges including the instantly claimed ranges from the ranges disclosed in the prior art reference in order to have dense packing of layers that produce compact and durable coatings (paragraph [0053] of Boovaragavan). It has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” Please see MPEP 2144.05, In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); and In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 22, Boovaragavan, Iwasaki and Endo disclose the electrode assembly of claim 11 as noted above.
Boovaragavan, Iwasaki do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the first aspect ratio being equal to 1:1.
However, Endo discloses a positive electrode (paragraph [0014]) comprising a conductive additive (conductive agent; paragraph [0028]) comprising a first conductive additive having a first aspect ratio (carbon black; paragraph [0028]) and a second conductive additive having a second aspect ratio (graphite; paragraph [0028]).
Carbon black is spherical and would have a first aspect ratio of 1:1.
Iwasaki does not disclose the graphite having a second aspect ratio of greater than 3:1 to less than or equal to about 500:1.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the aspect ratio of graphite to be greater than 3:1 to less than or equal to about 500:1 because doing so would provide enhanced electrical properties for a positive electrode mixture layer (paragraph [0028] of Endo).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boovaragavan et al (US 2018/0090767 A1) in view of Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1) in further view of Kent et al (WO 2021/247285 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Boovaragavan and Iwasaki disclose the electrode assembly of claim 1 as noted above.
Boovaragavan does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer comprising greater than or equal to 50 wt% to less than or equal to about 99 wt% of an electroactive material.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising an electroactive material layer comprising greater than or equal to about 50 wt% to less than or equal to about 99 wt% of an electroactive material (positive electrode active material particles within a range of 80 to 95 mass%; paragraph [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode electrode material of Boovaragavan for the positive electrode active material layer of Iwasaki because having the positive electrode active material layer provides a material with high battery voltage (paragraph [0107] of Iwasaki).
Boovaragavan and Iwasaki do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising greater than or equal to about 0.2 wt% to less than or equal to about 15 wt% of a polymer dispersant additive selected from acid-functionalized polyvinylidene fluoride.
However, Kent discloses a battery electrode comprising greater than or equal to about 0.2 wt% to less than or equal to about 15 wt% of a polymer dispersant additive selected from acid-functionalized polyvinylidene fluoride (a conductive material slurry comprising binder in an amount of at least 9 weight% where the binder comprising low viscosity PVDF and wherein the PVDF is acid functionalized; paragraphs [0048] and [0051]-[0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan and Iwasaki to include the binder of acid functionalized PVDF of Kent in the cathode active material of Boovaragavan and Iwasaki because using acid functionalized PVDF disperses the conductive material with less solvent maximizing the energy density in the battery (paragraph [0053] of Kent).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1) in view of Boovaragavan et al (US 2018/0090767 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Iwasaki discloses the electrode assembly of claim 15 as noted above and Iwasaki discloses the electrode assembly comprising the carbonaceous material being a first carbonaceous material (active material particles include carbon-containing layers with which at least a part of a surface of the primary particles or the secondary particles is coated where the carbon-containing layers are formed using a graphite material; paragraph [0050])
Iwasaki does not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the surface of the current collector comprising a protective coating, the protective coating being a continuous carbon coating covering greater than or equal to 85% of the surface of the current collector comprising a second carbonaceous selected from graphene and wherein the second carbonaceous material and the first carbonaceous material are different.
However, Boovaragavan discloses an electrode assembly (cell material; paragraph [0075]) comprising the surface of the current collector comprising a protective coating (a continuous layer of a carbon-containing material disposed directly on a top surface of the cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0075]), the protective coating being a continuous carbon coating covering greater than or equal to 85% of the surface of the current collector (a continuous layer of a carbon-containing material disposed directly on a top surface of the cathode current collector; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0075]) comprising a second carbonaceous selected from graphene (continuous layer of a carbon-containing material including graphene; Fig. 13B #1317; paragraph [0077]).
The graphene of Boovaragavan and the graphite of Iwasaki are different carbonaceous materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Iwasaki to include the continuous layer of a carbon-containing material includes at least two layers of sheets of graphene of Boovaragavan between the positive electrode current collector and positive electrode active material layer of Iwasaki because doing so reduces and mitigates electrolytic effects within a battery (paragraph [0004] of Boovaragavan).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boovaragavan et al (US 2018/0090767 A1) in view of Iwasaki et al (US 2017/0077494 A1) in further view of Endo (US 2021/0135229 A1) in further view of Kent et al (WO 2021/247285 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Boovaragavan, Iwasaki and Endo disclose the electrode assembly of claim 17 as noted above.
Boovaragavan do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising the electroactive material layer comprising greater than or equal to about 50 wt% to less than or equal to about 99 wt% of an electroactive material and greater than or equal to about 0.5 wt% to less than or equal to about 30 wt% of an conductive additive.
However, Iwasaki discloses an electrode assembly (electrode group; paragraph [0098]) comprising an electroactive material layer comprising greater than or equal to about 50 wt% to less than or equal to about 99 wt% of an electroactive material (positive electrode active material particles within a range of 80 to 95 mass%; paragraph [0112]) and greater than or equal to about 0.5 wt% to less than or equal to about 30 wt% of an conductive additive (3 to 18 mass% of conductive additive; paragraph [0112]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan to substitute the cathode electrode material of Boovaragavan for the positive electrode active material layer of Iwasaki because having the positive electrode active material layer provides a material with high battery voltage (paragraph [0107] of Iwasaki).
Boovaragavan and Iwasaki do not disclose the electrode assembly comprising greater than or equal to about 0.2 wt% to less than or equal to about 15 wt% of a polymer dispersant additive selected from acid-functionalized polyvinylidene fluoride.
However, Kent discloses a battery electrode comprising greater than or equal to about 0.2 wt% to less than or equal to about 15 wt% of a polymer dispersant additive selected from acid-functionalized polyvinylidene fluoride (a conductive material slurry comprising binder in an amount of at least 9 weight% where the binder comprising low viscosity PVDF and wherein the PVDF is acid functionalized; paragraphs [0048] and [0051]-[0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode assembly of Boovaragavan and Iwasaki to include the binder of acid functionalized PVDF of Kent in the cathode active material of Boovaragavan and Iwasaki because using acid functionalized PVDF disperses the conductive material with less solvent maximizing the energy density in the battery (paragraph [0053] of Kent).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, filed 11/11/2025, with respect to the objections to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The objections to the drawings have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 13, filed 11/11/2025, with respect to the 112(b) rejection has been fully considered and are persuasive.
The 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 13 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicants argue that Boovaragavan, Zhamu, Yang and Kent are silent with regard to the claimed electroactive material.
This argument is moot as Boovaragavan, Zhamu, Yang and Kent are silent with regard to the claimed electroactive material. Therefore, the previous rejections have been withdrawn. However, new grounds of rejection have been noted above.
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 SATHAVARAM I REDDY whose telephone number is (571)270-7061. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM-6:00 PM 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571)-272-1291. 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.
/SATHAVARAM I REDDY/Examiner, Art Unit 1785