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 1-24 are pending in the application. Claims 15-24 are withdrawn. Claims 1-14 were rejected in the office action mailed 11/17/2025. Applicant cancelled claims 7 & 14. Claims 1-6 & 8-13 are presently examined.
Response to Amendment / Arguments
The amendment filed 1/12/2026, in response to the office action mailed 11/17/2025, has been entered. Applicant’s claim amendments overcame the objection and some of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections. Applicant's claim amendments and arguments, regarding the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive, due to the introduction of new matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-6 & 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. Claim 1 contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Amended claim 1 now states:
“a margin insulating layer including an electrically insulating material different from a material of the solid electrolyte layer”
The present specification fails to teach that these layers have different material, but rather teaches the opposite, that material of both can be the same:
“[20] The margin insulating layer may include the same material as the solid electrolyte layer.”
“[30] The first and second margin insulating materials and the solid electrolyte layer may include the same material.”
“[76] A protective layer may be formed with an insulating material on the top and bottom of the cell stack of the all-solid-state battery 200, and the insulating material may also be made of the same material as the solid electrolyte layer 230.”
Claims 2-6 & 8-13 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-6 & 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor(s) regard as the invention.
Claim 1 states
“a margin insulating layer including an electrically insulating material different from a material of the solid electrolyte layer”
As discussed in the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) section above, the present specification fails to teach how the margin insulating layer and the solid electrolyte layer have different material.
Claims 2-6 & 8-13 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
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.
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.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20210384550A1 (Kumagae).
With regard to claim 1, Kumagae teaches the following claim limitations:
An all-solid-state battery (paragraph 75) comprising:
a first electrode layer (paragraphs 76, 91, & 94; figures 1, 2A, & 6B: positive electrode layer 10A) that includes a first current collector (paragraph 94; figure 6B: sub-collector layer 40) and a first active material layer (paragraph 94; figure 6B: positive electrode sub-active material layers 10′A) disposed on at least one side of the current collector (40);
a solid electrolyte layer (Paragraph 76; figures 1 & 2A: solid electrolyte layer 20. Paragraph 84: solid electrolyte layer can be an insulating material) disposed on the first electrode layer (10A) in a stack direction; and
a margin insulating layer (Figures A & B below)… disposed laterally on an edge of the active material layer (10′A),
wherein the first current collector (40) comprises a first body portion (Figures A & B below) on which the active material layer (10’A) is disposed, and a first tab portion (Figures A & B below) having a smaller width (paragraphs 73 & 83; figures 1 & 2A: W1) than a width (paragraph 73; figures 1 & 2A: W2) of the first body portion (Figures A & B below) and extending laterally to protrude from an edge of the body portion (Figures A & B below), and the margin insulating layer is disposed laterally on the first body portion and surrounds the first tab portion (Figures A & B below).
Figure A: Annotated Kumagae Figure 2A
PNG
media_image1.png
283
480
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure B: Annotated Kumagae Figure 6B
PNG
media_image2.png
309
934
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kumagae refers to the battery in figures 1, 2A, & 6B as embodiments, so is therefore missing one embodiment showing all the claim limitations. Both embodiments achieve Kumagae’s objectives of reducing the contact area between the electrode layer and an external terminal (paragraph 82). It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine Kumagae’s embodiments in figures 1, 2A, & 6B, in order to reduce contact area between the electrode layer and an external terminal.
Kumagae fails to teach that the margin insulating layer includes “an electrically insulating material different from a material of the solid electrolyte layer”. As discussed under the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) sections above, this new matter which was not sufficiently described in the specification; therefore, this claim limitation is disregarded for prior art analysis.
With regard to claims 2-3, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following limitations of claims 2-3 (Figure C below):
Claim 2
the first tab portion of the first current collector extends from a center of a width direction of the first body portion
Claim 3
the margin insulating layer is divided by the first tab portion and is disposed on both sides of the first tab portion in the width direction
Figure C: Annotated Kumagae Figure 1
PNG
media_image3.png
476
821
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 4, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following claim 4 limitation:
the margin insulating layer surrounds along the edge of the first active material layer (Figures A & B above)
With regard to claim 5, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following claim 5 limitation:
the margin insulating layer is stacked on the solid electrolyte layer (Figure A above)
With regard to claim 6, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following limitation of claim 6:
the margin insulating layer has an electrical conductivity of 1.0x10-10 S/cm or less
Kumagae teaches that the solid electrolyte layer 20 can be an insulating material (paragraph 84), and that the insulating material is non-conductive (paragraph 63). Examiner defines part of Kumagae’s solid electrolyte layer 20 to be the claimed solid electrolyte layer, and another part to be the claimed margin insulating layer. Note that claim 1 doesn’t distinguish between the claimed solid electrolyte layer and the margin insulating layer except by location.
With regard to claims 8-9, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following limitations of claims 8-9 (paragraphs 76, 91, & 94; figures 1, 2A, & 6B; Figure D below):
Claim 8
the first current collector is a positive current collector (40) and the first active material layer is a positive electrode active material layer (10’A), and
the all-solid-state battery further comprises a negative current collector (40) and a negative electrode active material layer (10’B) disposed on at least one surface of the negative current collector (40), and
the solid electrolyte layer (20) is disposed between the positive current collector (40) and the negative current collector (40)
Claim 9
the margin insulating layer (Figure D below) is disposed laterally on an edge of the negative electrode active material layer (10’B)
Figure D: Annotated Kumagae Figure 6B
PNG
media_image4.png
373
1116
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 10, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claims 1 & 8 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following claim 10 limitation (paragraphs 83, 91, & 94; figures 1, 2A-2B, & 6B):
the negative current collector (40) comprises a second body portion (12B) on which the negative electrode active material layer (10’B) is disposed, and
a second tab portion (11A & 11B) having a smaller width (W1) than a width (W1) of the second body portion (12B) and extending laterally to protrude from an edge of the second body portion
With regard to claim 11, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claims 1, 8, & 10 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following claim 11 limitation:
the margin insulating layer is disposed laterally on the second body portion of the negative current collector and surrounds the second tab portion of the negative current collector (figure 2A)
With regard to claim 12, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claims 1, 8, & 10 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following claim 12 limitation:
the first tab portion (11A) of the positive current collector extends from the body portion (12A) of the positive current collector in a direction opposite to a direction in which the second tab portion (11B) of the negative current collector extends from the second body portion (12B) of the negative current collector (figure 1)
With regard to claim 13, Kumagae teaches the limitations of claims 1 & 8 as described above. Kumagae also teaches the following claim 13 limitation:
the margin insulating layer surrounds along the edge of the positive electrode active material layer or the negative electrode active material layer (figures 1, 2A, & 6B)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 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