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
Claims 1-12 remain pending.
The amendment filed 06/04/2026 has been entered but does not place the application in condition for allowance. The amendment overcomes the 112(d) rejection to the previous version of claim 1.
New rejections follow.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al (KR 20150046552 A) in view of Sung et al (KR 20150048082 A), Kim et al (US 2020/0280060 A1), and Zeng et al (WO2020177624A1).
Hong teaches a (Fig. 1) a first electrode for a secondary (rechargeable) lithium battery (translation: [0024]) comprising a current collector (20), an active material layer (21) on the current collector ([0024]). Hong also teaches a binder adhesive layer (30) in contact with, or directly on, the electrode active material layer (21) (Fig. 1; [0024]) and discloses that the electrode structure taught for the first electrode can be the anode (negative electrode) or the cathode (positive electrode) ([0018]), therefore active material layer 21 can correspond to the negative active material layer, and thereby Hong teaches an adhesive layer 30 directly on the negative electrode active material layer as claimed. Hong also teaches that the adhesive layer can be positioned in a dot pattern ([0027]).
Hong does not teach the area coverage or thickness of the adhesive layer, nor do they specify silicon as an electrode active material. Hong is also silent regarding an additive comprising polyacrylic acid.
Sung teaches a non-woven patterned adhesive binder layer for a secondary battery adhered to a separator and electrode ([0001], [0014], [0021], [0025] lines 7-9) which possesses a thickness of about 0.1 to 5 µm ([0038]), and they reveal the taught thickness maintains the porosity of the porous substrate in an optimal state along with excellent bonding strength between the electrode and the porous separator ([0038]). Sung’s teaching is pertinent to Hong’s negative electrode, because the binder adhesive layer taught by Hong also functions to increase the bonding strength between an electrode layer and a porous electrode substrate ([0020]). It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the negative electrode of Hong to utilize the thickness of the adhesive layer taught by Sung for the benefit of maintaining the porosity of the porous insulating layer substrate in an optimal state along with excellent bonding strength between the electrode and the porous electrode substrate. The combined art teaches the limitation of the adhesive layer thickness as claimed.
In the same field of endeavor, Zeng teaches the use of polyacrylic acid as an option for a binder within a negative electrode active material coating (machine translation [0043-0048]). A skilled artisan would have found it obvious to have selected polyacrylic acid as a binder for Hong’s active material layer 21 given that Zeng teaches it is a suitable option for a binder within a negative electrode active material layer. 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). Consequently, the combination of prior art teaches an additive comprising polyacrylic acid.
Although Hong teaches the use of graphite as an electrode active material ([0033]), they are silent regarding the teaching of a silicon-based negative active material and that it is a Si-carbon composite.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches a negative active material layer comprising a silicon-based negative active material composite that includes a core of carbon and silicon nanoparticles that is a Si-carbon composite (Abstract). Kim further teaches that a rechargeable lithium battery having improved initial efficiency and cycle-life characteristics is obtained by including the negative electrode using the negative active material ([0009]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify modified Hong’s negative electrode with the negative active material layer of Kim to take advantage of a rechargeable lithium battery having improved initial efficiency and cycle-life characteristics, given that Hong discloses their negative electrode can be used within a lithium secondary battery (Hong: [0001]). Consequently, the combination reads on the limitations of “the negative active material layer comprises a silicon-based negative active material” and “the silicon-based negative active material is a Si-carbon composite.”
Regarding Claim 2, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, and as previously disclosed in addressing claim 1, Sung teaches the adhesive layer has a thickness between 0.1 to 5 µm ([0038]), which overlaps with the claimed range of thickness.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, and as previously pointed out in addressing claim 1, Sung teaches a non-woven patterned adhesive binder layer for a secondary battery ([0001], [0014], [0021], [0025] lines 7-9). Sung further teaches it is about 1% - 50% of the surface area of the substrate on which the binder layer is formed ([0037]). As previously pointed out in addressing the limitations of claim 1, Sung discloses that the taught area coverage enables sufficient bonding between the separator and other electrical elements, particularly electrodes ([0037] lines 15-18), and the teaching is pertinent to Hong’s negative electrode, because the binder adhesive layer taught by Hong also functions to increase the bonding strength between an electrode layer and a porous electrode substrate acting as a separator for the purpose of enhancing the stability of the lithium secondary battery ([0020], [0032], [0025] lines 1-3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have also modified the modified electrode of Hong to utilize the area coverage of adhesive layer taught by Sung for the benefit of enabling sufficient bonding between the electrode and a porous substrate. Within the combined art, the adhesive layer of modified Hong would be formed on a porous electrode substrate in which the negative electrode active material (11) and the insulating layer (12) are integrally connected (Fig. 1 of Hong); therefore, the adhesive area has an area of 1% - 50% of the total area of the negative active material layer, which overlaps with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
Regarding Claim 4, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, and Hong further teaches the binder adhesive layer can comprise of a mixture of acryl-based binder polyacrylonitrile and fluorine-based binder polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene ([0010]).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 4, and as pointed out previously in addressing claim 4, Hong teaches the binder adhesive layer can comprise of acryl-based binder polyacrylonitrile ([0010]).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 4, and as pointed out previously in addressing claim 4, Hong teaches the binder adhesive layer can comprise of polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene ([0010]).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, and Kim of the combination further teaches the negative electrode may include the negative active material composite and may further include a material that reversibly intercalates/deintercalates lithium ions ([0081]), such as a carbon-based negative active material ([0083]). Kim also teaches benefits to including carbon-based negative active materials with silicon-based negative active materials, such as reducing or buffer expansion of silicon nanoparticles and thus suppressing or reducing battery expansion (swelling) and/or improving initial efficiency and cycle-life characteristics of a battery ([0056], [0058]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the modified negative electrode of Kim to further include a carbon-based negative active material given that Kim teaches its inclusion is known and can result in advantages such as suppressed or reduced battery expansion (swelling) and/or improved initial efficiency and cycle-life characteristics of batteries.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1 and Hong further teaches a secondary (rechargeable) battery comprising a first electrode, a second/counter electrode, and an electrolyte ([0052] - [0053]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, and Kim of the combination further teaches the Si-carbon composite comprises silicon and a crystalline carbon and/or an amorphous carbon (Abstract). Specifically, Kim teaches the composite comprises a core of silicon nanoparticles, crystalline carbon, and amorphous carbon.
Regarding claim 12, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, and Kim of the combination further teaches the Si-carbon composite comprises a core comprising crystalline carbon 13 and silicon particles 11 and a coating layer 5 including amorphous carbon positioned on the surface of the core (Abstract, [0047], Fig. 1A).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al (KR 20150046552 A) in view of Sung et al (KR 20150048082 A), Kim et al (US 2020/0280060 A1), and Zeng et al (WO2020177624A1), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Ohata et al (JP 4659367 B2).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 1 but does not teach its bending strength.
In the same field of endeavor, with regards to an electrode’s mechanical strength, Ohata teaches that for lithium ion secondary batteries ([0003]), electrodes with high bending strength are less susceptible to electrode breakage during the preparation of the electrode assembly and will not deteriorate as easily under repeated charging and discharging of the electrode mixture layer, thereby positively affecting the cycle life of the secondary battery ([0013]). Therefore, bending strength is a result-effective variable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have iterated and adjusted the bending strength of a negative electrode to optimize its mechanical integrity and the cycle life of the secondary battery.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al (KR 20150046552 A) in view of Sung et al (KR 20150048082 A), Kim et al (US 2020/0280060 A1), and Zeng et al (WO2020177624A1), as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Rho et al (KR 20150141403 A).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination above teaches the negative electrode of claim 4, but does not teach polymer compositions of the adhesive layer.
Rho teaches (Fig. 3) a porous nanofiber web (13) that can serve as an adhesive layer easily bonded to negative electrode (50) when inserted between the negative electrode (50) and the positive electrode (60) together with porous nonwoven fabric (11) ([0057]), and further teaches that the adhesive layer can be formed of a combination of a swellable polymer such as fluorine-based binder polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVDF-HFP) and a heat-resistant/non-swellable polymer such as acryl-based binder polyacrylonitrile (PAN) in the weight ratio of 5:5 to 3:7 (translation: [0023], [0055] lines 1-4, [0056] lines 1-5, [0023], [0053]). Rho also teaches that their adhesive layer strengthens adhesion to the electrode by preventing detachment or peeling of the separator during the assembly process, thereby improving the safety of the secondary battery and preventing performance degradation ([0039]). The teaching is pertinent to the modified electrode of Hong, because Hong also teaches that the adhesive layer increases bonding strength between an electrode layer and an insulating layer (acting as separator), thereby further enhancing the stability of the lithium secondary battery ([0020]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the modified negative electrode of Hong to use the polymer composition taught by Rho for the adhesive layer to strengthen adhesion between the adjacent layers and improve the safety and performance stability of the battery.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous prior art rejections 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wakizaka et al (WO 2019039357 A1), published 2019-02-28.
In the same field of endeavor, Wakizaka teaches an adhesive functional layer comprising a binder additive that can function to adhere battery components together (machine translation [0021]), and wherein the binder can comprise polymers containing monomers of acrylic acid or acrylic acid esters [0024, 0034].
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIGI LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 - 6.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/G.L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 30 September 2026
