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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/27/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
The Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 03/02/2026, has been entered. Claim 8 is amended; claims 10-17 stand as originally or previously presented; claim 9 is canceled; and claims 1-7 and 18-20 are withdrawn. Support for the amendments is found in the original filing, and there is no new matter.
Upon considered said amendments and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C.103 rejection set forth in Office Action mailed 12/02/2025 has been withdrawn. Amended and new grounds of rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 citing to newly cited art and the originally cited art are set forth below as necessitated by the claim amendments.
Claim Objections
Claims 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 18-20 should be labeled as “Withdrawn”.
MPEP 714; 37 CFR 1.121 states (c): Claims. Amendments to a claim must be made by rewriting the entire claim with all changes (e.g., additions and deletions) as indicated in this subsection, except when the claim is being canceled. Each amendment document that includes a change to an existing claim, cancellation of an existing claim or addition of a new claim, must include a complete listing of all claims ever presented, including the text of all pending and withdrawn claims, in the application. The claim listing, including the text of the claims, in the amendment document will serve to replace all prior versions of the claims, in the application. In the claim listing, the status of every claim must be indicated after its claim number by using one of the following identifiers in a parenthetical expression: (Original), (Currently amended), (Canceled), (Withdrawn), (Previously presented), (New), and (Not entered).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duong et al. (US 20150303481 A1, hereinafter Duong), in view of Zheng et al. (US 20180175366 A1, hereinafter Zheng).
Regarding Claim 8, Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method for manufacturing a dry electrode (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), comprising:
preparing an electrode composition comprising an active material and a conductive material and a binder (Duong, cathode electrode film can include active material, conductive additive, and a binder material, [0083]);
mixing (Duong, a dry method for preparing an electrode can include mixing, [0078]) about 90 to 99 wt % of electrode composition (Duong, about 70 weight% to about 95 weight % of the active material, [0083]; the disclosed range of 70 wt% to 95 wt% overlaps the claimed range of 90 to 99 wt %),
about 0.01 to 5 wt % of the binder (Duong, comprise up to about 20 weight% of the binder material, [0083]; the disclosed range of up to 20 weight% overlaps the claimed range of 0.01 to 5 wt %), and
the remainder of the conductive material, 0.01 to 5 wt % (Duong, include up to about 5 weight% of the conductive additive, [0083]); and pressing the mixed mixture (Duong, calendaring the mixture to form a free-standing film, and the free standing film maybe attached to a current collector, such as through a lamination process, [0078]; the disclosed range of up to about 5 wt% falls within the claimed range of 0.01 to 5 wt %);
in the step of mixing, the electrode composition, the binder, and the remainder of the conductive material are stirred with a dispersion equipment (Duong, the first anode electrode film mixture can be provided by combining the first binder component, anode active material, and a conductive additive using a lower shear process, such as blending, [0091, 0094]).
the binder in the form of secondary particles comprising at least one first particle is separated from the secondary particles into the at least one first particle (Duong, a first binder component may be PVDF, and initial unblended PVDF powder may have secondary particles, the secondary particles comprising aggregates of smaller particles, [0092]).
Duong is silent regarding a stirring speed of about 20 to 40 m/s is applied.
Zheng discloses a method for manufacturing a dry electrode (Zheng, electrode composites can be made by a solvent free procedure, [0076]) comprising mixing an electrode composition comprising an active material and a conductive material and a binder (Zheng, an electrode composition in which active materials, conductive material additives, and binder are blended together using a rubber knead or two roll mill to form uniform mixtures, [0076]), wherein a stirring speed of about 20 to 40 m/s is applied (Zheng, when using the mixing device and dispersion kneader device, the circumferential velocity is preferably 10 to 40 m/s, [0077]; the disclosed range of 10 to 40 m/s overlaps the claimed range of 20 to 40 m/s).
Zheng teaches that when the circumferential velocity is too fast, the bubbling of the slurry and the pulverization of the non-conductive microparticles occur. When the circumferential velocity is too slow, the dispersibility of the non-conductive microparticles in the slurry is deteriorated (Zheng, [0077]).
Duong and Zheng are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards a mixed electrode composition comprising an active material and a conductive material and a binder.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to mix the electrode composition of Duong at a circumferential velocity of 10 to 40 m/s, as taught by Zheng, in order to achieve an electrode composition in which the active materials, conductive material additives, and binder are uniformly mixed.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), preparing comprising preparing a binder in the form of the at least one first particle, and preparing the binder in the form of at least one first particle as the binder in the form of the secondary particles (Duong, a first binder component may be PVDF, and initial unblended PVDF powder, may have secondary particles, the secondary particles comprising aggregates of smaller particles, [0092]).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), wherein the step of mixing further comprises: determining a degree of dispersion of the binder based on an average particle diameter of the at least one first particle (Duong, the cathode electrode film may be mixed until a desired tap density is achieve, and a mixture having a desired final tap density may demonstrate a desired degree of dispersion of components within the mixture, [0114]).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), wherein the step of mixing is performed at a mixing temperature in the range of about 10 to 100 °C (Duong, the cathode and binder component may be combined at about room temperature of higher, for example, the temperature may be about 20 °C to about 75 °C, [0108]).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), wherein the step of mixing further comprises: controlling a heat generated in a process of mixing the active material, the conductive material, and the binder (Duong, the temperature of the mixing container was maintained using liquid nitrogen cooling, and the jet-milled mixture was blended at a temperature of about -196 °C to about 20 °C, [0138]).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), wherein the step of mixing is performed at a time in the range of 1 to 60 minutes (Duong, the cathode electrode film was fabricated by blending for about 10 minutes, [0144]).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), wherein the step of pressing is performed in the range of about 15 to 200 °C (Duong, compress the electrode film mixture to form a free-standing electrode film can be performed at temperatures of about 140 °C to about 200 °C, [0101]).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), further comprising: attaching a dry electrode manufactured in the step of manufacturing the dry electrode and a current collector after the step of mixing (Duong, the electrode film may be attached, such as through a lamination process, to a corresponding current collector to form an electrode, [0101]).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Duong discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Duong discloses the limitations regarding a method (Duong, dry electrode processes, [0064]), wherein in the step of attaching the dry electrode and the current collector, at least one of temperature and pressure is applied to the dry electrode and the current collector (Duong, the electrode film may be attached, such as through a lamination process, to a corresponding current collector to form an electrode, and lamination of a free-standing electrode film to a current collector car be performed at temperatures of about 100 °C to about 200 °C, [0101]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (filed 03/02/2026) with respect to Claim(s) 8 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that in Duong, the emphasis is placed on high-shear processing such as jet milling, which is generally understood in the art to presuppose fibrillation or plastic deformation of the binder. In this respect, it would be difficult to infer from the secondary particles of Duong, separating secondary particles into primary particles without plastic deformation
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Duong discloses that a lower shear mixing process may also be used to disperse the binder component within the anode active material (Duong, [0091]).
Applicant argues that although Duong broadly discloses a binder content of 1 to 20 wt%, its Examples use 7 or 8 wt%, which correspond to the comparative example range of the present invention, thereby distinguishing the two.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the Comparative Examples in the Instant Specification do not suggest that using a binder above the claimed range would lead to different results. The Comparative Example uses an average particle size D50 that is 600 μm and an extrusion ratio of about 30 - 300: 1 (Instant Specification Page 25, lines 16-21). Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Applicant argues that when the speed exceeds 30 m/s, plastic deformation causing particle crushing may occur, so the stirring speed of Duong merely corresponds to the comparative example range of this application.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Claim 8 allows for a stirring speed of about 20 to 40 m/s. Thus, a stirring speed that exceeds 30 m/s would still be read upon by the claim. Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
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 KEVIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:50 - 7:50 ET.
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, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/K.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights