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
The amendment filed August 27, 2025 has been entered but does not place the application in condition for allowance. The examiner respectfully acknowledges cancellation of claims 1-10. Accordingly, claims 11-22 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to claim 11 overcomes the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection to the original claim in the Non-Final Office Action mailed June 3, 2025. The amendments to claims 11 and 12 also overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections to the original claims in the Non-Final Office Action mailed June 3, 2025. New rejections follow below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims 11 and 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koyama et al and rejections of claims 12-13 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Koyama et al in view of Mitsuhashi et al 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.
Specifically, Applicant’s arguments about flake graphite were considered. However, in the rejections of the original claims in the Non-Final Office Action mailed June 3, 2025, Koyama’s teachings were considered to meet the limitations of flake graphite as recited in the claim.
In light of the present amendments to claim 11 to include limitations of “a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter,” new art has been applied.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: lines 12-13 recite “wherein each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the first surface;” the “are” should be corrected to “is.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: lines 8-9 recite “wherein each of the thin edge planes of the second plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the first surface;” the “are” should be corrected to “is.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 5 recites “flake graphite each of the flakes;” there should be a comma after graphite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites in lines 6-9 “a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter, wherein teach of the thin edge planes of the second plurality of flakes…” It is unclear whether the recited “the parallel first and second planar surfaces,” “the perimeter,” and “the thin edge planes” refer to the antecedents introduced in claim 12 or similarly recited ones in parent claim 11. Appropriate correction is requested. To advance prosecution, the instances of “the parallel first and second planar surfaces,” “the perimeter,” and “the thin edge planes” will be interpreted as referring to the antecedents introduced in claim 12.
Claim 13 is dependent on parent claim 12 and therefore inherits its characteristics of indefiniteness.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al (JP 2018041645 A) in view of Takahata et al (US 9,911,972 B2). Further supporting evidence is provided by“What are the cathode materials for lithium ion batters? Lithium-ion battery cathode material introduction,” Benzo Battery News, 07 June 2022.
Regarding claim 11, Ito teaches a system comprising: a low-resistance high electrical energy lithium-ion battery cell including:
([0019] of the machine translation teaches use of active materials for positive electrodes such as LipCosO2 and LipNiqO2, which include species LiCoO2 known to have a high working voltage and high specific energy and LiNiO2, known to have a high theoretical capacity according to evidentiary reference Benzo Battery News, therefore the system is expected to have high electrical energy. Additionally, [0009] teaches the capacity is prevented from decreasing after repeated charging and discharging, implying that the system maintains a high electrical energy. [0064] teaches a conductive path can be formed by flake graphite in the positive electrode active material layer 112 that keeps the electronic resistance between the current collector and the positive electrode active material layer low, which indicates that the energy storage system is low-resistance. [0070] teaches the energy storage system can be a lithium ion secondary battery.)
An anode;
A cathode including;
A cathode current collector including a first surface; and a cathode coating formed from a cathode coating slurry and disposed on the cathode current collector;
(Paragraph [0014] teaches a positive electrode 11, i.e. cathode, and a negative electrode 12, i.e., anode. Additionally, [0015] teaches the positive electrode's current collector 111 has a surface on which a positive electrode active material layer 112 is layered; this is the first surface. Paragraphs [0061]/[0073] teach the positive electrode active material layer 112 is formed by a cathode coating slurry containing the active material, flake graphite, a binder, and a solvent.)
wherein the cathode coating slurry includes a first plurality of flakes of flake graphite, each of the flakes within the first plurality of flakes including a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter, wherein each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the first surface;
a separator disposed between the cathode and the anode; and
an electrolyte.
(Paragraph [0041] describes a separator 4 between the positive electrode 11 and negative electrode 12 and an electrolyte in the energy storage device 1. Paragraph [0025] describes flake graphite in the form of plates, i.e. flakes. They describe the structure as being formed by stacked layers of covalently bonding carbon atoms and that the direction of such stacking usually corresponds to the thickness direction of the flake graphite. Paragraphs [0028] and [0061] also teach the flake graphite in the applied coating is oriented so that the thickness direction of the flake graphite and the thickness direction of the metal foil 111 are substantially perpendicular to each other based on an applied magnetic field. Ito's teaching reads upon the general recitation “wherein each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the first surface,” because the thin edge planes can correspond to surfaces formed by stacking covalently-bonded carbon atom layers in the thickness direction of a flake and the phrase “statistically facing” is broad enough to encompass any probability of each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes facing toward the first surface.)
Although Ito’s teachings utilize flake graphite per [0025], they do not explicitly describe the characteristics of the covalently bonding carbon atoms and the stacked layers associated with the claimed features of “a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter.”
However, in the same field of endeavor, Takahata is relied upon to teach (Col 3 lines 48-52) the graphite with flake shape, i.e. flake graphite, may have a laminar structure in which a plurality of planes formed with carbon six-membered rings (i.e., planes equivalent to the (004) plane) is stacked, allowing migration of lithium ions through the interlaminar spaces. They also teach in Col 3 lines 56-65 that when the graphite material has the (004) plane sufficiently vertically oriented, migration as well as storage and release of the charge carriers such as lithium ions from the surface of the electrode active material layer toward the current collector are facilitated, and accordingly, the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery can have high capacity, low resistance, and excellent input and output properties.
Given that primary reference Ito teaches the use of vertically oriented flake graphite to form a conductive path between the current collector 111 and positive electrode material layer 112 ([0064], [0028]), one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have recognized the benefit of utilizing Takahata’s flake graphite as the flake graphite in the cathode coating slurry of Ito’s system, given that it is a suitable flake graphite option for establishing an ion conductive path and that it can result in high capacity, low resistance, and excellent input and output properties of the battery.
Accordingly, the distinct (004) planes stacked within the plurality of planes of Takahata’s flake graphite within the cathode coating slurry of the combination can be arbitrarily chosen to correspond to a first planar side surface and a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, respectively, as claimed. The intervening space between the first planar side surface and the second planar side surface corresponds to a thin edge plane, wherein the boundary of the thin edge plane would correspond to a perimeter, as claimed.
Regarding claim 12, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11, and Ito teaches in [0034] an anode current collector 121 including a second surface (the surface upon which the negative electrode, i.e. anode, active material layer 122 is formed); and provides an example in [0074] of an anode coating formed from an anode coating slurry (solvent, active material particles, binder) and disposed on the anode current collector (copper foil). Paragraph [0036] discloses that the active material of the negative electrode 12 can be graphite or amorphous carbon.
However, the combination does not teach an anode coating slurry, wherein the anode coating slurry includes a second plurality of flakes of the flake graphite, each of the flakes within the second plurality of flakes including a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter, wherein each of the thin edge planes of the second plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the second surface.
Analogous art Takahata teaches (Col 3 lines 37-40) the negative electrode active material may be a graphite material with a flake shape and further discloses (Col 3 lines 48-52) the graphite with flake shape, i.e. flake graphite, may have a laminar structure in which a plurality of planes formed with carbon six-membered rings (i.e., planes equivalent to the (004) plane) is stacked, allowing migration of lithium ions through the interlaminar spaces. They also teach in Col 3 lines 56-65 that when the graphite material has the (004) plane sufficiently vertically oriented, migration as well as storage and release of the charge carriers such as lithium ions from the surface of the electrode active material layer toward the current collector are facilitated, and accordingly, the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery can have high capacity, low resistance, and excellent input and output properties. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have recognized the benefit of utilizing Takahata’s flake graphite as the active material in the anode coating slurry of Ito’s system, given that it is a suitable active material option and that it can result in high capacity, low resistance, and excellent input and output properties of the battery.
Accordingly, the distinct (004) planes stacked within the plurality of planes of Takahata’s flake graphite within the anode coating slurry of the combination can also be arbitrarily chosen to correspond to a first planar side surface and a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, respectively, as claimed. The intervening space between the first planar side surface and the second planar side surface corresponds to a thin edge plane, wherein the boundary of the thin edge plane would correspond to a perimeter, as claimed.
The thin edge planes of Takahata’s flake graphite within the anode coating slurry read upon the general recitation “wherein each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the second surface,” because they teach “the graphite material has the (004) plane oriented so that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector is 45° or more and 90° or less” (Col 3 lines 56-59) and the phrase “statistically facing” is broad enough to encompass any probability of each of the thin edge planes of the second plurality of flakes facing toward the second surface.
Regarding claim 13, the combination above teaches the system of claim 12. Takahata of the combination further teaches wherein the thin edge plane of at least 75% of the second plurality of flakes defines an angle relative to the surface of the anode current collector of from 60 degrees to 90 degrees
Takahata teaches (Col 3 lines 37-44) that at least 50% by number of the graphite material, which can be a graphite material with a flake shape, in the negative electrode active material layer is oriented so that an angle of the (004) plane thereof relative to the surface of the current collector, which corresponds to the angle defined by of the thin edge plane of relative to the surface of the negative electrode, i.e. anode, current collector, is 45° or more and 90° or less. The taught fraction of the second plurality of flakes and the taught range of orientations both overlap with the claimed ranges. 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The combination does not teach the thin edge plane of at least 75% of the first plurality of flakes defines an angle relative to the surface of the cathode current collector of from 60 degrees to 90 degrees. Primary reference Ito only discloses an average angle of orientation in [0064] which is different from a distribution.
Takahata teaches (Col 3 lines 39-44, 56-65) that when the graphite material has the (004) plane oriented so that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector is 45° or more and 90° or less, migration as well as insertion (storage) and elimination (release) of the charge carriers such as lithium ions from the surface of the electrode active material layer towards the current collector are facilitated,” and teaches use of such oriented graphite flakes wherein at least 50% by number of the graphite material in the electrode active material layer is associated with a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery having high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties.
Although Takahata’s teachings are for flake graphite used in a negative active material layer, Takahata teaches an advantageous lithium ion conducting property from the current collector to the surface of the electrode active material layer that arises from the orientation of flake graphite and this property is applicable to the flake graphite within primary reference Ito’s positive electrode active material layer, because Ito also teaches using vertically oriented flake graphite to form a conductive path between the current collector 111 and positive electrode material layer 112 ([0064], [0028]). A skilled artisan would have been motivated to apply the learnings from Takahata’s teachings to modify the graphite flakes of the first plurality of flakes of modified Ito such that at least 50% by number of the graphite material is oriented so that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector, corresponding to the angle defined by of the thin edge plane of relative to the surface of the cathode current collector, is 45° or more and 90° or less to facilitate the movement of lithium ions between the cathode current collector and the surface of the cathode active material layer and for the advantageous performance benefits of high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties, and thus, the taught fraction of the first plurality of flakes and the taught range of orientations both overlap with the claimed ranges. 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).)
Regarding claim 14, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11 but does not teach wherein the thin edge plane of at least 50% of the first plurality of flakes defines an angle relative to the first surface of the cathode current collector of from 45 degrees to 90 degrees.
Takahata teaches (Col 3 lines 39-44, 56-65) that when the graphite material has the (004) plane oriented so that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector is 45° or more and 90° or less, migration as well as insertion (storage) and elimination (release) of the charge carriers such as lithium ions from the surface of the electrode active material layer towards the current collector are facilitated,” and teaches use of such oriented graphite flakes wherein at least 50% by number of the graphite material in the electrode active material layer is associated with a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery having high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties.
Although Takahata’s teachings are for flake graphite used in a negative active material layer, Takahata teaches an advantageous lithium ion conducting property from the current collector to the surface of the electrode active material layer that arises from the orientation of flake graphite and this property is applicable to the flake graphite within primary reference Ito’s positive electrode active material layer, because Ito also teaches using vertically oriented flake graphite to form a conductive path between the current collector 111 and positive electrode material layer 112 ([0064], [0028]). A skilled artisan would have been motivated to apply the learnings from Takahata’s teachings to modify the graphite flakes of the first plurality of flakes of modified Ito such that at least 50% by number of the graphite material is oriented such that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector, corresponding to the angle defined by of the thin edge plane of relative to the surface of the cathode current collector, is 45° or more and 90° or less to facilitate the movement of lithium ions between the cathode current collector and the surface of the cathode active material layer, and for the advantageous performance benefits of high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties. Thus, the taught fraction of the first plurality of flakes and the taught range of orientations within the combination overlap with the claimed ranges. 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 15, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11 but does not teach wherein the thin edge plane of at least 75% of the first plurality of flakes defines an angle relative to the first surface of the cathode current collector of from 45 degrees to 90 degrees.
Takahata teaches (Col 3 lines 39-44, 56-65) that when the graphite material has the (004) plane oriented so that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector is 45° or more and 90° or less, migration as well as insertion (storage) and elimination (release) of the charge carriers such as lithium ions from the surface of the electrode active material layer towards the current collector are facilitated,” and teaches use of such oriented graphite flakes wherein at least 50% by number of the graphite material in the electrode active material layer is associated with a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery having high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties.
Although Takahata’s teachings are for flake graphite used in a negative active material layer, Takahata teaches an advantageous lithium ion conducting property from the current collector to the surface of the electrode active material layer that arises from the orientation of flake graphite and this property is applicable to the flake graphite within primary reference Ito’s positive electrode active material layer, because Ito also teaches using vertically oriented flake graphite to form a conductive path between the current collector 111 and positive electrode material layer 112 ([0064], [0028]). A skilled artisan would have been motivated to apply the learnings from Takahata’s teachings to modify the graphite flakes of the first plurality of flakes of modified Ito such that at least 50% by number of the graphite material is oriented such that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector, corresponding to the angle defined by of the thin edge plane of relative to the surface of the cathode current collector, is 45° or more and 90° or less to facilitate the movement of lithium ions between the cathode current collector and the surface of the cathode active material layer, and for the advantageous performance benefits of high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties. Thus, the taught fraction of the first plurality of flakes and the taught range of orientations within the combination overlap with the claimed ranges. 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 16, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11 but does not teach wherein the thin edge plane of at least 50% of the first plurality of flakes defines an angle relative to the first surface of the cathode current collector of from 60 degrees to 90 degrees.
Takahata teaches (Col 3 lines 39-44, 56-65) that when the graphite material has the (004) plane oriented so that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector is 45° or more and 90° or less, migration as well as insertion (storage) and elimination (release) of the charge carriers such as lithium ions from the surface of the electrode active material layer towards the current collector are facilitated,” and teaches use of such oriented graphite flakes wherein at least 50% by number of the graphite material in the electrode active material layer is associated with a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery having high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties.
Although Takahata’s teachings are for flake graphite used in a negative active material layer, Takahata teaches an advantageous lithium ion conducting property from the current collector to the surface of the electrode active material layer that arises from the orientation of flake graphite and this property is applicable to the flake graphite within primary reference Ito’s positive electrode active material layer, because Ito also teaches using vertically oriented flake graphite to form a conductive path between the current collector 111 and positive electrode material layer 112 ([0064], [0028]). A skilled artisan would have been motivated to apply the learnings from Takahata’s teachings to modify the graphite flakes of the first plurality of flakes of modified Ito such that at least 50% by number of the graphite material is oriented such that the angle thereof relative to the surface of the current collector, corresponding to the angle defined by of the thin edge plane of relative to the surface of the cathode current collector, is 45° or more and 90° or less to facilitate the movement of lithium ions between the cathode current collector and the surface of the cathode active material layer, and for the advantageous performance benefits of high capacity, low resistance and excellent input and output properties. Thus, the taught fraction of the first plurality of flakes and the taught range of orientations within the combination overlap with the claimed ranges. 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 11-12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsuhashi et al (US 9490476 B2) in view of Ito et al (JP 2018041645 A).
Regarding claim 11, Mitsuhashi teaches
A system comprising:
A high electrical energy lithium-ion battery cell including:
(Col 4 lines 16-18 teach a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery having a high energy density, hence it would be expected to be a high electrical energy battery; Col 5 lines 16-19 teach the battery can be a lithium ion battery)
An anode;
A cathode including;
A cathode current collector including a first surface; and a cathode coating formed from a cathode coating slurry and disposed on the cathode current collector; a separator disposed between the cathode and the anode; and an electrolyte.
(Fig. 7 and Col 12 lines 45-51 teach a negative electrode sheet 20, i.e., anode, a positive electrode sheet 10, i.e., cathode, a separator 40 between the positive electrode sheet and the negative electrode sheet, and an electrolyte solution. Col 16 lines 6-19 teaches an example of a cathode coating formed from a cathode coating slurry with NMP as solvent and disposed on aluminum foil as the cathode current collector. The first surface would correspond to the surface of the cathode current collector on which the cathode coating is formed. Col 13 lines 44-51 teach the positive electrode mixture layer 14, i.e., the cathode coating, can use an electroconductive material such as a carbon powder.)
Mitsuhashi does not teach wherein the cathode coating slurry includes a first plurality of flakes of flake graphite, each of the flakes within the first plurality of flakes including a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter, wherein each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the first surface
Analogous art Ito teaches in paragraph [0024] of its machine translation that flake graphite can be used as a conductive material for a positive electrode active material layer and explains in [0065] that incorporation of the flake graphite as taught results in a conductive path between the active material particles that improves output performance and suppresses a decrease in capacity after cycling. Ito also discloses in [0007] that the use of the flake graphite as taught keeps the electronic resistance between the current collecting foil and the active material layer low. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have utilized flake graphite as a conductive material as taught by Ito to modify Mitushashi’s system given that it is a suitable conductive material and can improve output performance, suppresses a decrease in capacity after cycling, and keeps the resistance low. Hence, the resulting combination would exhibit low-resistance as claimed.
Col 7 lines 28-30 of Mitsuhashi teaches features of flake graphite as flat and having an edge 25b that is an edge where a plurality of layers 25a in the hexagonal plate crystal (graphene sheet) are stacked and exposed. Ito’s flake graphite taught as the conductive material within the cathode coating slurry and resulting cathode coating of the combination could be expected to exhibit similar features.
Accordingly, within the plurality of layers 25a of a flake of flake graphite, a graphene sheet can be arbitrarily chosen to correspond to a first planar side surface and another sheet as the second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, respectively, as claimed. The intervening space between the first planar side surface and the second planar side surface corresponds to a thin edge plane, wherein the boundary of the thin edge plane would correspond to a perimeter, as claimed.
Each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes would inherently be statistically facing toward the first surface because the phrase “statistically facing” encompasses any probability of each of the thin edge planes facing toward the first surface.
Regarding claim 12, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11, and Mitsuhashi teaches (Col 7 lines 21-24) an anode current collector 22 including a second surface (the surface upon which the negative electrode, i.e. anode, active material layer is formed); and teaches the anode coating is formed from an anode coating slurry 23 (comprising graphite dispersed in a solvent, per Col 5 lines 35-39) and disposed on the anode current collector 22.
Mitsuhashi further teaches the anode coating slurry includes a second plurality of flakes of the flake graphite, each of the flakes within the second plurality of flakes including a first planar side surface, a second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, a perimeter, and a thin edge plane defined by the parallel first and second planar surfaces around the perimeter, wherein each of the thin edge planes of the second plurality of flakes are statistically facing toward the second surface.
Specifically, Mitsuhashi teaches flat flake graphite 25 is incorporated as the negative electrode active material, per Col 7 lines 25-27). Col 7 lines 28-30 of Mitsuhashi teaches features of flat flake graphite as having an edge 25b that is an edge where a plurality of layers 25a in the hexagonal plate crystal (graphene sheet) are stacked and exposed.
Accordingly, within the plurality of layers 25a of a flake of flake graphite, a graphene sheet can be arbitrarily chosen to correspond to a first planar side surface and another sheet as the second planar side surface parallel to the first planar side surface, respectively, as claimed. The intervening space between the first planar side surface and the second planar side surface corresponds to a thin edge plane, wherein the boundary of the thin edge plane would correspond to a perimeter, as claimed.
Each of the thin edge planes of the first plurality of flakes would inherently be statistically facing toward the first surface because the phrase “statistically facing” encompasses any probability of each of the thin edge planes facing toward the second surface.
Regarding claim 21, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11 and Mitsuhashi further teaches that the positive electrode mixture layer may as necessary, i.e. optionally, contain a polymeric binder for the electrode coating (Col 13: lines 44-48, 52-55), therefore it would have been obvious to exclude the polymeric binder from the electrode coating slurry because it is optional.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsuhashi et al (US 9490476 B2) in view of Ito et al (JP 2018041645 A) as applied above to claim 11, and further in view of Jung et al (WO 2021107586 A1).
Regarding claim 22, the combination above teaches the system of claim 11, but does not teach wherein the cathode coating slurry includes a polymeric bonder present in an amount less than or equal to one unit by weight of the polymeric binder per one hundred units by weight of the cathode coating slurry.
In the same field of endeavor, Jung teaches in [0079] the polymeric binder may be included in an amount of 0.5 to 2 wt%, specifically 0.5 to 1.5 wt%, based on the total weight of each positive electrode composite layer, which is a dried coating formed from the cathode coating slurry (B) per paragraph [0132]. Therefore, within the slurry, the weight percentage of the binder would have been lower than 0.5 to 1.5 wt%, and therefore would have overlapped with the claimed range. Jung also teaches within the range, the binder amount provides sufficient binding properties of the electrode and sufficient battery capacity and energy density ([0080]). A skilled artisan would have found it obvious incorporated Jung’s taught range for the polymeric binder within the modified system of Mitsuhashi given that it provides binding properties of the electrode and sufficient battery capacity and energy density. 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Additionally, a skilled artisan would have also recognized that the amount of binder is a result-effective variable and utilized routine experimentation to adjust it to optimize the binding properties of the electrode, as well as battery capacity and energy density.
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 GIGI LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 - 6.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/GIGI LEE LIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 26 September 2025