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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-10, and 17 are under examination.
Claims 11-16 are withdrawn.
Withdrawn Claim Objections
The amendment(s) to the claim(s) filed April 21st, 2026 is acknowledged and the previous objection is withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Withdrawn Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The amendment(s) to the claim(s) filed April 21st, 2026 is acknowledged and the previous rejection is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8, 10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (WO2019103545 (A1) and using U.S. PGPub US 2020/0014010 (A1) as machine translation of English version), in view of Lim et al. (U.S. PGPub US 2014/0370383 (A1)), in view of Kim et al. (U.S. PGPub US 2013/0302661 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kwon et al. discloses a separator for a lithium secondary battery, comprising: a porous polymer substrate (i.e., at least porous polymer substrate as disclosed in Par. [0016], also see Abstract, Pars. [0052], [0097]-[0103], [0109]);
and a porous coating layer on at least one surface of the porous polymer substrate (i.e., at least forming a porous coating layer onto the porous polymer substrate as disclosed in Par. [0104], also see Fig. 1, S1-3, Pars. [0009], [0015], Figs. 2b-c),
wherein the porous coating layer comprises inorganic particles (i.e., at least inorganic particles as disclosed in Par. [0048], also see Fig. 1, Pars. [0009], [0014]-[0015], [0017], [0033]-[0034], [0048], [0064], [0066]),
a fluorine-containing binder polymer (A) (i.e., at least first binder polymer such as polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, etc., as disclosed in Par. [0060], lacking any further distinction thereof, also see Pars. [0048], [0120]),
and an ethylenic copolymer (B) having an ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) and a vinyl acetate monomer-derived repeating unit (b) (i.e., at least second binder polymer such as polyethylene-co-vinyl acetate, etc., as disclosed in Par. [0090], such that the skilled artisan would appreciate that a copolymer containing ethylene and vinyl acetate necessarily possesses an ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit and a vinyl acetate monomer-derived repeating unit, lacking any further distinction thereof, also see Par. [0048]).
Kwon et al. further discloses in Par. [0023] the total content of the second binder polymer is 5-13 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the binder polymer solution, etc., and further discloses in Pars. [0049]-[0052] applying a slurry for forming a porous coating layer to at last one surface of the porous polymer substrate, followed by drying, to form a porous coating layer, which at least provides a range that overlaps the claimed range of an amount of the ethylenic copolymer is 5 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of the porous coating layer, such that said second binder polymer is at least polyethylene-co-vinyl acetate as discussed above, etc., and said porous coating layer at least contains solid contents of the binder polymer solution (i.e., inorganic particles, first/second binder polymer(s), etc.) so as to form said porous coating layer as discussed above, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see Par. [0023]).
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the ethylenic copolymer has a weight average molecular weight of 400,000 or less. Furthermore, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the porous coating layer has a larger weight ratio (A/B) of the fluorine-based binder polymer/ethylenic copolymer toward a surface portion of the porous coating layer.
Lim et al. teaches an ethylene copolymer-fluoropolymer hybrid battery binder (Title). Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0013]-[0016] a blend composition comprising (a) an ethylene copolymer or combination thereof comprising copolymerized units of ethylene and a comonomer, etc., which at least provides an ethylenic copolymer including an ethylene monomer-derivative, etc., lacking any further chemical distinction thereof. Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0035] the ethylene copolymer component of the binder compositions can be a dipolymer, a terpolymer, a tetrapolymer, or combinations thereof, etc., whereby at least one comonomer in the copolymer is vinyl acetate, an alkyl acrylate and/or an alkyl methacrylate, etc., whereby as taught in Par. [0049] ethylene copolymers with higher alkyl acrylate content, etc., are elastomeric, and thus elastomeric copolymers include a copolymer derived from copolymerization of Par. [0050] (a) from 13 to 50 weight % of ethylene; [0051] (b) from 50 to 80 weight % of an alkyl acrylate; and [0052] (c) from 0 to 7 weight % of a monoalkyl ester of 1,4-butene-dioic acid, etc., such that as taught in [0057] the elastomeric copolymers may have number average molecular weight from about 40,000 to about 65,000, etc., which at least provides a weight average molecular weight range that is within the claimed range of the ethylenic copolymer has a weight average molecular weight of 400,000 or less, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see Pars. [0033], [0044], [0073]).
Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0068] the compositions described herein provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials (also see Par. [0031]).
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include the ethylenic copolymer weight average molecular weight range of about 40,000 to about 65,000 as taught by Lim et al. so as to provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials.
Furthermore, and as put forth by the examiner, since Lim et al. teaches in [0073] it may be desirable to use multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer to build up its molecular weight, the skilled artisan before the effective filing date would appreciate optimizing said molecular weight through routine experimentation with multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer so as to build up the molecular weight, thereby providing improved adhesion over previous binder materials (MPEP 2144.05, II., A., "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
However, as discussed above, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the porous coating layer has a larger weight ratio (A/B) of the fluorine-based binder polymer/ethylenic copolymer toward a surface portion of the porous coating layer.
Kim et al. teaches a separator and method of manufacturing the same and rechargeable lithium battery including the same (Title). Kim et al. further teaches in [0040]-[0044] the amount of the polymer binder may be greater at the surface of the coating layer ref. 33 than the amount of the polymer binder at the interior of the coating layer ref. 33 adjacent to the porous substrate ref. 23, etc., and referring to Fig. 2, more of the polymer binder is included at the surface of the coating layer ref. 33 than at the inside of the coating layer ref. 33, and when more of the polymer binder is included at the surface of the coating layer ref. 33 than at the inside of the coating layer ref. 33, the separator may be better adhered to the electrode, etc., and whereby as taught in [0050] the first polymer binder ref. 33a and the second polymer binder ref. 33b may be emulsion-type polymer binders and the first and second polymer binder may be the same or different, etc., such that the emulsion type polymer binder(s) may be a fluorine rubber, polytetrafluoroethylene, ethylene propylene copolymer, or a combination thereof, etc., which at least provides the coating layer has a larger weight ratio (A/B) of the fluorine-based binder polymer/ethylenic copolymer toward a surface portion of the coating layer, such that the skilled artisan would appreciate the broad teachings of Kim et al. so as to provide said polymer binder amount that is greater at the surface of the coating layer than the amount of the polymer binder at the interior of the coating layer, and lacking any further distinction thereof.
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combined teachings of Kwon et al. and Lim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, fluorine-based binder polymer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include the coating layer has a larger weight ratio (A/B) of the fluorine-based binder polymer/ethylenic copolymer toward a surface portion of the coating layer as taught by Kim et al. so that the separator may be better adhered to the electrode, etc.
Regarding claim 2, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1.
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the content of the ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) is 20 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of the total weight of the ethylenic copolymer.
Lim et al. teaches an ethylene copolymer-fluoropolymer hybrid battery binder (Title). Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0013]-[0016] a blend composition comprising (a) an ethylene copolymer or combination thereof comprising copolymerized units of ethylene and a comonomer, etc., which at least provides an ethylenic copolymer including an ethylene monomer-derivative, etc., lacking any further chemical distinction thereof. Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0035] the ethylene copolymer component of the binder compositions can be a dipolymer, a terpolymer, a tetrapolymer, or combinations thereof, etc., whereby at least one comonomer in the copolymer is vinyl acetate, an alkyl acrylate and/or an alkyl methacrylate, etc., whereby as taught in Par. [0049] ethylene copolymers with higher alkyl acrylate content, etc., are elastomeric, and thus elastomeric copolymers include a copolymer derived from copolymerization of Par. [0050] (a) from 13 to 50 weight % of ethylene; [0051] (b) from 50 to 80 weight % of an alkyl acrylate; and [0052] (c) from 0 to 7 weight % of a monoalkyl ester of 1,4-butene-dioic acid, etc., which at least provides a range that overlaps the claimed range of the content of the ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) is 20 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight the total weight of the ethylenic copolymer, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see Pars. [0014], [0037], [0049]-[0052], [0069]-[0072]).
Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0068] the compositions described herein provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials (also see Par. [0031]).
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include ethylene in quantities of 13 to 50 weight % (i.e., at least ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) based on 100 parts by weight the total weight of the ethylenic copolymer) as taught by Lim et al. so as to provide so as to provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials.
Regarding claim 4, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1.
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the ethylenic copolymer further comprises a comonomer-derived repeating unit (c), the comonomer-derived repeating unit comprises a repeating unit derived from an acrylate monomer, a carboxyl group-containing C1-C10 monomer, or two or more monomers of them, and the content of the ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) is 13 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of the ethylenic copolymer.
Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0013]-[0016] a blend composition comprising (a) an ethylene copolymer or combination thereof comprising copolymerized units of ethylene and a comonomer, etc., which at least provides an ethylenic copolymer including an ethylene monomer-derivative, etc., lacking any further chemical distinction thereof. Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0035] the ethylene copolymer component of the binder compositions can be a dipolymer, a terpolymer, a tetrapolymer, or combinations thereof, etc., whereby at least one comonomer in the copolymer is vinyl acetate, an alkyl acrylate and/or an alkyl methacrylate, etc., whereby as taught in Par. [0049] ethylene copolymers with higher alkyl acrylate content, etc., are elastomeric, and thus elastomeric copolymers include a copolymer derived from copolymerization of Par. [0050] (a) from 13 to 50 weight % of ethylene; [0051] (b) from 50 to 80 weight % of an alkyl acrylate; and [0052] (c) from 0 to 7 weight % of a monoalkyl ester of 1,4-butene-dioic acid, etc. (also see Par. [0046] with regards to α,β-unsaturated dicarboxylic acid or its derivative, etc.), which at least provides the ethylenic copolymer further comprises a comonomer-derived repeating unit (c), the comonomer-derived repeating unit comprises a repeating unit derived from an acrylate monomer, a carboxyl group-containing C1-C10 monomer, or two or more monomers of them, and further provides a range of ethylene that overlaps the claimed range of the content of the ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) is 13 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of the ethylenic copolymer, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.). (also see Pars. [0013]-[0016], [0035]-[0039], [0060], [0069]-[0072]).
Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0068] the compositions described herein provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials (also see Par. [0031]).
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include a comonomer-derived repeating unit (c), the comonomer-derived repeating unit comprises a repeating unit derived from an acrylate monomer (e.g., alkyl acrylate, etc.), a carboxyl group-containing C1-C10 monomer (monoalkyl ester of 1,4-butene-dioic acid, α,β-unsaturated dicarboxylic acid or its derivative, etc.), or two or more monomers of them, and the ethylene in quantities of 13 to 50 weight % (i.e., at least ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) based on 100 parts by weight the total weight of the ethylenic copolymer) as taught by Lim et al. so as to provide so as to provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials.
Regarding claim 5, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator including the molecular weight for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 4.
Lim et al. further teaches in [0057] the elastomeric copolymers may have number average molecular weight from about 40,000 to about 65,000, etc., which at least provides a weight average molecular weight range that is within the claimed range of the ethylenic copolymer has a weight average molecular weight of 350,000 or less, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see Pars. [0033], [0044], [0073]).
Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0068] the compositions described herein provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials (also see Par. [0031]).
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include the ethylenic copolymer weight average molecular weight range of about 40,000 to about 65,000 as taught by Lim et al. so as to provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials.
Furthermore, and as put forth by the examiner, since Lim et al. teaches in [0073] it may be desirable to use multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer to build up its molecular weight, the skilled artisan before the effective filing date would appreciate optimizing said molecular weight through routine experimentation with multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer so as to build up the molecular weight, thereby providing improved adhesion over previous binder materials (MPEP 2144.05, II., A., "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Regarding claim 8, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator including the porous coating layer, etc., for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1. Kwon et al. further discloses a fluorine-containing binder polymer (A) (i.e., at least first binder polymer such as polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-trichloroethylene, etc., as disclosed in Par. [0060], lacking any further distinction thereof, also see Pars. [0048], [0120]), which at least provides the fluorine-based binder polymer includes polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride-co-trifluoroethylene, etc., from the group.
Regarding claim 10, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1. Kwon et al. further discloses in Par. [0122] the separator and the electrodes were stacked so that the separator faced the active material layers of the electrodes, etc., and Kwon et al. further discloses an adhesion (gf/15 mm) of 60 to 76 in Table 1 (Examples 1-4), (also see [0122], [0128]), which provides a value that is within the claimed range of an adhesion (Lami strength) between the separator and an electrode of 50 gf/25 mm or more, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.).
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose an adhesion (peel strength) between the porous polymer substrate and the porous coating layer of 70 gf/15 mm or more, and an adhesion (Lami strength) between the separator and an electrode of 50 gf/25 mm or more, with regards to the separator comprising the porous polymer substrate, porous coating layer, etc., as claimed in claim 1.
Although Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose an adhesion (Lami strength) between the separator and an electrode of 50 gf/25 mm or more, with regards to the separator comprising the porous polymer substrate, porous coating layer, etc., as claimed in claim 1, since Kwon et al. discloses in Table 1 (Examples 1-4) values of 60 to 76 gf/15 mm, which are large than values of adhesion for the counter examples, the skilled artisan would appreciate before the effective filing date optimizing through routine experimentation the adhesion strength, so as to provide a separator having excellent adhesion, etc. as disclosed in Par. [0035] (MPEP 2144.05, II., A., "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Furthermore, since Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. discloses a product including the separator, including the porous polymer substrate, porous coating layer, as well as discloses an electrode, that is identical and/or substantially identical to the product as claimed and as discussed above in claim 1, properties and/or functions such as an adhesion (peel strength) between the porous polymer substrate and the porous coating layer of 70 gf/15 mm or more, and an adhesion (Lami strength) between the separator and an electrode of 50 gf/25 mm or more are presumed inherent (MPEP 2112.01, I., In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), II., In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990)).
Regarding claim 17, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator as discussed above in claim 1. Kwon et al. further discloses Par. [0111] the electrochemical device according includes a cathode, an anode a separator interposed between the cathode and an anode, which at least reads on “a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode and a separator interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode”, lacking any further distinction thereof.
However, as discussed above in claim 1 Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the ethylenic copolymer has a weight average molecular weight of 400,000 or less.
Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator as discussed above in claim 1. Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0068] the compositions described herein provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials (also see Par. [0031]).
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode and a separator interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include the ethylenic copolymer weight average molecular weight range of about 40,000 to about 65,000 as taught by Lim et al. so as to provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials.
Furthermore, and as put forth by the examiner, since Lim et al. teaches in [0073] it may be desirable to use multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer to build up its molecular weight, the skilled artisan before the effective filing date would appreciate optimizing said molecular weight through routine experimentation with multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer so as to build up the molecular weight, thereby providing improved adhesion over previous binder materials (MPEP 2144.05, II., A., "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claim 1 above, or in the alternative, and further in view of Fujimoto et al. (U.S. PGPub US 2006/0204854 (A1)).
Regarding claim 3, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1.
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the ethylenic copolymer has a weight average molecular weight of 100,000-400,000.
Lim et al. teaches an ethylene copolymer-fluoropolymer hybrid battery binder (Title). Lim et al. further teaches in [0073] it may be desirable to use multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer to build up its molecular weight, such that the skilled artisan before the effective filing date would appreciate optimizing said molecular weight through routine experimentation with multifunctional additives with an ethylene copolymer so as to build up the molecular weight, thereby providing improved adhesion over previous binder materials (MPEP 2144.05, II., A., "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Lim et al. further teaches in Par. [0068] the compositions described herein provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials (also see Par. [0031]).
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., to further include the ethylenic copolymer weight average molecular weight and multifunctional additive(s) so as to increase the molecular weight as taught by Lim et al. so as to provide improved adhesion over previous binder materials.
In the alternative, and as put forth by the examiner in the interest of compact prosecution, Fujimoto et al. teaches a gel-type polymer electrolyte and use thereof (Title). Fujimoto et al. further teaches in [0058] it is desired that the ethylene-unsaturated carboxylic acid copolymer or the derivative thereof (A) (hereinafter often referred to as compound (A)) has a composition containing an ethylene, an unsaturated carboxylic acid, and other monomers, etc., which at least provides and ethylenic copolymer including an ethylene monomer- derivative, etc., lacking any further chemical distinction thereof. Fujimoto further teaches in [0070] it is desired that the weight average molecular weight (Mw) is particularly from 4,000 to 500,000 (i.e., corresponds to a number average molecular weight (Mn) of preferably from 1,000 to 100,000), etc., which at least provides a weight average molecular weight range that overlaps the claimed range of the ethylenic copolymer has a weight average molecular weight of 100,000-400,000, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see [0020]-[0021], [0029], [0062], [0068], Preparation Examples 1-4, Table 1).
Fujimoto et al. further teaches in [0018] it is a first object of the present invention to provide a novel polymer electrolyte having a high ionic conductivity, which is useful for forming cells that exhibit excellent charging/discharging characteristics at low temperatures as well as at high temperatures.
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. and Fujimoto et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, ethylenic copolymer, etc., as disclosed by Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. to further include the ethylenic copolymer weight average molecular weight range as taught by Fujimoto et al. so as to provide a novel polymer electrolyte having a high ionic conductivity, which is useful for forming cells that exhibit excellent charging/discharging characteristics at low temperatures as well as at high temperatures.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (U.S. PGPub US 2016/0006011 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator including the porous coating layer for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1.
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the porous coating layer further comprises a dispersing agent.
Chen et al. teaches a heat-resistant porous separator and method for manufacturing the same (Title). Chen et al. further teaches Par. [0009] the present invention provides a novel heat-resistant and high electrolyte absorption ability, whereby the heat-resistant porous separator comprises a porous substrate and a composite coating layer, etc. (also see Pars. [0010]-[0012]). Chen et al. further teaches Pars. [0017]-[0018] the composite coating layer further comprises a dispersant, whereby the dispersant is selected from the group consisting of 3-glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane, methacryloyl propyltrimethoxysilane, vinyltrimethoxysilane, and a combination thereof, etc., which at least reads on “the porous coating layer further comprises a dispersing agent”.
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. and Chen et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, etc., to further include the dispersant (e.g., 3-glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, etc.) as taught by Chen et al. so as to provide a heat-resistant porous separator that comprises a porous substrate and a composite coating layer that has a high electrolyte absorption ability.
Regarding claim 7, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. in view of Chen et al. disclose the separator for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 6.
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the dispersing agent includes a fatty acid compound, an alkyl ammonium-based compound, a titanate-based compound, a silane-based compound, a phenolic compound, or two or more of them.
Chen et al. further teaches Pars. [0017]-[0018] the composite coating layer further comprises a dispersant, whereby the dispersant is selected from the group consisting of 3-glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane, methacryloyl propyltrimethoxysilane, vinyltrimethoxysilane, and a combination thereof, etc., which at least provides the dispersing agent includes a silane-based compound from the group, lacking any further distinction thereof.
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. in view of Chen et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, etc., to further include the dispersant (e.g., 3-glycidyloxypropyltrimethoxysilane, etc.) as taught by Chen et al. so as to provide a heat-resistant porous separator that comprises a porous substrate and a composite coating layer that has a high electrolyte absorption ability.
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hong et al. (U.S. PGPub US 2013/0224553 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. disclose the separator for a lithium secondary battery as discussed above in claim 1.
However, Kwon et al. does not explicitly disclose the fluorine-based binder polymer has a weight average molecular weight of 100,000-1,500,000.
Hong et al. teaches a separator including coating layer and battery including the same (Title). Hong et al. further teaches [0036] in an example embodiment, a separator includes a coating layer of an organic and inorganic mixture containing a polyvinylidene fluoride homopolymer, a polyvinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer, a solvent, and inorganic particles, in which the solvent may be present in an amount of 100 ppm or less in the coating layer, whereby as taught in Par. [0037] the polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) homopolymer may have a weight average molecular weight of about 1,000,000 g/mol or more, e.g., about 1,000,000 g/mol to about 1,200,000 g/mol, which provides a range of values within the claimed range of the fluorine-based binder polymer has a weight average molecular weight of 100,000-1,500,000, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.).
Hong et al. further teaches Par. [0038] within this molecular weight range, the polyvinylidene fluoride homopolymer may improve adhesion between the coating layer and the base film to achieve efficient suppression of thermal shrinkage of a polyolefin base film, which may be susceptible to heat, and may provide good adhesion between the coating layer and electrodes to help prevent a short circuit between electrodes.
Therefore, Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. and Hong et al. are analogous in the field of batteries, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Kwon et al. and Lim et al. and Kim et al. that discloses the separator for a lithium secondary battery including the porous coating layer, fluorine-based binder polymer (A), etc., to further include the polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) homopolymer may have a weight average molecular weight of about 1,000,000 g/mol to about 1,200,000 g/mol as taught by Hong et al., such that in this molecular weight range, the polyvinylidene fluoride homopolymer may improve adhesion between the coating layer and the base film to achieve efficient suppression of thermal shrinkage of a polyolefin base film, which may be susceptible to heat, and may provide good adhesion between the coating layer and electrodes to help prevent a short circuit between electrodes.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 8, 10, and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Kwon and Lim 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.
As to applicant’s arguments Page 9, “(2) In contrast, the primary reference of Kwon relates to a technique for stepwise dispersing binder polymers in order to improve the dispersibility of inorganic particles in a porous coating layer slurry, and broadly lists PVDF-based polymers and ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers as second binder polymers. However, Kwon does not explicitly disclose the specific combination of binders as claimed in the present application, namely, a fluorine-based binder polymer (A) (e.g., PVDF-based binder) and an ethylenic copolymer (B) comprising repeating units derived from an ethylene monomer (a) and a vinyl acetate monomer (b). In fact, the examples of Kwon employ cyanoethyl pullulan together with a PVDF-based binder.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, whereby as put forth in the current 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of record, Kwon discloses a porous coating layer on at least one surface of the porous polymer substrate (i.e., at least forming a porous coating layer onto the porous polymer substrate as disclosed in Par. [0104], also see Fig. 1, S1-3, Pars. [0009], [0015], Figs. 2b-c), wherein the porous coating layer comprises inorganic particles (i.e., at least inorganic particles as disclosed in Par. [0048], also see Fig. 1, Pars. [0009], [0014]-[0015], [0017], [0033]-[0034], [0048], [0064], [0066]), a fluorine-containing binder polymer (A) (i.e., at least first binder polymer such as polyvinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene, etc., as disclosed in Par. [0060], lacking any further distinction thereof, also see Pars. [0048], [0120]), and an ethylenic copolymer (B) having an ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit (a) and a vinyl acetate monomer-derived repeating unit (b) (i.e., at least second binder polymer such as polyethylene-co-vinyl acetate, etc., as disclosed in Par. [0090], such that the skilled artisan would appreciate that a copolymer containing ethylene and vinyl acetate necessarily possesses an ethylene monomer-derived repeating unit and a vinyl acetate monomer-derived repeating unit, lacking any further distinction thereof, also see Par. [0048]). Therefore, the examiner asserts that under broadest reasonable interpretation, Kwon at least meets the claim limitations so as to obviate the combination, and lacking any further distinction thereof.
As to applicant’s arguments Page 9, “More importantly, Kwon fails to disclose or suggest a process in which a fluorine-based binder is dissolved and phase separation is induced under humid conditions, nor does it recognize the associated problems or provide any motivation to introduce the above ethylenic copolymer as a solution.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees, whereby as put forth in the current 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of record, the process as put forth by applicant is not commensurate in scope with the product as claimed. Furthermore, 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., “a process in which a fluorine-based binder is dissolved and phase separation is induced under humid conditions, etc.”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chou et al. (U.S. PGPub 2005/0090633 A1) discloses a fluorine-containing ethylene copolymers (Title), whereby as disclosed in [0045] in still another embodiment, the present invention is a terpolymer comprising, in addition to the ethylene and fluoroalkyl comonomers described hereinabove, from about 0.5 wt % to about 50 wt % of a termonomer Y, wherein Y is a vinyl acetate or an acrylate comonomer, etc.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA PATRICK MCCLURE whose telephone number is (571)272-2742. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached on (571) 272-1330. 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.
/JOSHUA P MCCLURE/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights