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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-7, 12-15 are rejected.
Claims 8-11 are withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-7, 12-15 in the reply filed on 01/02/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/02/2026.
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.
Claims 1-7, 12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20190051925 A1, “Li”) in view of Duong et al. (US 20170244098 A1, “Duong”).
Regarding claim 1 and claim 12, Li discloses a negative electrode current collector for a solid-state battery (see abstract “anode current collector” & “all solid state battery”), the negative electrode current collector comprising: a metal foil which is electroconductive (see [0030]). Li does not explicitly disclose and a coating layer formed on a surface of the metal foil and comprising metal-carbon composite particles, wherein the metal-carbon composite particles comprise metal particles and carbon particles and one or more of the metal particle and one or more of the carbon particles are attached to each other, the composite particles have a particle diameter of 20 µm or less, and a content of metal in the composite particles is 50 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of carbon.
Duong teaches metal particles attached (see [0099] “elemental metal particles and carbon particles are composite particles”) & see [0041] “The processes and structures of materials used herein allow for bulk elemental lithium metal to be used, which increases the energy density of the resulting energy storage device, and in a way that has reduced probability of undesired reactions or explosions”. Duong teaches energy storage devices (see title).
Li and Duong are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely energy storage devices (see Duong 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 “elemental metal particles and carbon particles are composite particles”, as suggested by Duong (see [0099]) into the negative electrode current collector of Li because doing so “increases the energy density of the resulting energy storage device, and in a way that has reduced probability of undesired reactions or explosions”, as suggested by Duong (see [0041]).
Regarding the limitation in claim 1 and claim 12, the composite particles have a particle diameter of 20 µm or less, Li does not explicitly disclose.
Duong teaches particles size (see [0051] & [0068] “particle size distribution D50 value of about 1 µm to about 20 µm).
Duong teaches a range of 1 µm to 20 µm, which lies inside the claimed range of 20 μm or less. 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)'.
Regarding the limitation a content of metal in the composite particles is 50 parts by weight or less based on 100 parts by weight of carbon, Li does not explicitly disclose.
Duong teaches content of metal in the composite particles (see [0068] “porous carbon particle can occupy about 10% to about 80% of the volume of the carbon particle” & “size of the elemental lithium particles can be selected based on a pore size of the porous carbon particles such that a desired amount of elemental lithium metal can be inserted into the pores of the porous carbon particles” & see [0049] “the elemental metal can comprise about 0.1 wt %, about 0.3 wt %, about 0.5 wt %, about 0.7 wt %, about 1 wt %, about 1.5 wt %, about 2 wt %, about 2.5 wt %, about 3 wt %, about 3.5 wt %, about 4 wt %, about 4.5 wt %, about 5 wt %, about 6 wt %, about 7 wt %, about 8 wt %, about 9 wt %, or about 10 wt % of the electrode film mixture”) & 10 wt% lies within the claimed range of 50 parts by weight or less.
Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the negative electrode current collector of claim 1. Li does not explicitly disclose wherein the metal particle comprises Al.
Duong teaches aluminum (see [0006] “the elemental metal can comprise, consist essentially of, or consist of elemental aluminum metal” & see [0054], [0056]).
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 Al, as suggested by Duong (see [0006], [0054], [0056]) into the negative electrode current collector because doing so forms the aluminum based energy storage device, as suggested by Duong (see [0056]) & further doing so “increases the energy density of the resulting energy storage device, and in a way that has reduced probability of undesired reactions or explosions”, as suggested by Duong (see [0041]).
Regarding claim 3, Li discloses the negative electrode current collector of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the carbon particle comprises carbon black, acetylene black (see [0040] “carbon material and a metal material” & “carbon black such as acetylene black”).
Regarding claim 4, Li discloses the negative electrode current collector of claim 1 and further discloses a negative electrode for a solid-state battery (see title) and further discloses wherein the negative electrode does not comprise negative electrode active material (see [0038] “the porous layer preferably does not comprise an anode active material”), and wherein lithium is electrodeposited to and detached from the surface of the metal foil during operation of a battery (see [0058] “The all solid state battery of the present disclosure comprises an anode current collector, a porous layer, a solid electrolyte layer, a cathode active material layer, and a cathode current collector, in this order. As shown in FIG. 1A, an anode active material layer may not be present between solid electrolyte layer 3 and porous layer 6. In particular, it is preferable that solid electrolyte layer 3 directly contacts with porous layer 6. Meanwhile, as shown in FIG. 1B, all solid state battery 10 may comprise anode active material layer 2 that is a deposition Li between solid electrolyte layer 3 and porous layer 6.”; see [0059] “The all solid state battery of the present disclosure comprises the porous layer, and thus a dense deposition Li layer (anode active material layer) may be formed after charge”).
Regarding claim 5, Li discloses the negative electrode of claim 4 and further discloses wherein the lithium is electrodeposited between the metal foil and the coating layer (see FIG. 3B describes “6 porous layer” & “5 anode current collector” describes Li is deposited between “5” & “6”; see [0030] “the metal Li is deposited uniformly in the interface of solid electrolyte 31 and porous layer 6”).
Regarding claim 6, Li discloses the negative electrode current collector of claim 1. Li does not explicitly disclose wherein the metal particle and the carbon particle are attached to each other chemically.
Duong teaches coating & composite (see [0090] “the mixture comprising the graphite particles and elemental lithium metal comprises the graphite particles and a plurality of elemental lithium metal particles and/or elemental lithium coating on surfaces of at least some of the graphite particles” & see [0099] “the elemental metal particles and carbon particles are composite particles as provided herein”).
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 “elemental metal particles and carbon particles are composite particles” as suggested by Duong (see [0099] & [0090]) into the negative electrode current collector of Li because doing so “increases the energy density of the resulting energy storage device, and in a way that has reduced probability of undesired reactions or explosions”, as suggested by Duong (see [0041]).
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the negative electrode of claim 5 and further discloses a solid-state battery (see abstract “anode current collector” & “all solid state battery”).
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses the solid-state battery of claim 7 and further discloses wherein a solid electrolyte membrane is interposed between a positive electrode and a negative electrode (see FIG. 3b “solid electrolyte 31” & see FIG. 1A & 1B describes “solid electrolyte layer” & “5 anode current collector” & “4 cathode current collector” & see [0034] describes “anode” which reads on negative electrode & see [0051] “cathode” reads on positive electrode).
Regarding claim 15, Li discloses the solid-state battery of claim 14 and further discloses wherein the solid electrolyte membrane comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte material (see FIG. 3b “solid electrolyte 31” & see FIG. 1A & FIG. 1B describes “solid electrolyte layer”; see [0044] “sulfide solid electrolyte”).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20190051925 A1, “Li”) in view of Duong et al. (US 20170244098 A1, “Duong”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yushin et al. (US 20170170515 A1, “Yushin”).
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the negative electrode current collector of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the coating layer has a porous structure having pores (see [0053] “coating layer” & see abstract “porous layer”; see [0028] “arrangement of a specific porous layer allows an all solid state battery to have high reversibility of deposition and dissolution reaction of a metal Li while inhibiting an occurrence of short circuit”). Li does not explicitly disclose derived from the interstitial volumes among the composite particles.
Yushin teaches interstitial positions (see [0101] “interstitial positions” & “very little change in volume takes place”; see [0017] “the shells may comprise pores”; see [0087] “the presence of pores in such a coating may further assist in stress accommodation”).
Li and Yushin are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely anodes (see Yushin abstract) and current collector (see Yushin [0019]).
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 interstitial positions and little volume change as suggested by Yushin (see [0101] & shells with pores (see [0017]) into the negative electrode current collector of Li because Yushin teaches doing so “assist[s] in stress accommodation” (see [0087]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7 and 12-15 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 07/30/2026
Prosecution Insights