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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 7/23/2026:
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-13 are pending in the current application. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended and Claims 2, 5, and 14-16 have been canceled.
The cores of the previous prior art-based rejections have been maintained in light of the amendment. All changes made to the rejection are necessitated by the amendment.
Claim Interpretation
All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Arguments directed at dendritic surface structure
Applicant argues that the prior art does not disclose a dendritic surface structure. This newly amended limitation is addressed in the new rejection below.
Arguments directed at Hyun’s patterned layer
Applicant argues that Hyun’s patterned layer differs from the instant invention in that it is applied directly to the current collector instead of between two layers containing a positive electrode mixture.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Zeng discloses a conductive layer 3 disposed on a first coating layer comprising an active material 2 to improve electronic conductivity at the interface between the first coating layer 2 and a second coating layer comprising an active material 4 (see paragraph [0021]). Hyun discloses a patterned conductive layer that can solve the problem of the weak bonding force of the binder in the active material (composite) while maintaining electrical conductivity (see pages 2-5) which provides a reasonable motivation for a skilled artisan to make the conductive layer of Zeng patterned. When Hyun is combined with Zeng, the patterned conductive layer would be located between the two layers containing active materials as it is in Zeng.
Arguments directed at area ratio, SD/PD ratio, and criticality
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the coordinated control area ratio and SD/PD and that there is criticality in the claimed combination.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Hyun discloses the area ratio stably maintains bonding while avoiding adversely affecting the overall volume of the completed battery (see page 5), so a skilled artisan is capable of using the area ratio of Hyun when incorporating the pattern into Zeng. Further, the skilled artisan is capable of using the thicknesses of the layers disclosed by Zeng as a guide when incorporating the pattern disclosed by Hyun to achieve an average thickness PD such that the SD/PD ratio falls in the claimed range as the thicknesses of Zeng overlap to render the SD/PD ratio obvious.
Additionally, there does not appear to be enough data to establish criticality of the claimed endpoints for the ranges of 30% to 80% area ratio, 10≤SD/PD≤30, and 10≤SD/PD≤20. The claimed endpoints and values near the endpoints are not shown in the data so criticality of the endpoints is not fully demonstrated. An affidavit may be filed to disclose more data and clearly demonstrate the criticality of the endpoints/unexpected results.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3-4, and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng et al. CN-112072068-A (hereinafter referred to as Zeng) in view of Hyun et al. KR-20080015162-A (hereinafter referred to as Hyun).
Regarding Claim 1, Zeng discloses a positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery (see paragraphs [0002], [0004]-[0005], and [0007]) comprising:
a current collector 1 in Fig. 1 (see paragraphs [0007] and [0009]-[0011]);
a first coating layer (safety/security layer) 2 disposed on one or both surfaces of the current collector 1 and containing a first positive electrode active material in Fig. 1 (see paragraphs [0051]);
a layer (conductive layer) 3 disposed on the first coating layer 2 and having a binder and a conductive material dispersed in the binder (see paragraphs [0009]-[0010], [0051]); and
a second coating layer (active material layer) 4 disposed on the first coating layer 2 on which the conductive layer 3 is disposed, and containing a second positive electrode active material in Fig. 1 (see paragraphs [0009]-[0010], [0051]).
Zeng also discloses the conductive layer 3 disposed on the first coating layer 2 functions to improve electronic conductivity at the interface between the first coating layer 2 and second coating layer 4 (see paragraph [0021]).
Zeng further discloses the thickness of the second coating layer is preferably 70-90 μm (which a skilled artisan is capable of designating as SD) and the thickness of the conductive layer is 1-5 μm (which a skilled artisan is capable of designating as PD) (see paragraphs [0019] and [0022]). The ratio between these thicknesses (SD/PD) ranges from 14 to 90. This range overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of 10≤SD/PD≤30 wherein, in Equation 1, SD represents an average thickness of the second coating layer, and PD represents an average thickness of the patterned layer. 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).
Zeng is silent on the layer disposed on the first coating layer being patterned and an area of the first coating layer on which the patterned layer is disposed being 30% to 80% of a total area of the first coating layer.
However, in the same field of endeavor of positive electrodes with conductive layers (see page 2), Hyun discloses a positive electrode comprising a patterned layer coated in a uniform pattern and a positive active material layer in Figs. 1 and 2a-2c (see pages 2 and 6-7).
Hyun additionally discloses coating a conductive layer thinly in a uniform pattern on the current collector improves the bonding force and electrical conductivity of the positive electrode mixture (see pages 2 and 4-5), i.e. the patterned coating layer can improve electronic conductivity at the interface between layers containing positive active material. As such, a skilled artisan would be motivated to use a patterned conductive layer in the positive electrode of Zeng to further improve the bonding force and electronic conductivity between the two layers that contain positive active material.
Hyun further discloses an area of the patterned layer may be 20 to 80% of the current collector area to stably maintain the bonding while maximally suppressing the reduction in electrical conductivity and not adversely affecting the overall volume of the completed battery (see page 5). In the combined structure of Zeng and Hyun, the conductive layer is located on the first layer and as such the patterned layer would be 20 to 80% of the total area of the first coating layer. This range substantially overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of the patterned layer being disposed being 30% to 80% of a total area of the first coating layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the positive electrode disclosed by Zeng wherein an area of the first coating layer on which the patterned layer is disposed is 30% to 80% of a total area of the first coating layer, as disclosed by Hyun, in order to improve the bonding force and electronic conductivity between the two layers that contain positive active material.
Zeng further discloses a material for increasing conductivity is required in the conductive layer in order to achieve an improvement of the interface problem caused by poor electronic conductivity between the layers (see paragraph [0021]).
Zeng is silent on the conductive material comprising one or more selected from the group consisting of graphite; metal fiber; aluminum powder; nickel powder; zinc oxide; potassium titanate; titanium oxide; and polyphenylene derivatives.
However, Hyun discloses graphite, metal fiber, aluminum powder, nickel powder, zinc oxide, potassium titanate, titanium oxide, and polyphenylene derivatives are appropriate conductive materials to use in a battery (see pg. 8).
A skilled artisan would expect the graphite, aluminum powder, nickel powder, zinc oxide, and polyphenylene derivatives to function as conductive materials and increase the conductivity in the conductive layer of Zeng. Furthermore, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the positive electrode disclosed by Zeng wherein the conductive material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of graphite; metal fiber; aluminum powder; nickel powder; zinc oxide; potassium titanate; titanium oxide; and polyphenylene derivatives, as disclosed by Hyun, as these are suitable materials to increase the conductivity of the conductive layer.
Hyun further discloses the patterned layer may have multiple different shaped patterns in Figs. 2a-2c (see pages 6-7). Regarding the limitation of a dendritic shape, there does not appear to be any criticality in the shape of the patterned layer. The change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the modify the positive electrode wherein the patterned layer has a dendritic surface structure as a matter of obvious engineering design.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the first positive electrode active material in the first coating layer accounts for preferably 86-90 wt% of the first coating layer and the mass ratio of the binder to the conductive material ranges from 2-6:1 (see paragraphs [0014]-[0015]). The binder and conductive material would account for the remaining 10-14 wt% of the first coating layer (which a skilled artisan would understand is an equivalent measurement to parts by weight of a binder based on 100 parts by weight) and, based on the disclosed ratios, the amount of binder in the first coating layer would substantially overlap with and therefore render obvious the claimed range of the first coating layer comprising 1 to 10 parts by weight of a binder based on 100 parts by weight of the first coating layer.
Zeng also discloses the second positive electrode active material in the second coating layer accounts for preferably 96-99 wt% of the second coating layer and the mass ratio of the conductive material to the binder ranges from 0.5-2:1 (see paragraphs [0024]-[0025]). The binder and conductive material would account for the remaining 1-4 wt% of the second coating layer (which a skilled artisan would understand is an equivalent measurement to parts by weight of a binder based on 100 parts by weight) and, based on the disclosed ratios, the amount of binder in the second coating layer would substantially overlap with and therefore render obvious the claimed range of the second coating layer comprising 1 to 10 parts by weight of a binder based on 100 parts by weight of the second coating layer.
Zeng additionally discloses the binder in the patterned layer comprises one or more resins selected from the group consisting of a polyvinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer (PVDF- co-HFP), polyvinylidene fluoride, and polymethyl methacrylate (see paragraph [0030]).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the binder in the patterned layer comprises one or more resins selected from the group consisting of a polyvinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer (PVDF- co-HFP), polyvinylidene fluoride, polymethyl methacrylate, carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), tetrafluoroethylene, styrene butadiene rubber (see paragraph [0030]).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the thickness of the conductive layer is 1-5 μm (see paragraph [0019]). A skilled artisan would recognize the thickness of the conductive layer is an equivalent measurement to the height of the conductive layer in a cross-section. This range falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of an average height of the patterned layer being 0.5 μm to 50 μm based on the cross-section.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses an average thickness of the first coating layer is 1 μm to 10 μm (see paragraph [0013]). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of an average thickness of the first coating layer being 0.1 μm to 10 μm.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the thickness of the second coating layer is preferably 70-90 μm (which a skilled artisan is capable of designating as SD) and the thickness of the conductive layer is 1-5 μm (which a skilled artisan is capable of designating as PD) (see paragraphs [0019] and [0022]). The ratio between these thicknesses (SD/PD) ranges from 14 to 90. This range overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of 10≤SD/PD≤20 wherein, in Equation 1, SD represents an average thickness of the second coating layer, and PD represents an average thickness of the patterned layer. 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).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the first positive electrode active material may comprise lithium iron phosphate (see paragraph [0016]). A skilled artisan would recognize lithium iron phosphate has the formula of LiFePO4, which falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed Chemical Formula 1 of Li1+aFe1-bM1b(PO4-c)Xc wherein, in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is one or more selected from the group consisting of Al, Mg and Ti, X is one or more selected from the group consisting of F, S and N, and a, b and c are −0.5≤a≤+0.5, 0≤b≤0.5, 0≤c≤0.1, respectively.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the second positive electrode active material may comprise lithium cobalt oxide (see paragraph [0023]), which a skilled artisan would recognize has a chemical formula of LiCoO2. This formula falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed Chemical Formula 2 of LiCo1-qM2qO2 wherein, in Chemical Formula 2, M2 is one or more elements selected from the group consisting of W, Cu, Fe, V, Cr, Ti, Zr, Zn, Al, In, Ta, Y, La, Sr, Ga, Sc, Gd, Sm, Ca, Ce, Nb, Mg, B, and Mo, and q is 0≤q≤0.4.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to the aforementioned claim 1 (see paragraphs [0002], [0007], and [0051]).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses a material for increasing conductivity is required in the conductive layer in order to achieve an improvement of the interface problem caused by poor electronic conductivity between the layers (see paragraph [0021]).
Zeng is silent on the conductive material comprising graphite comprising natural graphite or artificial graphite.
However, Hyun discloses graphite such as natural graphite or artificial graphite are appropriate conductive materials to use in a battery (see pg. 8).
A skilled artisan would expect the natural or artificial graphite to function as a conductive material and increase the conductivity in the conductive layer of Zeng. Furthermore, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the positive electrode disclosed by Zeng wherein the conductive material comprises graphite comprising natural graphite or artificial graphite, as disclosed by Hyun, as it is a suitable material to increase the conductivity of the conductive layer.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng in view of Hyun as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li et al. US-20170092943-A1 (hereinafter referred to as Li).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Zeng discloses the positive electrode for the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zeng further discloses the high conductivity of the conductive layer can be utilized to improve the interface problem caused by poor electronic conductivity between layers in the positive electrode plate during the cycle process (see paragraph [0021]).
Zeng and Hyun are silent on an amount of the conductive material in the patterned layer being 1 to 50 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the binder.
However, in the same field of endeavor of positive electrodes with multiple layers (see abstract), Li discloses a positive electrode comprising a first coating layer (first active material layer) disposed on one or both surfaces of the current collector and containing a first positive electrode active material; a buffer layer disposed on the first coating layer and having a binder and a conductive material (carbon material) dispersed in the binder; and a second coating layer (second active material layer) disposed on the first coating layer on which the buffer layer is disposed, and containing a second positive electrode active material (see abstract and paragraphs [0011]-[0012], [0030], and [0032]-[0033]). Li further discloses the ratio of the total weight of the carbon material to the total weight of the binder is 1:9~9:1 (see paragraphs [0032]-[0034]).
Li additionally discloses the binder functions to expand at a rising temperature, so as to reduce the thermal runaway (see paragraphs [0033]-[0036]).
Furthermore, with the combined teachings of Zeng disclosing the importance of optimizing the conductivity via a conductive material and Li disclosing the importance of optimizing the safety via the expansion of the binder, the ratio between these materials in the patterned layer is a result effective variable, and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). So, a skilled artisan would be able to optimize the ratio disclosed by Li to arrive at an amount of the conductive material in the patterned layer of 1 to 50 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the binder.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the positive electrode disclosed by Zeng and Hyun wherein an amount of the conductive material in the patterned layer is 1 to 50 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the binder, as disclosed by Li, in order to optimize the effects of conductive material and binder to improve conductivity and safety, respectively.
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 SYDNEY L KLINE whose telephone number is (703)756-1729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/S.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights