Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/013,287

ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 28, 2022
Examiner
DINH, BACH T
Art Unit
1726
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Samsung Electronics
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
530 granted / 966 resolved
-10.1% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+32.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1016
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
§112
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 966 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Summary This is the response to the RCE filed on 01/14/2026. Claims 1-3, 5-7 and 9-18 remain pending in the application. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/14/2026 has been entered. 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: 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. Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516). Addressing claims 1-2 and 9, Suzuki discloses an all solid state battery (title), comprising: an electrode assembly including a negative electrode (anode 120), a positive electrode (cathode 10), and a solid electrolyte 130 between the negative electrode and the positive electrode [0066]; and wherein: the negative electrode includes a negative electrode current collector 121 and a negative electrode active material layer 122 including a negative electrode active material (anode active material, [0086]) and a binder [0010], the negative electrode active material includes a carbon material (amorphous carbon, [0015] as the claimed non-graphitic carbon) and metal particles ([0015-0017, 0032-0033], silver, tin or zinc), the binder includes butadiene polymer [0034], the weight ratio of the carbon material to the metal particles is 1:1 to 10:1 [0031], the binder is included in an amount of 4 parts by weight to 10 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material ([0011], 0.3 to 15 wt% of the anode active material, which encompasses the claimed range; paragraph [0103] discloses the weight percent of binder is to ensure sufficient adhesion of the active material to the current collector; therefore, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one would have arrived at the claimed weight percent range of binder in the negative electrode active material when perform routine experimentation with the amount of binder in the negative electrode active material in order to optimize adhesion of the active material to the current collector). Suzuki is silent regarding a case for accommodating the electrode assembly, the binder includes the first polymer of a butadiene rubber and a second polymer including carboxy alkyl cellulose and the first polymer and the second polymer are included in a weight ratio of 1:1 to 6:1. Oh discloses an all-slid-state battery [0022] comprising an anode active material layer including an anode active material (an electrode active material, [0009]) and a binder [0009]. The binder includes a first polymer of a butadiene rubber (styrene butadiene rubber), and a second polymer including a carboxy alkyl cellulose (carboxymethylcellulose [0050]), a salt thereof [0051], or a combination thereof, and the first polymer and the second polymer are included in a weight ratio of 1:1 to 6:1 ([0052], 0.001 to 10 wt% for CMC, and [0054], 0.001 to 10 wt% for SBR, which satisfies the claimed range). The binder is included in an amount of 4 parts by weight to 15 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material (paragraph [0059] discloses 1 to 10 wt% of the binder based on the total weight of the electrode slurry, which meets the claimed limitation with a value that falls within the claimed range). Oh further discloses a case for accommodating the electrode assembly (Oh implicitly discloses a case for accommodating the electrode assembly by disclosing the electrode assembly forms a lithium secondary battery and is used in a vehicle [0024]). At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the battery of Suzuki with the binder composition of butadiene rubber and CMC as disclosed by Oh in order to improve a solid content increasing effect, the phase stability, binding strength, reduction in resistance, performance and stability of the battery (Oh, [0051-0055]) and the case for accommodating the electrode assembly in order to protect the electrode assembly and mounting of the electrode assembly in the desired usage location (Oh, [0024]). Addressing claims 3 and 18, paragraph [0182] discloses silver particles with diameter of 20, 60 or 800 nm that fall within the claimed range. Addressing claim 7, paragraphs [0159 and 0190] disclose the non-graphitic carbon includes ketjen black, carbon black and acetylene black. Addressing claims 10-11, Suzuki discloses in paragraph [0107] the sulfide solid electrolyte having the claimed formula. Addressing claim 12, paragraph [0027-0041] disclose the composition of the negative electrode that does not include solid electrolyte. Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516) as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 above, and further in view of Woo et al. (KR101753892 with provided machine English translation). Addressing claims 5-6, Suzuki and Oh are silent regarding the non-graphitic carbon has a secondary particle form in which a plurality of primary particles are agglomerated and the primary particle has a particle diameter of 20 nm to 100 nm as claimed. Woo discloses forming negative electrode for secondary battery; wherein, the negative electrode includes cellulose-based thickener and carbon black, acetylene black, ketjen black or channel black (page 3 of the translation document) similarly to that of Oh and Suzuki. Woo further discloses the carbon material includes secondary particles agglomerated with primary particles (page 3 of the translation document) with average diameter of less than 1 micron (page 3 of the translation document), which overlaps with the claimed range. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the negative electrode composition of Suzuki in view of Oh with the secondary particles of carbon material disclosed by Woo in order to enhance the conductivity of the electrode and output characteristics and lifetime characteristics of the secondary battery (Woo, Abstract). Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516) as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 above, and further in view of Okada et al. (JPWO2014046078 with provided machine English translation). Addressing claim 13, Suzuki and Oh are silent regarding the binding force of the negative electrode. Okada discloses a negative electrode for lithium secondary battery with binding force of 0.5 to 20 gf/mm (paragraph [0119]) of the translation document that overlaps with the claimed range. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed binding force range when perform routine experimentation with binding strength in the range disclosed by Okada by perform routine experimentation with the binder and composition of the negative electrode active material layer of Suzuki in view of Oh in the manner disclosed by Okada in order to optimize the binding strength of the negative electrode active material layer to the current collector (Okada, [0119-0120]). Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516) as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 above, and further in view of Mayer et al. (US 2017/0324113). Addressing claim 14, Suzuki and Oh are silent regarding the limitation of current claim. Mayer discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising a lithium metal layer disposed between the current collector and the negative electrode active material layer (anolyte layer [0013]). The lithium metal layer is formed when the cell is charged, particularly lithium is transferred to the negative electrode and the lithium metal layer [0005, 0013]. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the battery of Suzuki in view of Oh with the known lithium metal layer between the negative electrode active material layer and the current collector as disclosed by Mayer in order to maintain the size of the secondary battery and obtain the predictable result of forming a lithium secondary battery (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143). Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516) as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 above, and further in view of Yoshida (JP2012009209 with provided machine English translation). Addressing claims 14-15, Suzuki and Oh are silent regarding lithium precipitation layer and the claimed thickness range. Yoshida discloses a lithium layer 4 between the negative electrode active material layer and the current collector (figs. 2 and 4-5). Yoshida discloses during charging operation lithium is deposited between the current collector and the negative electrode active material layer (page 3 of the translation document). The presence of the lithium layer between the negative electrode active material layer and the current collector allows the suppression of the supply of the electrolytic solution to the reaction field and reduction in excessive electrolyte decomposition (page 4 of the translation document). Yoshida discloses the lithium layer 4 has a thickness of 1 to 100 microns (page 6 of the translation document), which encompasses the claimed range. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the battery of Suzuki in view of Oh with the lithium layer between the negative electrode active material layer and the current collector as disclosed by Yoshida in order to suppress the supply of electrolytic solution to the reaction field and reducing the decomposition of the electrolytic solution (Yoshida, page 7 of the translation document). Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516) as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 above, and further in view of Izumi et al. (CN104659443 with provided machine English translation). Addressing claim 16, Suzuki and Oh are silent regarding the buffer material between the negative electrode and the case. Izumi discloses a buffer layer 17 positioned between the negative electrode and the case (paragraph [0080] of the translation document, fig. 7). At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the battery of Suzuki in view of Oh with the buffer layer between the negative electrode and the case as disclosed by Izumi in order to extend the life of the battery (Izumi, [0080]). Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0157723) in view of Oh et al. (US 2019/0074516) as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-12 and 18 above, and further in view of Takeda et al. (US 2019/0115592). Addressing claim 17, Suzuki and Oh are silent regarding the claimed butadiene rubber. Takeda discloses a negative electrode material layer containing a binder that is SBR, similarly to that of Suzuki and Oh, or NBR in combination with CMC [0064]. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to modify the negative electrode active material with the known NBR binder disclosed by Takeda in order to obtain the predictable result of binding the materials of the negative electrode active material layer together (Rationale B, KSR decision, MPEP 2143). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5-7 and 9-18 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 BACH T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-5118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 EST. 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 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. /BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 02/25/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 28, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 01, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 14, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595176
PREPARATION METHOD OF LITHIUM IRON PHOSPHATE CATHODE MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597882
PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER GENERATION MODULE USING CONDENSING LENS HAVING MEDIUM THEREIN AND PHOTOVOLTAIC/SOLAR HEAT POWER GENERATION SYSTEM INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12580517
PHOTOVOLTAIC ROOFING TILE FOOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570173
Vehicular Electricity Generating Canopy Appliance
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12563857
PHOTOVOLTAIC DEVICE INCLUDING A P-N JUNCTION AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+32.5%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 966 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month