DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 6/23/2026 has been entered. Claim 7 is cancelled. Claims 1-6 and 8-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(a) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 3/25/2026.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2020/0274155, hereinafter "Li") in view of Wang et al. (Tuning wettability of molten lithium via a chemical strategy for lithium metal anodes, hereinafter "Wang") and Liu et al. (A scalable 3D lithium metal anode, hereinafter "Liu").
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches an anode plate (anode 200), comprising a porous anode skeleton (3D conductive porous structure 204), a lithophilic substance, and a current collector (208) [0029, “lithium anode 200 … may include a 3D conductive porous structure 204, a lithium metal layer 206, and a thin metal current collector 208”, 0030, “Further, carbon and metals can be coated or doped with other lithiophilic elements”]. Li also teaches that a concentration of the lithiophilic substance has a gradient distribution inside the porous anode skeleton [claim 5, “wherein the particles comprise particles with high electronic conductivity that are distributed at a higher concentration toward the first end than at the second end”, 0030, “3D structure 204 may be designed to have high electronic conductivity at the bottom of the layer and lower electronic conductivity at the top of the layer”, “The conductive materials used may include conductive carbon and conductive metals”, “Further, carbon and metals can be coated or doped with other lithiophilic elements”]. Li discloses that the porous anode skeleton may comprise a polymer binder such as PVdF or polyimide, which are insulating polymers [0030, “3D structure 204 may be made of conductive materials in the form of particles or fibers or any other shapes, and polymer binders, including but not limited to PVdF, or polyimide”]. Li does not specifically teach a lithiophilic substance comprising a substance containing a functional group, nor the porous anode skeleton being directly disposed on a surface of the current collector.
Wang teaches analogous art of a Li anode comprising an organic compound with a functional group (“substance containing a functional group”) such as —COOH (carboxyl), —OH (hydroxyl), and —NH2 (amino), among others, coated onto a substrate [pg. 2 col. 1, “Herein, we developed a facile and low cost chemical strategy for producing ultrathin Li anodes by introducing organic compounds with a functional group, such as–COOH,–OH,–SO3H,–NH2,–NH,–PO4,–Si-O,–F,–Cl,–Br, or–I, coated onto the substrates via a doctor-blade coating method”].
Wang teaches that the organic coatings with functional groups are lithiophilic, and help form ultrathin Li anodes [pg. 6 col. 2, “For this newly developed chemical strategy, the mechanisms of improved wettability of molten Li are proposed. Negative values of ΔrG for the reactions between molten Li and lithiophilic substances and the newly formed bonds are regarded as characteristics that govern improved wettability”]. Wang also teaches that these organic coatings may facilitate molten Li spreading along substrates such as Cu [pg. 2 col. 2, “Fortunately, the selected organic coating in a proper solvent could have good wettability on Cu substrates and thus facilitate molten Li spreading along substrates”]. Li teaches that doping and coating the porous anode skeleton with lithiophilic elements can facilitate the smooth growth of lithium [0032].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by Li to include an organic coating with a functional group such as carboxyl, hydroxyl, or amino as the lithiophilic substance as taught by Wang, in order to facilitate the smooth growth of lithium metal in the anode plate, along the entire current collector. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the known lithiophilic organic coatings of Wang for the lithiophilic substance taught by Li in the porous anode skeleton to yield the predictable result of an anode plate in which lithium metal deposits smoothly [see MPEP 2143(I)(A)].
Liu teaches analogous art of a lithium metal anode comprising a 3D electrode with a porous structural skeleton [Abstract]. Liu teaches that the 3D electrode, or 3D composite host, comprises carbon black, LiNO3 as a structural skeleton component, and a PVDF binder to form a porous structure [pg. 510, paragraph 2, “Scheme 2a illustrates … the 3D composite host. The carbon black in the host provides an electronic conductive network to reduce the local current density and serve as a substrate for Li deposition. The LiNO3 serves as both reserved additive source and a structural skeleton component. The PVDF binder holds all the components together to form the robust porous structure.”]. Scheme 2a of Liu shows that the 3D composite anode comprising carbon black, LiNO3, and PVDF is disposed on a surface of a Cu foil, or current collector [pg. 511]. Liu also specifically teaches that the 3D electrode is formed directly on the surface of a Cu foil [Abstract, “The electrode is simply fabricated by coating a slurry of well mixed LiNO3, carbon black, and PVDF on the Cu foil”, 2.1. 3D composite electrode preparation, pg. 506, “The slurry was cast onto a Cu foil”].
Liu teaches that lithium metal anodes comprising the 3D composite host prevent the formation of lithium metal dendrites, resulting in a higher coulombic efficiency for the lithium metal anode [4. Conclusion, pg. 511]. Liu also teaches that the 3D composite host can be easily scaled up by battery manufacturers [4. Conclusion, pg. 511].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by Li to have the porous anode skeleton be formed directly on a surface of the current collector as taught by Liu, in order to provide a higher coulombic efficiency for the anode plate, as well as to provide an anode plate that can be easily scaled up for battery manufacturers.
Regarding claim 2, modified Li teaches the anode plate according to claim 1, wherein the concentration of the lithiophilic substance gradually decreases in a direction from the current collector to a surface of the porous anode skeleton [Li Fig. 2, claim 1, “a first layer comprising a porous, three-dimensional structure having a first end and a second end; and a second layer comprising lithium metal, wherein the second layer is coupled to the first end of the first layer”, claim 5, “wherein the particles comprise particles with high electronic conductivity that are distributed that are distributed at a higher concentration toward the first end than at the second end”]. From Li Fig. 2 and claim 1, it can be seen that the “first end” is the end closest to the current collector, and the “second end” corresponds to the surface of the porous anode skeleton.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, modified Li teaches the anode plate of claim 1 as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Li further discloses a range of thickness for the porous anode skeleton, which is also the lithiophilic substance thickness, (5 µm to 500 µm), which overlaps with the claimed range of 1 nm to 10 µm in claim 5 and 1 µm to 10 µm in claim 6 [0029, “3D porous structure 204 may have a thickness ranging from 5 μm to 500 μm”]. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, modified Li teaches the anode plate of claim 1 as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Li further teaches that the porous anode skeleton may have a porosity ranging from 30% to 95% or 60% to 90%, both of which overlap with the claimed range of 20% to 90% in claim 8 and 40% to 70% in claim 9. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, modified Li teaches the anode plate of claim 1 as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Li further discloses a range of thicknesses for the current collector (1 µm to 200 µm or 5 µm to 10 µm), the lithium metal layer (5 µm to 200 µm), and the porous anode skeleton (5 µm to 500 µm or 10 µm to 150 µm or 20 µm to 80 µm) [0029]. Since these are all the components in the anode plate, they can be added together to get a range of thickness from 11 µm to 900 µm, or 30 µm to 290 µm using the narrowest ranges, both of which overlap with the claimed range of 10 µm to 100 µm in claim 10 and 10 µm to 80 µm in claim 11. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Regarding claim 12, modified Li teaches the anode plate of claim 1 as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Li teaches that the anode plate further comprises lithium metal [0029, “3D lithium anode 200 is coupled to an aqueous electrolyte solution 202 and may include a 3D conductive porous structure 204, a lithium metal layer 206”].
Regarding claims 13 and 14, modified Li teaches the anode plate according to claim 12, as described in the rejection for instant claim 12. Modified Li is silent regarding the amount of lithium metal in the anode plate.
Liu teaches that in making the 3D lithium host, the amount of lithium metal was 0.63 mg/cm2, which is within the recited ranges of 0.25-25 mg/cm2 in claim 13 and 0.25-10 mg/cm2 in claim 14 [3. Results and discussion, page 507, paragraph 2, “Once all the pores are filled by Li, the mass of the deposited Li is calculated to be 0.63 mg cm−2”].
Liu discloses that this amount of lithium corresponds to a high gravimetric capacity of the anode [3. Results and discussion, page 507, paragraph 2, “the mass of the deposited Li is calculated to be 0.63 mg cm−2, which corresponds to a high gravimetric capacity of 1264 mAh g-1”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the anode plate taught by modified Li to have the 0.63 mg/cm2 of lithium metal as taught by Liu, in order to have a high gravimetric capacity in the anode.
Regarding claim 15, modified Li teaches the anode plate of claim 13 as described in the rejection for instant claim 13. Li further discloses that the material of the current collector may include copper, a copper alloy, nickel, or a nickel alloy [0029, “Current collector 208 may include a conventional anode current collector, including, but not limited to, copper, copper alloy, nickel, nickel alloy, stainless steel”].
Regarding claim 16, Li teaches a lithium-ion battery [0003, entire disclosure relied upon], comprising a cathode plate (cathode), an anode plate (anode 200), a separator, and an electrolyte [0081, “Coin cells can be made with NMC 532 cathode, Celgard 2400 separator and 3D lithium anode. Conventional electrolyte or any proper non-aqueous electrolyte can be used to make the coin cell”]. Li teaches that the separator is located between the cathode plate and the anode plate [claim 14, “the separator and electrolyte are located in between the cathode and the anode”]. Li also teaches that the anode plate comprises a porous anode skeleton (3D conductive porous structure 204), a lithophilic substance, and a current collector (208) [0029, “lithium anode 200 … may include a 3D conductive porous structure 204, a lithium metal layer 206, and a thin metal current collector 208”, 0030, “Further, carbon and metals can be coated or doped with other lithiophilic elements”]. Li further teaches that a concentration of the lithiophilic substance has a gradient distribution inside the porous anode skeleton [claim 5, “wherein the particles comprise particles with high electronic conductivity that are distributed at a higher concentration toward the first end than at the second end”, 0030, “3D structure 204 may be designed to have high electronic conductivity at the bottom of the layer and lower electronic conductivity at the top of the layer”, “The conductive materials used may include conductive carbon and conductive metals”, “Further, carbon and metals can be coated or doped with other lithiophilic elements”]. Li discloses that the porous anode skeleton may comprise a polymer binder such as PVdF or polyimide, which are insulating polymers [0030, “3D structure 204 may be made of conductive materials in the form of particles or fibers or any other shapes, and polymer binders, including but not limited to PVdF, or polyimide”]. Li does not specifically teach a lithiophilic substance comprising a substance containing a functional group, nor the porous anode skeleton being directly disposed on a surface of the current collector.
Wang teaches analogous art of a Li anode comprising an organic compound with a functional group (“substance containing a functional group”) such as —COOH (carboxyl), —OH (hydroxyl), and —NH2 (amino), among others, coated onto a substrate [pg. 2 col. 1, “Herein, we developed a facile and low cost chemical strategy for producing ultrathin Li anodes by introducing organic compounds with a functional group, such as–COOH,–OH,–SO3H,–NH2,–NH,–PO4,–Si-O,–F,–Cl,–Br, or–I, coated onto the substrates via a doctor-blade coating method”].
Wang teaches that the organic coatings with functional groups are lithiophilic, and help form ultrathin Li anodes [pg. 6 col. 2, “For this newly developed chemical strategy, the mechanisms of improved wettability of molten Li are proposed. Negative values of ΔrG for the reactions between molten Li and lithiophilic substances and the newly formed bonds are regarded as characteristics that govern improved wettability”]. Wang also teaches that these organic coatings may facilitate molten Li spreading along substrates such as Cu [pg. 2 col. 2, “Fortunately, the selected organic coating in a proper solvent could have good wettability on Cu substrates and thus facilitate molten Li spreading along substrates”]. Li teaches that doping and coating the porous anode skeleton with lithiophilic elements can facilitate the smooth growth of lithium [0032].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by Li to include an organic coating with a functional group such as carboxyl, hydroxyl, or amino as the lithiophilic substance as taught by Wang, in order to facilitate the smooth growth of lithium metal in the anode plate, along the entire current collector. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the known lithiophilic organic coatings of Wang for the lithiophilic substance taught by Li in the porous anode skeleton to yield the predictable result of an anode plate in which lithium metal deposits smoothly [see MPEP 2143(I)(A)].
Liu teaches analogous art of a lithium metal anode comprising a 3D electrode with a porous structural skeleton [Abstract]. Liu teaches that the 3D electrode, or 3D composite host, comprises carbon black, LiNO3 as a structural skeleton component, and a PVDF binder to form a porous structure [pg. 510, paragraph 2, “Scheme 2a illustrates … the 3D composite host. The carbon black in the host provides an electronic conductive network to reduce the local current density and serve as a substrate for Li deposition. The LiNO3 serves as both reserved additive source and a structural skeleton component. The PVDF binder holds all the components together to form the robust porous structure.”]. Scheme 2a of Liu shows that the 3D composite anode comprising carbon black, LiNO3, and PVDF is disposed on a surface of a Cu foil, or current collector [pg. 511]. Liu also specifically teaches that the 3D electrode is formed directly on the surface of a Cu foil [Abstract, “The electrode is simply fabricated by coating a slurry of well mixed LiNO3, carbon black, and PVDF on the Cu foil”, 2.1. 3D composite electrode preparation, pg. 506, “The slurry was cast onto a Cu foil”].
Liu teaches that lithium metal anodes comprising the 3D composite host prevent the formation of lithium metal dendrites, resulting in a higher coulombic efficiency for the lithium metal anode [4. Conclusion, pg. 511]. Liu also teaches that the 3D composite host can be easily scaled up by battery manufacturers [4. Conclusion, pg. 511].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by Li to have the porous anode skeleton be formed directly on a surface of the current collector as taught by Liu, in order to provide a higher coulombic efficiency for the anode plate, as well as to provide an anode plate that can be easily scaled up for battery manufacturers.
Regarding claim 18, modified Li teaches the lithium-ion battery as described in the rejection for instant claim 16. Li teaches that lithium ion batteries, such as the one taught by Li, are used in electronic apparatuses [0003, “These batteries have found widespread application in portable electronics and mobile communications devices as well as in, for instance, HEVs, PHEVs and EVs”]. While Li never explicitly states that the exact battery taught in the embodiment taught in Example 9 [0081] and claim 14 is then used in an electronic apparatus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the battery taught by Li in an electronic apparatus since it is well known that the purpose of batteries is to provide electrical power to electronic apparatuses.
Claims 3, 4, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2020/0274155) in view of Wang (Tuning wettability of molten lithium via a chemical strategy for lithium metal anodes) and Liu (A scalable 3D lithium metal anode) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Zhamu et al. (US 2021/0151741, hereinafter "Zhamu").
Regarding claim 3, modified Li teaches the anode plate as described in the rejection for instant claim 1. Li further teaches that the lithiophilic substance may comprise a metal [0030, “with other lithiophilic elements, including but not limited to Sn, Zn, Ag, Bi, In, Ga, Al, N, P, Si, Ge, or alloys of these elements”]. Li teaches that the concentration of the lithiophilic substance gradually decreases in a direction from the current collector to a surface of the porous anode skeleton [Li Fig. 2, claim 1, “a first layer comprising a porous, three-dimensional structure having a first end and a second end; and a second layer comprising lithium metal, wherein the second layer is coupled to the first end of the first layer”, claim 5, “wherein the particles comprise particles with high electronic conductivity that are distributed that are distributed at a higher concentration toward the first end than at the second end”]. From Li Fig. 2 and claim 1, it can be seen that the “first end” is the end closest to the current collector, and the “second end” corresponds to the surface of the porous anode skeleton. Li does not specifically teach that the lithiophilic substance may comprise two different metals.
Zhamu teaches analogous art of an anode material for a lithium metal battery comprising graphene balls containing a metal supported on graphene sheets in the graphene balls [0012]. Zhamu teaches that the metal supported on the graphene sheets is a lithium-attracting metal (“lithiophilic substance”) [0013]. Zhamu discloses that the lithium-attracting metal is selected from Au, Ag, Mg, Zn, Ti, Na, K, Al, Fe, Mn, Co, Ni, Sn, V, Cr, an alloy thereof, or a combination thereof [0013], therefore the lithium-attracting metal may comprise two different metals.
Zhamu teaches that when the anode material comprises lithium-attracting metals, an anode comprising the anode material is highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free [0067]. Zhamu discloses that the lithium-attracting metal provides a safe and reliable site to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by modified Li to include two different metals in the lithiophilic substance as taught by Zhamu, in order to provide a highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free anode plate, as well as to provide safe and reliable sites to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step. Furthermore, both Li and Zhamu teach an anode, or anode plate, comprising a lithiophilic substance for use in a lithium metal battery. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the known lithiophilic substance comprising two different metals of Zhamu for the lithiophilic substance of Li, and the results of this substitution, i.e. providing an anode plate for a lithium metal battery, would have been predictable [MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Regarding claim 4, modified Li teaches the anode plate as described in the rejection for instant claim 3. Li teaches that the lithiophilic substance may be Ag (silver) [0030].
As described previously, Zhamu teaches an anode material for a lithium metal battery comprising graphene balls containing a metal supported on graphene sheets in the graphene balls [0012], wherein the metal supported on the graphene sheets is a lithium-attracting metal (“lithiophilic substance”) selected from Au, Ag, Mg, Zn, Ti, Na, K, Al, Fe, Mn, Co, Ni, Sn, V, Cr, an alloy thereof, or a combination thereof [0013]. Therefore, one of the metals may be Ag (“silver”).
Zhamu teaches that when the anode material comprises lithium-attracting metals, an anode comprising the anode material is highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free [0067]. Zhamu discloses that the lithium-attracting metal provides a safe and reliable site to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by modified Li to include two different metals, one of which being silver, in the lithiophilic substance as taught by Zhamu, in order to provide a highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free anode plate, as well as to provide safe and reliable sites to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step. Furthermore, both Li and Zhamu teach an anode, or anode plate, comprising a lithiophilic substance for use in a lithium metal battery. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the known lithiophilic substance comprising two different metals, one of which being silver, of Zhamu for the lithiophilic substance of Li, and the results of this substitution, i.e. providing an anode plate for a lithium metal battery, would have been predictable [MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Regarding claim 19, modified Li teaches the lithium-ion battery as described in the rejection for instant claim 2. Li further teaches that the lithiophilic substance may comprise a metal [0030, “with other lithiophilic elements, including but not limited to Sn, Zn, Ag, Bi, In, Ga, Al, N, P, Si, Ge, or alloys of these elements”]. Li teaches that the concentration of the lithiophilic substance gradually decreases in a direction from the current collector to a surface of the porous anode skeleton [Li Fig. 2, claim 1, “a first layer comprising a porous, three-dimensional structure having a first end and a second end; and a second layer comprising lithium metal, wherein the second layer is coupled to the first end of the first layer”, claim 5, “wherein the particles comprise particles with high electronic conductivity that are distributed that are distributed at a higher concentration toward the first end than at the second end”]. From Li Fig. 2 and claim 1, it can be seen that the “first end” is the end closest to the current collector, and the “second end” corresponds to the surface of the porous anode skeleton. Li does not specifically teach that the lithiophilic substance may comprise two different metals.
Zhamu teaches analogous art of an anode material for a lithium metal battery comprising graphene balls containing a metal supported on graphene sheets in the graphene balls [0012]. Zhamu teaches that the metal supported on the graphene sheets is a lithium-attracting metal (“lithiophilic substance”) [0013]. Zhamu discloses that the lithium-attracting metal is selected from Au, Ag, Mg, Zn, Ti, Na, K, Al, Fe, Mn, Co, Ni, Sn, V, Cr, an alloy thereof, or a combination thereof [0013], therefore the lithium-attracting metal may comprise two different metals.
Zhamu teaches that when the anode material comprises lithium-attracting metals, an anode comprising the anode material is highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free [0067]. Zhamu discloses that the lithium-attracting metal provides a safe and reliable site to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by modified Li to include two different metals in the lithiophilic substance as taught by Zhamu, in order to provide a highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free anode plate, as well as to provide safe and reliable sites to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step. Furthermore, both Li and Zhamu teach an anode, or anode plate, comprising a lithiophilic substance for use in a lithium metal battery. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the known lithiophilic substance comprising two different metals of Zhamu for the lithiophilic substance of Li, and the results of this substitution, i.e. providing an anode plate for a lithium metal battery, would have been predictable [MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Regarding claim 20, modified Li teaches the lithium-ion battery as described in the rejection for instant claim 19. Li teaches that the lithiophilic substance may be Ag (silver) [0030].
As described previously, Zhamu teaches an anode material for a lithium metal battery comprising graphene balls containing a metal supported on graphene sheets in the graphene balls [0012], wherein the metal supported on the graphene sheets is a lithium-attracting metal (“lithiophilic substance”) selected from Au, Ag, Mg, Zn, Ti, Na, K, Al, Fe, Mn, Co, Ni, Sn, V, Cr, an alloy thereof, or a combination thereof [0013]. Therefore, one of the metals may be Ag (“silver”).
Zhamu teaches that when the anode material comprises lithium-attracting metals, an anode comprising the anode material is highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free [0067]. Zhamu discloses that the lithium-attracting metal provides a safe and reliable site to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step [0075].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode plate taught by modified Li to include two different metals, one of which being silver, in the lithiophilic substance as taught by Zhamu, in order to provide a highly dendrite-resistant or dendrite-free anode plate, as well as to provide safe and reliable sites to receive and accommodate lithium during the battery charging step. Furthermore, both Li and Zhamu teach an anode, or anode plate, comprising a lithiophilic substance for use in a lithium metal battery. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the known lithiophilic substance comprising two different metals, one of which being silver, of Zhamu for the lithiophilic substance of Li, and the results of this substitution, i.e. providing an anode plate for a lithium metal battery, would have been predictable [MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2020/0274155) in view of Wang (Tuning wettability of molten lithium via a chemical strategy for lithium metal anodes) and Liu (A scalable 3D lithium metal anode) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Fan et al. (Enabling Stable Lithium Metal Anode via 3d Inorganic Skeleton with Superlithiophilic Interphase, hereinafter "Fan").
Regarding claim 17, modified Li teaches the lithium-ion battery of claim 16 as described in the rejection for instant claim 16. Li is silent regarding the volume swelling of the lithium-ion battery.
Fan teaches analogous art of a lithium metal battery which can reduce volume expansion during cell cycling through a 3D framework, or skeleton, with a lithiophilic substance [Abstract]. Fan teaches a 3D Al2O3-Li (LIA) anode skeleton [1. Introduction, page 2, paragraph 2, “Here, we propose a novel 3D lithium/Al2O3 (denoted as LIA) hybrid anode”] which experiences near-zero volume change during cycling (i.e. from 100% charge to 0% charge) of 534 µm to 540 µm, which constitutes a volume swelling of 1.1%. Since the volume change of the anode is near-zero, the volume change of the battery would also be near-zero.
Fan discloses that large volume changes in an anode can disfigure the lithium metal surface of the anode and damage the SEI layer, leading to increased dendrite formation [2.3. Morphology Evolution during Repeated Cycling, page 6, paragraph 1, “The pristine lithium metal surface is completely disfigured due to the severe dendrite growth and huge volume change”, “this tremendous volume change that in turn damaged the fragile SEI layer, which intensified the formation of thick SEI and lithium dendrites”]. Fan teaches that the reduced volume swelling stabilizes the SEI layer and maintains the integrity of the separator [2.3. Morphology Evolution during Repeated Cycling, page 7, paragraph 2, “The reduced volume change is essential for stabilizing the SEI layer and maintaining the integrity of the polymeric separator”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery taught by modified Li to have a low volume swelling of 1.1% as taught by Fan, in order to prevent damage to the SEI layer and dendrite growth, and instead stabilize the SEI and maintain the integrity of the separator.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding instant claims 1 and 16, applicant alleges that Wang is relied upon for “applying organic coatings onto flat substrates … instead of applying them with a gradient distribution inside a porous anode skeleton as claimed” [Remarks, pg. 7]. 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). As described in the rejection of claim 1 above, Li is relied on for the teaching of a lithiophilic substance with a gradient distribution inside a porous anode skeleton [Li claim 5, 0030], while Wang is relied on for the teaching of a lithiophilic substance comprising a functional group such as carboxyl, hydroxyl, and amino [pg. 2 col. 1].
Applicant further alleges that “Wang’s flat substrate coating teaches away from a gradient distribution inside a porous anode skeleton as claimed” [Remarks, pg. 7]. However, applicant does not cite a specific teaching in Wang that criticizes, discredits, or otherwise discourages the claimed invention. "[T]he prior art’s mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed…." In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004) [MPEP 2145(X)(D)(1)]. In fact, Wang discloses that in addition to planar Cu substrate, ultrathin Li layers were also successfully prepared via abietic resin coatings on various substrates with different porous structures, and that a composite Li metal anode with three-dimensional (3D) conducting scaffold could be prepared easily [pg. 2, col. 2, paragraph 2].
Thus, these arguments are not considered persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues that Li does not teach the new limitation of “a material of the porous anode skeleton comprises an insulating polymer” of instant claims 1 and 16 because the “polymer in 3D structure disclosed in Li serves as a binder while the insulating polymer in the application is a main component of the porous anode skeleton” [Remarks, pg. 7]. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the insulating polymer being a main component of the porous anode skeleton) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Claims 1 and 16 do not recite how much of the porous anode skeleton must be insulating polymer. Furthermore, the claim language “comprises” “is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements or method steps. See, e.g., Mars Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 377 F.3d 1369, 1376, 71 USPQ2d 1837, 1843 (Fed. Cir. 2004) [MPEP 2111.03(I)]. Therefore, instant claims 1 and 16 do not exclude additional elements from being included in the porous anode skeleton. Furthermore, applicant does not described how the polymer binder taught by Li is different from the claimed insulating polymer.
Thus, this argument is not considered persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with regarding the added limitation of “the porous anode skeleton is disposed on a surface of the current collector” 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.
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 MARIA F OROZCO whose telephone number is (571)272-0172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, 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.
/M.F.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights