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 . If status of the application as subject to 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 a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9 are pending in the application and are presently examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 1- are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010205449A (Wakizaka) in view of US20190221785A1 (Kim) and US20180248235A1 (US235), together “modified Wakizaka”.
With regard to claim 1, Wakizaka teaches the following claim limitations:
A method of producing a binder composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery that contains a polymer and an organic solvent (Abstract: all-solid secondary battery with a solid electrolyte material including soft polymer binder. Page 3, lines 13-16: soft polymer composition contains an organic solvent.), comprising:
a water removal step of using a desiccant (page 6, lines 15-17 & page 16, lines 21-23: dehydrate the soft polymer composition with a molecular sieve)… to obtain a composition (X) that contains the polymer and the organic solvent (Abstract & page 3, lines 13-16: soft polymer binder has organic solvent.) and has a water content of 200 ppm or less (page 6, lines 7-10: ≤ 500 ppm water content in the soft polymer)
Wakizaka’s ≤ 500 ppm range overlaps the claimed ≤ 200 ppm range. MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A) provides the law for this issue:
“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)”.
Given that Wakizaka’s range is similar to and substantially overlaps the claimed range, and further given the fact that no criticality is disclosed for the claimed range, the range in claim 1 is an obvious variant of Wakizaka’s range.
Although Wakizaka teaches dehydrating with a molecular sieve [claimed desiccant], Wakizaka fails to teach that the molecular sieve “contains either or both of a group 13 element and a group 14 element”.
Kim is directed to a battery with a moisture scavenger, which can include activated carbon, zeolite, alumina, silica gel, and/or molecular sieves (paragraphs 61-62). Activated carbon, zeolite, alumina, silica gel all include a group 13 (C or Si) or a group 14 (Al) element.
Kim thus recognizes the equivalency of activated carbon, zeolite, alumina, silica gel, and molecular sieves in the field of scavenging moisture from battery components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the molecular sieve of Wakizaka with the activated carbon, zeolite, alumina, silica gel, and/or molecular sieve of Kim. This replacement is merely the selection of functionally equivalent moisture scavengers recognized in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in making this replacement.
Furthermore, molecular sieves commonly use materials with group 13 (C or Si) and/or group 14 (Al) elements. US235 teaches a molecular sieve, for use in a battery, with six optional materials (paragraph 36). Four of these materials include a group 13 or a group 14 element: silica gel (includes Si), carbon fiber (includes C), a porous carbon material (includes C), and/or zeolite (includes Al & Si). Due to the small number of optional materials, presented by US235, for a molecular sieve, it would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to try each US235’s materials for a molecular sieve as taught by Wakizaka, and to select a molecular sieve with a group 13 and/or a group 14 element.
Wakizaka also teaches the following claim 1 limitations:
a transition metal removal step of magnetically removing transition metal contained in the composition (X) to obtain the binder composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery (page 6, lines 19-44)
Wakizaka describes the need for low Fe, Ni, Cu, and Zn ions, which are transition metals. Wakizaka then teaches use of a magnetic force to remove the metal species. See page 6, lines 19-44.
With regard to claim 2, modified Wakizaka teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Wakizaka also teaches the following claim 2 limitation:
transition metal content of the binder composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery is 5 ppm or less (page 6, lines 22-23: Fe ≤ 1 ppm, Ni ≤ 1 ppm, Zn ≤ 1 ppm)
With regard to claim 3, modified Wakizaka teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Modified Wakizaka also teaches the following claim 3 limitation:
the desiccant includes either or both of an -O-Si-O- structure and an -O-Al-O- structure (zeolite, discussed under claim 1, has this structure)
With regard to claim 4, modified Wakizaka teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Wakizaka also teaches the following claim 4 limitation:
the organic solvent has an SP value of not less than 5 and not more than 9.5 (page 5, lines 37-39: the organic solvent in the soft polymer composition is xylene)
The present spec teaches that xylene has SP = 8.3 (paragraph 51). Wakizaka teaches xylene (page 5, lines 37-39).
With regard to claim 6, modified Wakizaka teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Wakizaka also teaches the following claim 6 limitation:
the water removal step includes a step of removing water from a pre-dehydration composition (Y) that contains the polymer and the organic solvent using the desiccant to obtain the composition (X) (page 16, lines 15-23: polymer and organic solvent are first mixed (Y), then the solution is dehydrated (X))
With regard to claims 7-8, modified Wakizaka teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Wakizaka also teaches the following claim 7 limitation (page 16, lines 13-37):
Claim 7
A method of producing a slurry composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery comprising a step of producing a slurry composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery containing: a solid electrolyte; and a binder composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery produced by the method of producing a binder composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery according to claim 1
Claim 8
A method of producing a solid electrolyte-containing layer comprising a step of forming a solid electrolyte-containing layer using a slurry composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery produced by the method of producing a slurry composition for an all-solid-state secondary battery according to claim 7
Claim 9
A method of producing an all-solid-state secondary battery comprising a step of producing an all-solid-state secondary battery using a solid electrolyte-containing layer produced by the method of producing a solid electrolyte-containing layer according to claim 8
Kim is directed to… (paragraph 11). Kim teaches... (paragraph 11). Kim teaches a benefit of… (paragraph 11).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for Wakizaka’s to…, as taught by Kim, for…
Claims 5- are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010205449A (Wakizaka) in view of US20190221785A1 (Kim) and US20180248235A1 (US235), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US20110171526A1 (US526).
With regard to claim 5, modified Wakizaka teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Wakizaka, however, fails to teach the following claim 5 limitation, which is taught by US526:
the polymer includes one or more selected from the group consisting of… a (meth)acrylic acid ester monomer unit…
US526 is directed to a secondary battery binder composition with superior stability (paragraph 19). US526’ binder composition includes a polymer with methacrylic acid ester (abstract & paragraph 27). It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for Wakizaka’s soft polymer binder to include methacrylic acid ester, as taught by US526, for a binder composition with superior stability.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WEST whose telephone number is 703-756-1363 and email address is Robert.West@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am - 7 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684.
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.
/R.G.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721