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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/10/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1- 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20160261000 A1, “Zhang”) in view of Chae et al. (KR 20190030987 A, “Chae”). The machine translation is used herein for citation purposes.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses a rechargeable lithium battery, comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; and an electrolyte (see abstract “anode-free rechargeable battery” & “cathode” & “electrolyte” & see [0021] “anode”), wherein the negative electrode consists of a current collector, and the current collector is a copper foil (see [0044] “anode-free Li rechargeable battery was assembled using copper (Cu) foil as the anode current collector”).
Regarding the limitation and an electrolyte comprising a smoothing additive, Zhang does not explicitly disclose.
Chae teaches a leveling agent (see [0156] “the first leveling agent (component C) is at least one compound selected from the group consisting of thiourea (TU)”) & describes “the first leveling agent (component C) improves the strength of the copper foil (200) in addition to the function of flattening the copper layer (110)” in [0153].
Zhang and Chae are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely secondary battery (see Chae Title).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate “leveling agent” as suggested by Chae (see [0156]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so flattens the copper layer and improves the strength of the copper foil, as suggested by Chae (see [0153]).
Regarding the limitation having a reduction potential between -0.5 V and less than 0.9 V, Zhang does not explicitly disclose, however, reduction potential is a property of the electrolyte material as evidenced by the specification of the instant application on P4 par 1 lines 4-5 “the smoothing additive has a reduction potential of -0.5 V or more and less than 0.9 V”.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the battery of Zhang would exhibit the same properties as the claimed invention including a smoothing additive exhibiting the same properties of reduction potential between -0.5 and less than 0.9 V as evidenced by the instant specification (see P4 par 1 lines 4-5).
Regarding claim 2, Zhang discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1. Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the smoothing additive is thiourea.
Chae teaches leveling agent is thiourea (see [0156]) & describes “the first leveling agent (component C) improves the strength of the copper foil (200) in addition to the function of flattening the copper layer (110)” in [0153].
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate “leveling agent” as suggested by Chae (see [0156]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so flattens the copper layer and improves the strength of the copper foil, as suggested by Chae (see [0153]).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1. Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein an amount of the smoothing additive is 5 wt% or less based on the total, 100 wt% of the electrolyte.
Chae teaches leveling agent concentration (see [0154] “first leveling agent (compound C) has a concentration of 1 to 10 ppm”).
Chae teaches a range of 1 to 10 ppm, which overlaps with the claimed range of 5 wt% or less based on the total, 100 wt% of the electrolyte. MPEP 2144.05 I states that '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)'.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate 1 to 10 ppm leveling agent as suggested by Chae (see [0154]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so improves the strength of the copper foil as suggested by Chae ([0159] & [0153]).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1. Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein an amount of the smoothing additive is 0.01 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total, 100 wt%, of the electrolyte.
Chae teaches leveling agent concentration (see [0154] “first leveling agent (compound C) has a concentration of 1 to 10 ppm”).
Chae teaches a range of 1 to 10 ppm, which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.01 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total, 100 wt% of the electrolyte. MPEP 2144.05 I states that '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)'.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Chae teaches a range of 10 ppm which overlaps the claimed range 0.01/100 = 0.0001 and a skilled artisan would find it obvious that 1 ppm is equivalent to 0.0001 wt%.
Regarding claim 5, Zhang discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the electrolyte further comprises a lithium salt and a non-aqueous organic solvent (see [0014] “lithium salt of the electrolyte” & “DME” & see [0013] “non-aqueous solvent” & “1,2-dimethoxyethane (DME)”).
Regarding claim 6, Zhang discloses a rechargeable lithium battery, comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; and an electrolyte (see abstract “anode-free rechargeable battery” & “cathode” & “electrolyte” & see [0021] “anode”), wherein the negative electrode consists of a current collector, and the current collector is a copper foil (see [0044] “anode-free Li rechargeable battery was assembled using copper (Cu) foil as the anode current collector”). Regarding the limitation wherein the negative electrode comprises a coating layer including a current collector and a polymer positioned on the current collector and between the current collector and the electrolyte, Zhang discloses (see [0041] “selected electrolyte can form a stable SEI layer” & see FIG. 1 & [0037] “anode 150 is formed in situ on the surface of the anode current collector 140 facing the separator 130” & see [0038] “polymer electrolyte”).
Regarding the limitation and an electrolyte comprising a smoothing additive, Zhang does not explicitly disclose.
Chae teaches a leveling agent (see [0156] “the first leveling agent (component C) is at least one compound selected from the group consisting of thiourea (TU)”) & describes “the first leveling agent (component C) improves the strength of the copper foil (200) in addition to the function of flattening the copper layer (110)” in [0153].
Zhang and Chae are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely secondary battery (see Chae Title).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate “leveling agent” as suggested by Chae (see [0156]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so flattens the copper layer and improves the strength of the copper foil, as suggested by Chae (see [0153]).
Regarding the limitation having a reduction potential between -0.5 V and less than 0.9 V, Zhang does not explicitly disclose, however, reduction potential is a property of the electrolyte material as evidenced by the specification of the instant application on P4 par 1 lines 4-5 “the smoothing additive has a reduction potential of -0.5 V or more and less than 0.9 V”.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the battery of Zhang would exhibit the same properties as the claimed invention including a smoothing additive exhibiting the same properties of reduction potential between -0.5 and less than 0.9 V as evidenced by the instant specification (see P4 par 1 lines 4-5).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20160261000 A1, “Zhang”) in view of Chae et al. (KR 20190030987 A, “Chae”) as applied to claims 1-6 above, and further in view of Bae et al. (US 20110177388 A1, “Bae”). The machine translation is used herein for citation purposes.
Regarding claim 7, Zhang discloses a rechargeable lithium battery, comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; and an electrolyte (see abstract “anode-free rechargeable battery” & “cathode” & “electrolyte” & see [0021] “anode”), wherein the negative electrode consists of a current collector, and the current collector is a copper foil (see [0044] “anode-free Li rechargeable battery was assembled using copper (Cu) foil as the anode current collector”). Regarding the limitation wherein the negative electrode comprises a coating layer including a current collector and a polymer positioned on the current collector and between the current collector and the electrolyte, Zhang discloses (see [0041] “selected electrolyte can form a stable SEI layer” & see FIG. 1 & [0037] “anode 150 is formed in situ on the surface of the anode current collector 140 facing the separator 130” & see [0038] “polymer electrolyte”).
Regarding the limitation and an electrolyte comprising a smoothing additive, Zhang does not explicitly disclose.
Chae teaches a leveling agent (see [0156] “the first leveling agent (component C) is at least one compound selected from the group consisting of thiourea (TU)”) & describes “the first leveling agent (component C) improves the strength of the copper foil (200) in addition to the function of flattening the copper layer (110)” in [0153].
Zhang and Chae are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely secondary battery (see Chae Title).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate “leveling agent” as suggested by Chae (see [0156]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so flattens the copper layer and improves the strength of the copper foil, as suggested by Chae (see [0153]).
Regarding the limitation having a reduction potential between -0.5 V and less than 0.9 V, Zhang does not explicitly disclose, however, reduction potential is a property of the electrolyte material as evidenced by the specification of the instant application on P4 par 1 lines 4-5 “the smoothing additive has a reduction potential of -0.5 V or more and less than 0.9 V”.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the battery of Zhang would exhibit the same properties as the claimed invention including a smoothing additive exhibiting the same properties of reduction potential between -0.5 and less than 0.9 V as evidenced by the instant specification (see P4 par 1 lines 4-5).
Regarding the limitation and wherein the coating layer is distinct from the electrolyte and has a thickness of 1 to 10 µm, Zhang does not explicitly disclose.
Bae teaches coating layer thickness (see [0020] “an anode active material layer on a current collector using an anode active material composition including an anode active material, a binder, a conductive material and a solvent.” &
see abstract “LiF-based coating layer has a thickness of 0.05 to 1 µm”).
Bae teaches a range of 0.05 to 1 µm, which overlaps with the claimed range of 1 to 10 µm. MPEP 2144.05 I states that '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)'.
Zhang and Bae are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely lithium secondary batteries (see Bae abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate coating layer has a thickness of 0.05 to 1 µm as suggested by Bae (see [0020]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so elongates the life cycle of the battery as suggested by Bae (see abstract).
Regarding claim 8, Zhang discloses the rechargeable battery of claim 7. Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the polymer is a polyvinylidene fluoride-based polymer.
Bae teaches PVDF (see [0023] “polyvinylidenefluoride”) & “elongating the life cycle of a lithium ion secondary battery” (see abstract).
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate PVDF (see [0023]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so improves the life cycle of the battery as suggested by Bae (see abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Zhang discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 7. Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the polymer is a copolymer of polyvinylidene fluoride and hexafluoropropylene (PVdf-HFP).
Bae teaches PVDF-HFP (see [0023] “vinylidenefluoride-hexafluoropropylene-copolymer (PVDF-co-HFP)”) & “elongating the life cycle of a lithium ion secondary battery” (see abstract).
Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate PVDF-co-HFP (see [0023]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so improves the life cycle of the battery as suggested by Bae (see abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Zhang discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 7 and further discloses LiF (see [0042]). Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the coating layer further comprises LiF.
Bae teaches “a coating layer made of LiF-based particles is formed on the anode surface” (see [0029]) “elongating the life cycle of a lithium ion secondary battery” (see abstract).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the coating layer further comprises LiF as suggested by Bae (see [0029]) into the battery of Zhang because doing so elongates the life cycle of the battery as suggested by Bae (see abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH APPLEGATE whose telephone number is (571)270-0370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.A.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JAMES M ERWIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 03/25/2026