DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The Claim Interpretation as laid out in the Non-Final Rejection (mailed 07/11/2025) is still considered relevant and is applied to the amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 and 6-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohata et al. (US-20080044733-A1) as evidenced by Matsumura et al. (US-20130273421-A1) in view of Kim et al. (US-20210175505-A1) and in further view of Jin et al. (US-20160329547-A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 9-10, Ohata discloses an insulation paste (porous film paste; [0013, 0023, 0055]). The preamble recitation “for a current collector for a lithium-ion secondary battery” is a statement of purpose or intended use of the claimed insulation paste. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. Since the recitation “for a current collector for a lithium-ion secondary battery” does not impart additional structure to the insulation paste, the preamble does not limit the claim (MPEP 2111.02, II).
Ohata discloses that the insulation paste (porous film paste) includes an inorganic filler [0051, 0063, 0065] as required by Claim 1. In specific Examples (Examples 1-3) the inorganic filler is selected to be alumina [0108, 0115, 0119], thereby rendering obvious the use of alumina, which is within the claimed list of inorganic fillers recited in Claim 9.
Ohata further discloses that the insulation paste (porous film paste) can include a combination of “thermo-cross-linkable resins or cured resins thereof” (reads on “dispersion resin (C)” [0043-0045]) and “other resin components” (reads on “binder (B)”) [0049-0050]. The “other resin components” can be selected from a list which includes polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) [0049].
Therefore, although Ohata does not disclose a specific example wherein a thermo-cross-linkable resin is combined with PVDF, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used a combination of a thermo-cross-linkable resin and a binder containing PVDF with a reasonable expectation that such a combination would result in a successful insulation paste. The use of a binder (B) and a dispersion resin (C) corresponds to a recited limitation of Claim 1. The use of a binder containing PVDF corresponds to the recited limitation of Claim 10.
Ohata also discloses that the insulation paste (porous film paste) comprises “a solvent (D)” (dispersion medium) [0051, 0056, 0089-0091, 0110].
Ohata discloses that the thermo-cross-linkable resin (i.e. dispersion resin) is used as the film binder in order to suppress swelling of the porous film with the non-aqueous electrolyte [0037]. The thermo-cross-linkable resin (dispersion resin) preferably contains a hydrophilic group with a high degree of dissociation [0043]. The hydrophilic group provides a good balance between the cross-linking characteristics upon heating and the stability of the dispersion state of the particular filler in the porous film paste [0043]. Preferable examples of the hydrophilic group include groups with a high degree of dissociation such as a sulfuric acid group, a sulfonic acid group, a phosphoric acid group, an acidic phosphoric ester group, a phosphonic acid group, and a quaternary ammonium group [0043]. A resin containing a hydrophilic group with a high degree of dissociation can be obtained by copolymerizing a monomer containing a hydrophilic group with a high degree of dissociation, such as unsaturated organic phosphate [0044], with a monomer capable of being copolymerized therewith, such as alkyl methacrylates [0045-0045].
Additionally, Matsumura evidences that a polymer unit comprising a hydrophilic acid group such as a phosphate group [0048, 0055] can be polymerized with another polymer unit [0056] to produce a successful binder with a good binding property [0047].
Therefore, although Ohata does not disclose a specific embodiment wherein the thermo-cross-linkable resin (dispersion resin) comprises an acrylic resin having a polar group which comprises a phosphate group, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the thermo-cross-linkable resin (dispersion resin) to be a copolymer formed of monomers comprising an unsaturated organic phosphate and monomers of an alkyl methacrylate with a reasonable expectation that forming the dispersion resin to be such a copolymer would result in a successful dispersion resin. A copolymer formed of monomers comprising an unsaturated organic phosphate and monomers of an alkyl methacrylate reads on an acrylic resin having a polar group which comprises a phosphate group.
Ohata discloses that the insulation paste (porous film paste) is applied to a lithium secondary battery [0019, 0021, 0023, 0057-0058]. Ohata does not teach the sodium content of the insulation paste, and therefore does not teach that a sodium content of the insulation paste is 10 to 350 ppm.
Kim teaches a lithium secondary battery [0025, 0038-0039, 0060-0061, 0077] wherein the content of sodium ions in the secondary battery is minimized in order to prevent a decrease in Coulomb efficiency and capacity reduction [0025-0028, 0031-0032]. Kim teaches that alkali metal is recognized as an impurity in lithium secondary batteries, and that minimizing the content of alkali metal contained in the lithium secondary battery has a direct correlation with the improvement of the battery performance [0025-0026]. Kim teaches that the content of sodium can be reduced by using high purity starting materials [0052], altering the reactor design [0052], rinsing or dialyzing a binder polymer after hydrolysis [0053], or altering starting materials [0053-0054]. Kim teaches that the content of sodium ions in the secondary battery is no more than 500 ppm [0028, 0031], and that the lower the content of sodium ions, the more likely it will be advantageous in view of lifetime and the capacity of the battery [0031, 0034, 0041].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the content of sodium in the lithium secondary battery of Ohata to be as low as possible to maximize battery performance, while taking into account the cost, design / synthetic requirements, and time required to reduce the content of sodium. (MPEP 2144.05, II). By optimizing the total content of sodium in the lithium secondary battery, it would have further been obvious to one of ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the content of sodium in the insulation paste (porous film paste), including optimizing the content of sodium to be 10 ppm to 350 ppm, with a reasonable expectation that such a content of sodium would result in a successful lithium secondary battery with increased lifetime characteristics and battery capacity (MPEP 2144.05, II).
Ohata discloses that the viscosity of the insulation paste (porous film paste) is important for successful storage and application of the insulation paste [0040]. Ohata discloses that factors such as the liquid-type of the thermo-cross-linkable resin [0040], the weight-average molecular weight [0042], and the temperature of cross-linking [0048] are considered in view of preventing the insulation paste (porous film paste) from becoming too viscous [0040, 0042, 0048]. Ohata further discloses that the inorganic filler particles are designed to suppress agglomeration and to optimize fluidity of the porous film [0064]. Ohata does not teach that the viscosity of the insulation paste at any shear rates.
Jin teaches a similar insulation paste (electrical insulating layer) [0018, 0043-0044, 0049] including an inorganic filler [0043]. Jin teaches that when the viscosity of the insulation paste is too high, the coating properties deteriorate, while if the viscosity of the slurry is too low, the inorganic filler settles earlier than a desired time point, thus failing to achieve slurry stability [0048].
Both Ohata and Jin are drawn to insulation pastes including inorganic particles which can be stably stored and applied. Therefore, in seeking to achieve an insulation pate wherein the inorganic filler does not settle too early while ensuring that the coating properties are not deteriorated, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the viscosity of the insulation paste, including selecting the insulation paste to have a viscosity at a shear rate of 1 s-1 of 1500 mPa*s or more, and selecting the insulation paste to further have a T1 value greater than 1, the T1 value being a ratio of the viscosity at a shear rate of 1 s-1 to the viscosity at a shear rate of 1000 s-1 (MPEP 2144.05, II) as required by Claim 1. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation that providing the insulation paste with such a viscosity would result in a successful insulation paste.
Regarding Claims 6-8, modified Ohata renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above, including that the acrylic resin is a copolymer formed of monomers comprising an unsaturated organic phosphate (i.e. a polar group which comprises a phosphate group) and monomers of an alkyl methacrylate (see rejection of Claim 1, above; [Ohata: 0043-0045]). An acrylic resin which is formed as a copolymer reads on the recited limitation of Claim 8 wherein “the dispersion resin (C) comprises the acrylic resin having the polar group which comprises the phosphate group and which is a copolymer of starting material monomers”. The use of starting material monomers comprising the unsaturated organic phosphate reads on the recited limitation of Claim 8 of starting material monomers containing “a polymerizable unsaturated monomer having the phosphate group”.
Ohata discloses that various alkyl methacrylates can be successfully polymerized with the unsaturated organic phosphate (see rejection of Claim 1, above; [Ohata: 0043-0045]) including t-butyl methacrylate, hexyl methacrylate, cyclohexyl methacrylate, dodecyl methacrylate, and lauryl methacrylate [0045].
Therefore, although Ohata does not disclose a specific example wherein the acrylic resin is a copolymer of a starting material monomer containing “a polymerizable unsaturated monomer having a hydrocarbon group that has four or more carbon atoms (c2)”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the alkyl methacrylate disclosed by Ohata to be any of t-butyl methacrylate, hexyl methacrylate, cyclohexyl methacrylate, dodecyl methacrylate, and lauryl methacrylate with a reasonable expectation that such a selection would result in a successful acrylic resin. These alkyl methacrylates read on the recited limitation of “a polymerizable unsaturated monomer having a hydrocarbon group that has four or more carbon atoms (c2)” as required by Claims 6 and 8.
Ohata further discloses that the acrylic resin preferably has a weight-average molecular weight of 3,000 or more and 300,000 or less [0042]. If the weight-average molecular weight is too low (i.e. less than 3,000), the inorganic filler can settle to the bottom of the insulation paste [0042]. However, if the weight-average molecular weight is too high, the viscosity of the insulation paste may become too high [0042].
Therefore, although Ohata does not specifically teach that the acrylic copolymer has “a weight average molecular weight of 1,000 to 100,000”, in seeking to prevent the inorganic filler from settling while preventing the viscosity from becoming too high, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have optimized the weight-average molecular weight of the acrylic resin copolymer, including selecting the weight-average molecular weight to be 3,000 to 100,000, with a reasonable expectation that such a weight-average molecular weight would result in a successful acrylic resin copolymer for use in an insulation paste (MPEP 2144.05, II). A copolymer with a weight average molecular weight of 3,000 to 100,000 is within the claimed range of 1,000 to 100,000 recited in Claim 8. Since the acrylic resin is the copolymer, the acrylic resin also has a weight average molecular weight of 3,000 to 100,000, which is within the claimed range of 1,000 to 100,000 recited in Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Ohata renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Ohata further discloses a specific embodiment wherein a mixture of N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP) and cyclohexanone [0091, 0110] is successfully be used as the solvent (dispersion media) [0091, 0109-0110, 0123, 0126], thereby rendering obvious the use of NMP and cyclohexanone as the solvent (D). Such a solvent “contains N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone”.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Ohata renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Ohata discloses that the insulation paste (porous film paste) can be prepared by mixing a film forming material containing an inorganic filler and a film binder with a film formative dispersion medium [0055]. Ohata does not disclose the use of an active substance for an electrode in the insulation paste (porous film paste), and therefore it is interpreted that the insulation paste comprises no (i.e. 0 mass%) active substance for an electrode.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohata et al. (US-20080044733-A1) as evidenced by Matsumura et al. (US-20130273421-A1) in view of Kim et al. (US-20210175505-A1) and in further view of Jin et al. (US-20160329547-A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, and in view of Otohata et al. (US-20190165368-A1).
Regarding Claims 2-3, modified Ohata renders obvious all of the limitations as set forth above. Ohata further discloses that the mean particle size of the inorganic filler is preferably 0.1 to 5 µm [0064]. The range disclosed in the prior art overlaps the range claimed in the instant application. Therefore, although Ohata does not specifically teach that the inorganic filler has a volume average particle size (D50) of 0.5 to 7 µm as required by Claim 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected any portion of the range disclosed in the prior art, including selecting the inorganic filler to have a D50 of 0.5 to 5 µm, with a reasonable expectation that such an inorganic filler with such a particle size would result in a successful insulation paste (MPEP 2144.05, I).
Ohata discloses the inorganic filler is designed such that agglomeration of the inorganic filler is suppressed and fluidity of the insulation paste (porous film paste) is optimized [0064]. Ohata does not teach that the standard deviation of particle size distribution is 1.4 µm or less.
Otohata teaches a similar insulation paste (insulating layer) [0067-0068] for use in a lithium ion secondary battery [0043] including a similar inorganic filler (corresponds to non-conductive inorganic oxide particles; [0069-0070, 0073]). Otohata teaches that the particle diameter distribution of the inorganic filler is particularly preferably 0.5 to 20% [0075]. Advantageously, by selecting the particle diameter distribution to be within such a range, a predetermined gap is maintained between the non-conductive particles (i.e. inorganic filler), thereby suppressing an increase in resistance due to the inhibition of movement of lithium [0075].
Since both Ohata and Otohata are drawn to insulation pastes comprising inorganic filler particles dispersed in solvent, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the particle diameter distribution to be 0.5 to 20% with a reasonable expectation that such a particle diameter distribution would result in a successful insulation paste capable of maintaining a predetermined gap between particles and suppressing an increase in resistance.
Therefore, although modified Ohata does not specifically teach a standard deviation of particle size distribution of 1.4 µm or less, the particle diameter distribution of 0.5 to 20% rendered obvious by modified Ohata results in a standard deviation of particle size distribution which falls within the claimed range, thereby rendering obvious a standard deviation of particle size distribution of 1.4 µm or less as required by Claim 3. Furthermore, in light of the teachings of modified Ohata, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to have selected the standard deviation of particle size distribution to be 1.4 µm or less in order to maintain a predetermined gap between the inorganic filler and suppress an increase in resistance of the insulation paste.
Regarding Claim 2, Examiner notes that the limitation “wherein an insulation layer obtained by applying the insulation paste to a current collector has an adhesive force of 2.5 N/m or more” is an intended use limitation. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention (i.e. the insulation paste) must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In this case, the instant specification evidences that the particle size of the inorganic filler and the weight average molecular weight of the acrylic resin influence the adhesive force of a resulting insulation layer [instant specification: 0025-0026, 0059].
Regarding the particle size of the inorganic filler, modified Ohata renders obvious that the inorganic filler has a D50 of 0.5 to 5 µm and a standard deviation of particle size distribution is 1.4 µm or less, as laid out above. An inorganic filler with a D50 of 0.5 to 5 µm and a standard deviation of particle size distribution of 1.4 µm or less is understood to “increase the cohesion of the insulation layer to the current collector, thereby increasing the adhesive force” as evidenced by the instant specification [instant specification: 0025-0026].
Regarding the weight average molecular weight of the acrylic resin, Ohata discloses that the acrylic resin preferably has a weight-average molecular weight of 3,000 or more and 300,000 or less [0042]. If the weight-average molecular weight is too low (i.e. less than 3,000), the inorganic filler can settle to the bottom of the insulation paste [0042]. However, if the weight-average molecular weight is too high, the viscosity of the insulation paste may become too high [0042].
Therefore, in seeking to prevent the inorganic filler from settling while preventing the viscosity from becoming too high, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to have optimized the weight-average molecular weight of the acrylic resin copolymer, including selecting the weight-average molecular weight to be 3,000 to 100,000, with a reasonable expectation that such a weight-average molecular weight would result in a successful acrylic resin copolymer for use in an insulation paste (MPEP 2144.05, II). An acrylic resin with a weight average molecular weight of 3,000 to 100,000 is within the range of 1,000 to 100,000 which the instant specification evidences results in an adhesive force of an insulation layer obtained by applying the insulation paste to a current collector of 2.5 N/m or more [instant specification: 0059].
Ohata further discloses that the insulation paste can be applied to a surface of at least one of the positive electrode and the negative electrode to form an insulating porous film [0013, 0023]. The positive electrode and negative electrode each include a respective electrode substrate (corresponds to current collector) and a respective electrode material mixture [0024]. The insulting porous film prevents direct contact between the positive electrode material mixture or current collector thereof and the negative electrode material mixture or current collector thereof [0023].
Therefore, although not disclosed in a specific example, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have applied the insulation paste to a current collector (i.e. electrode substrate) with a reasonable expectation that applying the insulation paste to a current collector would result in a successful insulation layer.
Since the insulation paste includes an inorganic filler with a D50 of 0.5 to 5 µm and a standard deviation of particle size distribution of 1.4 µm or less, and an acrylic resin with a weight average molecular weight of 3,000 to 100,000, it is understood that the insulation paste is inherently capable of being applied to a current collector such that “an insulation layer obtained by applying the insulation paste to a current collector has an adhesive force of 2.5 N/m or more” as evidenced by the instant specification [instant specification: 0025-0026, 0059] and as recited in Claim 2 (MPEP 2112.01, I-II).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner notes that newly cited Kim is relied upon to render obvious the new limitation regarding the content of sodium in the insulation paste, and therefore remarks directed towards the previous combination of refences failing to teach new limitation (Remarks Pgs. 6-7) are moot.
Applicant has further argued that the skilled artisan would not reasonably achieve the claimed subject matter from the teachings of Ohata and Jin (Remarks, Pg. 7). Specifically, Applicant has argued that Ohata discloses a large variety of groups that can be used to obtain such a resin, and that Ohata does not provide any particular reason to select phosphate from this group (Remarks, Pg. 7-8).
Examiner has carefully considered this argument, but does not find it persuasive. Examiner notes that the paragraph cited by the Applicant [Ohata: 0044] only lists five examples of monomers containing the hydrophilic group – those that contain: an unsaturated organic sulfonate, an unsaturated organic sulfate, an unsaturated organic phosphate, an unsaturated organic phosphonate, and an unsaturated monomer containing a quaternary ammonium salt group. Furthermore, Ohata discloses a phosphoric acid group as one of six preferable examples of a hydrophilic group with a high degree of dissociation [Ohata: 0043]. Additionally, Matsumura evidences that a phosphate group is a known example of a hydrophilic acid group that can be successfully polymerized with another polymer unit to produce a binder with a good binding property [Matsumura: 0047-0048, 0055-0056]. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have had a reasonable expectation that selecting a phosphate group from the list of possible options would result in a successful hydrophilic group for use in the thermo-cross-linkable resin.
Applicant has argued that the rejection takes a position with respect to Ohata that departs from the actual disclosure and represents an unduly broad interpretation of Ohata (Remarks, Pg. 8). Applicant submits that Ohata does not disclose any examples of a thermosetting resin having a phosphate group, let alone an acrylic resin containing a phosphate group (Remarks, Pg. 8). Applicant also submits that Ohata does not describe specific effects obtained by using a dispersion resin with a phosphate group and Ohata discloses various substituents, including a phosphate and a sulfonic acid group, as alternative options, thereby providing no specific reason for the skilled artisan to make such a careful selection without the guidance of Applicant’s disclosure (Remarks, Pg. 8).
Examiner has carefully considered this argument, but does not find it persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that the conclusion of obviousness is based upon guidance from the Applicant’s disclosure, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is, in a sense, necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. However, so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper (MPEP 2145, X, A).
In this case, the primary reference Ohata discloses a phosphate group as a possible example of a hydrophilic group [Ohata: 0043-0044], and Ohata discloses that a resin can be formed by copolymerizing a monomer containing a hydrophilic group with “a monomer capable of being copolymerized therewith” [Ohata: 0044]. The monomer capable of being copolymerized therewith include alkyl methacrylates [Ohata: 0045]. Therefore, although not disclosed in a specific example, the selection of a resin formed from a copolymer of a monomer containing a phosphate group (i.e. a hydrophilic group) and an alkyl methacrylate (i.e. a monomer capable of being copolymerized therewith) would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation that such a selection would result in a successful resin, since the individual components (i.e. the monomer with a hydrophilic group and the monomer capable of being copolymerized therewith) are disclosed as being capable of use together [Ohata: 0043-0045]. Such a conclusion of obviousness uses only knowledge gleaned from the prior art. Additionally, Matsumura evidences that a phosphate group is a known example of a hydrophilic acid group that can be successfully polymerized with another polymer unit to produce a binder with a good binding property [Matsumura: 0047-0048, 0055-0056].
Applicant has argued that the Examples of the Specification demonstrate “an unexpected and remarkable effect” resulting from the use of a dispersion resin containing a phosphate group, including better adhesion, dispersibility, appearance, pigment sedimentation and bendability compared to examples without a phosphate group and examples containing a sulfonic acid group (Remarks, Pgs. 8-9).
Examiner has carefully considered this argument, but does not find it persuasive. Although Examiner acknowledges that the Examples demonstrate an improvement in adhesion or bendability when a phosphate group is used (Examples 4A-6A and 4B-6B) as opposed to when a sulfonic acid group is used (Examples 7A-7B), Examiner notes that the showing of evidence is not yet commensurate with the independent claim (see MPEP 716.02, (d)), and therefore any argument regarding unexpected results is not yet commensurate with the scope of the claim.
For instance, as non-limiting examples, the showing of evidence (Examples 4A-6A and 4B-6B) appear to require the following (Tables 1-2 and 4-5; [0111-0120, 0142-0150]):
an insulation paste formed of (see Tables 2 and 5; [0118-0119; 0146-0147]):
80 parts boehmite as the inorganic filler (B);
wherein the inorganic filler has a volume average particle size (D50) of 1.3 µm [0135, 0152];
20 parts PVDF with a weight average molecular weight of 500,0000 [0118-0119] or 900,000 [0146-0147] as the binder (B);
4.8 parts of acrylic resin solution (resin solids content: 2.4 parts);
250 parts of NMP as the solvent (D);
an insulation paste with a volume average particle size (D50) of 2.5 µm (Table 5);
a standard deviation of particle size distribution of 0.8 µm (Table 5);
an insulation paste with a water content of less than 0.8 mass% [0134, 0152];
wherein the acrylic resin is a monomer mixture of (see Tables 1 and 4):
20-30 parts 2-methacryloyloxyethyl acid phosphate;
10-20 parts styrene;
20 parts n-butyl acrylate;
10 parts lauryl methacrylate;
20 parts methyl methacrylate;
3 parts t-butylperoxy-2-ethylhexanoate as a polymerization initiator;
and wherein the acrylic resin has a weight average molecular weight of 19,000 – 20,000 (Tables 1 and 4).
Absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, each of these factors is considered to be critical to achieving the improvement in adhesion or bendability.
Examiner notes that Claim 1 is currently open to any inorganic filler of any volume average particle size, any binder and any solvent, and is currently open to any amount of filler, binder, dispersion resin, or solvent. Claim 1 is also open to an insulation paste with any volume average particle size, any standard deviation of particle size distribution, and any water content. Furthermore, although Claim 1 specifies that the dispersion resin comprises an acrylic resin having a polar group which comprises a phosphate group, Claim 1 is open to any acrylic resin having a phosphate group, and does not require the specific composition or the specific contents indicated in the Examples. Claim 1 is also open to an acrylic resin having any weight average molecular weight.
Applicant has further argued that the specific sodium content claimed shows improved stability over a sodium content outside of the claimed range (Remarks, Pg. 10).
Examiner has carefully considered this argument, but does not find it persuasive. As laid out above, the showing of evidence is not commensurate with the independent claim, and it is not clear that the allegedly unexpected results would occur throughout the independent claim as currently presented. Furthermore, Examiner notes that the showing of evidence (i.e. Table 3) appears to indicate that the “storability” of the insulation paste increases as the content of sodium decreases (i.e. Examples 29A-31A and 34A have the lowest sodium content – less than 200 ppm – and exhibit better storability than Examples 32A and 35A which have a sodium content of 280 ppm and 230 ppm, respectively, and Examples 33A and 36A which have sodium content of 370 ppm and 450 ppm, respectively). Examiner notes that newly cited Kim renders obvious minimizing the content of sodium to improve battery performance [Kim: 0025-0028]. The fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious.
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 DREW C NEWMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9873. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571)270-1292. 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.
/D.C.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 11/6/2025
Prosecution Insights