DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3-5, and 8-21 are presented for examination, wherein claim 9 and the subject matter of sub-species (1)-(3) are withdrawn; plus, claims 19-21 are newly added. Claims 2 and 6-7 are cancelled.
The NSDP rejection of claims 1, 8, 11-12, and 16-18 over copending Application No. 18/039428 is withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 1, from which the other claims depend.
The 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection of claims 1 and 18 over Arai is withdrawn. However, the examiner respectfully refers infra.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 6-7 and 16-17 over Arai is withdrawn. However, the examiner respectfully refers infra.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai et al (JPH 10172615, published 1998) in view of Noguchi et al (US 2015/0010831).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 1, Arai teaches a nonaqueous secondary battery comprising
a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode layer (e.g. item 2) laminated on a current collector (e.g. item 1);
a negative electrode comprising a negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on a current collector (e.g. item 3);
a nonaqueous electrolyte, and
a separator/solid polymer electrolyte layer between said positive electrode and said negative electrode, insulating said positive electrode from said negative electrode, and retaining said electrolyte,
wherein said negative electrode layer containing an active material that absorbs and desorbs lithium ions, such e.g. graphite; a flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A; a non-aqueous electrolyte; a polymer that retains said electrolyte; and, a conductive material,
wherein C-Br bonds of said tetrabromobisphenol A dissociates when the temperature in the battery raises to 300-400°C,
a blending amount of said flame retardant is preferably in a range of 5 to 20 wt % relative to the polymer that retains said electrolyte,
an example of a blending amount of said active material may be approximately 80 wt% of said negative electrode layer, said polymer that retains said electrolyte plus said flame retardant and may be approximately 20 wt%,
said conductive materials may be e.g. graphite, carbon black, acetylene black, ketjen black, nickel powder, and carbon fiber,
(e.g. ¶¶ 0007-12, 14-21, 35-47, and 52-57 plus e.g. Figure 1), reading on “secondary battery,” said battery comprising:
(1) said positive electrode (e.g. supra), reading on “a positive electrode;” and,
(2) said negative electrode comprising said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on said current collector (e.g. item 3),
wherein said negative electrode layer containing said active material that absorbs and desorbs lithium ions, such e.g. graphite; and, said flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A; said non-aqueous electrolyte (e.g. supra),
reading on “a negative electrode, wherein the negative electrode includes a first layer including a negative electrode active material, and the first layer further includes a fire retardant including a halogen atom.”
Regarding the newly added limitation incorporating former claims 6-7, “when a mass ratio between the negative electrode active material and the fire retardant in the first layer is represented by, the negative electrode active material : the fire retardant = 100: a, the “a” is 1 or more and less than 5,” Arai teaches said negative electrode comprising said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on said current collector (e.g. item 3), wherein said negative electrode layer includes said example of said blending amount of said active material may be approximately 80 wt% of said negative electrode layer, said polymer that retains said electrolyte plus said flame retardant and may be approximately 20 wt%, wherein a broader teaching provides said blending amount of said flame retardant is preferably in said range of 5 to 20 wt % relative to said polymer that retains said electrolyte (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on said newly added limitation.
Regarding the newly added limitation incorporating former claim 2, Arai teaches said negative electrode layer containing said active material that absorbs and desorbs lithium ions, such e.g. graphite; said flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A; said non-aqueous electrolyte; said polymer that retains said electrolyte; and, said conductive material (e.g. supra), reading on “the negative electrode active material includes a graphite…,” but does not expressly teach the negative electrode active material includes…particles, the particles including at least one type selected from the group consisting of first particles of silicon oxide represented by a formula SiOx (0.5 ≤ X< 1.6), second particles including a lithium silicate phase and silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase.”
However, Noguchi teaches a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode including a positive electrode active material capable of intercalating and deintercalating lithium ions, a negative electrode including a negative electrode active material capable of intercalating and deintercalating lithium ions, and a nonaqueous electrolytic solution,
wherein said negative electrode active material capable of intercalating and deintercalating lithium ions may include graphite (a) particles alone or a combination of the following negative electrode active materials:
(1) carbon material (a) particles composed of e.g. graphite and carbon nanotube, in a range of 2-80 mass%, preferably 2-30 mass%, of said negative electrode active material;
(2) metal (b) particles composed of e.g. silicon, in a range of 5-90 mass%, preferably 40-70 mass%, of said negative electrode active material;
(3) metal oxide (c) particles composed of e.g. silicon oxide, such as SiO, in a range of 5-90 mass%, preferably 20-50 mass%, of said negative electrode active material when present; and,
(4) aggregates of graphite (a) particles and silicon (b) particles, wherein said silicon (b) particles have an average particle size is smaller than an average particle size of graphite (a) particles, thereby suppressing generation of residual stress and residual strain caused by a difference in volume change accompanying charge and discharge
(e.g. ¶¶ 0001, 24, and 82-101).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the negative electrode active material of Noguchi—including the graphite (a) particles, carbon nanotube (a) particles, silicon (b) particles, silicon oxide (c) particles, and aggregates of graphite (a) particles and silicon (b) particles, in the taught proportions—for the graphite active material of Arai, since Arai teaches they are equivalent negative electrode active materials for use in a lithium-ion battery.
Said negative electrode active material of Arai as modified comprising
(1) said graphite (a) particles and carbon nanotube (a) particles, in said range of 2-80 mass%, preferably 2-30 mass%, of said negative electrode active material;
(2) said silicon (b) particles, in a range of 5-90 mass%, preferably 40-70 mass%, of said negative electrode active material;
(3) said silicon oxide (c) particles, such as SiO, in said range of 5-90 mass%, preferably 40-70 mass%, of said negative electrode active material when present; and,
(3) aggregates of graphite (a) particles and silicon (b) particles, wherein said silicon oxide (c) particles have said n average particle size of less than ½ of said average particle size of graphite (a) particles, thereby suppressing generation of residual stress and residual strain caused by a difference in volume change accompanying charge and discharge (e.g. supra), noting in said aggregate, said graphite (a) particles and said silicon (b) particles are dispersed within each other,
said aggregates of graphite (a) particles and silicon (b) particles, wherein said silicon (b) particles have an average particle size is smaller than an average particle size of graphite (a) particles corresponding with the claimed “third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase,”
reading on “the negative electrode active material includes a graphite and particles, the particles including at least one type selected from the group consisting of first particles of silicon oxide represented by a formula SiOx (0.5 ≤ X< 1.6), second particles including a lithium silicate phase and silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase.”
Regarding claims 3-5 and 15, Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein said negative electrode active material of Arai as modified comprises
(1) said graphite (a) particles and carbon nanotube (a) particles, in said range of 2-80 mass%, preferably 2-30 mass%, of said negative electrode active material;
(2) said silicon (b) particles, in a range of 5-90 mass%, preferably 40-70 mass%, of said negative electrode active material;
(3) said silicon oxide (c) particles, such as SiO, in said range of 5-90 mass%, preferably 40-70 mass%, of said negative electrode active material when present; and,
(3) aggregates of graphite (a) particles and silicon (b) particles, wherein said silicon oxide (c) particles have said n average particle size of less than ½ of said average particle size of graphite (a) particles, thereby suppressing generation of residual stress and residual strain caused by a difference in volume change accompanying charge and discharge (e.g. supra), noting in said aggregate, said graphite (a) particles and said silicon (b) particles are dispersed within each other,
said aggregates of graphite (a) particles and silicon (b) particles, wherein said silicon (b) particles have an average particle size is smaller than an average particle size of graphite (a) particles corresponding with the claimed “third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase,”
wherein the option of second particles, “the lithium silicate phase includes lithium silicate represented by a formula Li2ZSiO(2+Z) (0 < Z< 2)” (claim 3), is not required and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention, see supra; establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the negative electrode active material has a particle content of the at least one type of particles of 1 mass% or more” (claim 4); “the negative electrode active material includes plural types of particles selected from the group consisting of the first particles, the second particles, and the third particles” (claim 5); and, “the first layer includes carbon nanotube” (claim 15).
Regarding claims 16-17, Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein Arai teaches said negative electrode comprising said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on said current collector (e.g. item 3), wherein said negative electrode layer containing said flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A, wherein C-Br bonds of said tetrabromobisphenol A dissociates when the temperature in the battery raises to 300-400°C (e.g. supra), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on the limitations “the fire retardant includes a cyclic structure to which the halogen atom is bonded, a ratio of the halogen atom in the fire retardant is 45 mass% or more” (claim 16); and, “the fire retardant releases the halogen atom at a temperature of 180° C. or more” (claim 17).
Regarding claim 18, Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein Arai teaches said negative electrode comprising said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on said current collector (e.g. item 3), wherein said negative electrode layer containing said flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A (e.g. supra), reading on “the fire retardant is at least one selected from the group consisting of ethylene-1,2-bis pentabromo phenyl, ethylenebistetra bromophthalimide, tetrabromobisphenol A, hexabromocyclododecane, 2,4,6-tribromophenol, 1,6,7,8,9,14,15,16,17,17,18,18-dodecachloropentacyclo (12.2.1.16,9.02,13.05,10) octadeca-7,15-diene, and tris (2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) phosphate.”
Regarding newly added claim 19, Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein Arai teaches said negative electrode comprising said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on said current collector (e.g. item 3), wherein said negative electrode layer containing said flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A (e.g. supra), said tetrabromobisphenol A reading on “the fire retardant includes a cyclic structure to which the halogen atom is bonded…,” and bromine is about 58.8 mass% of said tetrabromobisphenol A, which is sufficiently close to the claimed range to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “…a ratio of the halogen atom in the fire retardant is 60 mass% or more.”
Claims 8 and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai et al (JPH 10172615, published 1998) in view of Noguchi et al (US 2015/0010831), as provided supra, in view of Liu et al (CN 105733332, published 2016).
Regarding claims 8 and 10-14, Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein Arai teaches said negative electrode comprising said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) laminated on said current collector (e.g. item 3), wherein said negative electrode layer contains said active material that absorbs and desorbs lithium ions, such e.g. graphite; and, said flame retardant that generates volatile non-flammable substances at high temperatures, such as e.g. tetrabromobisphenol A, as provided supra,
wherein said negative electrode layer corresponds with the claimed “second layer” (claim 8) and a portion of “first layer” as further defined in claim 8,
reading on “the first layer includes a second layer including at least the negative electrode active material…” (claim 8), but does not expressly teach the limitations “the first layer includes…a third layer including at least the fire retardant disposed at a surface of the second layer” (claim 8); “the third layer has a basis weight of 0.1 g/m2 or more and 10 g/m2 or less” (claim 10); “including a separator interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and the third layer is disposed between the second layer and the separator” (claim 11); “the third layer has a thickness of 0.1 µm or more and 10 µm or less” (claim 12); “the third layer has a fire retardant content of more than that of the second layer” (claim 13); and, “a ratio of the fire retardant contained in the third layer relative to the third layer as a whole is 50% or more by mass” (claim 14).
However, Liu teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising a flame-retardant coating, which can effectively prevent and suppress large-scale thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries through both chemical and physical means, thereby improving the safety of lithium-ion batteries, while said flame-retardant coating and its battery are also easy to process and low in cost,
wherein said lithium-ion battery includes a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a separator, and an electrolyte, wherein at least one side of said positive electrode, negative electrode, or separator is coated with said flame-retardant coating,
said flame-retardant coating having a composition including a flame retardant additive in an amount of 15-50 wt%, preferably 35-50 wt%, solvent in an amount of 45-80 wt%, preferably 55-65 wt%; and, and an adhesive 0.5-12 wt%, preferably 2-10 wt%;
said flame-retardant coating having an areal density of 0.05–1.3 mg/cm³; and,
said flame-retardant coating having a thickness of 0.5–10 μm
(e.g. ¶¶ 0008-25 and 31-32).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the flame-retardant coating of Liu on at least one surface of the negative electrode of Arai as modified and/or at least one surface of the separator of Arai as modified, since Liu teaches said flame-retardant coating of Liu applied on at least one side of said negative electrode or separator can effectively prevent and suppress large-scale thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries through both chemical and physical means, thereby improving the safety of lithium-ion batteries, while said flame-retardant coating and its battery are also easy to process and low in cost.
Further, it would have been obvious to locate said flame-retardant coating of Liu on the outer surface of the negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) of Arai as modified so that it is between said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) and said separator of Arai as modified, since Liu teaches said flame-retardant coating of Liu applied on at least one side of said negative electrode or separator, and since said outer surface of the negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) of Arai as modified is one of a limited number of major surfaces; and/or, since it is a surface that would also be applied against said separator, a configuration that Liu teaches can effectively prevent and suppress large-scale thermal runaway of lithium-ion batteries through both chemical and physical means, thereby improving the safety of lithium-ion batteries, while said flame-retardant coating and its battery are also easy to process and low in cost.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to substitute the tetrabromobisphenol A flame retardant of Liu for the flame retardant additive of Liu since Aria teaches said tetrabromobisphenol A flame retardant is provided in the negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) and using the same flame retardant composition of tetrabromobisphenol A as the flame retardant additive in the flame-retardant coating of Liu would simplify the manufacturing of the battery.
wherein said negative electrode layer corresponds with the claimed “second layer” (claim 8) and a portion of “first layer” as further defined in claim 8; and,
wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu corresponding with the claimed “third layer” (claim 8) and a portion of “first layer” as further defined in claim 8,
reading on “the first layer includes a second layer including at least the negative electrode active material, and a third layer including at least the fire retardant disposed at a surface of the second layer” (claim 8).
Still regarding claim 10, wherein Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 8, wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu having said areal density of 0.05–1.3 mg/cm³ plus said thickness of 0.5–10 μm (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the third layer has a basis weight of 0.1 g/m2 or more and 10 g/m2 or less.”
Still regarding claim 11, wherein Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 8, wherein Arai teaches said separator is between said positive electrode and said negative electrode, and insulates said positive electrode from said negative electrode; and, said flame-retardant coating of Liu on the outer surface of the negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) of Arai as modified so that it is between said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) and said separator of Arai (e.g. supra),
wherein said negative electrode layer corresponds with the claimed “second layer” and a portion of “first layer” as further defined in claim 8; and,
wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu corresponding with the claimed “third layer,”
reading on including a separator interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and the third layer is disposed between the second layer and the separator.
Still regarding claim 12, wherein Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 8, wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu having said thickness of 0.5–10 μm (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the third layer has a thickness of 0.1 µm or more and 10 µm or less.”
Still regarding claim 13, wherein Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 8, wherein Arai teaches said negative electrode layer (e.g. item 4) includes said example of said blending amount of said active material may be approximately 80 wt% of said negative electrode layer, said polymer that retains said electrolyte and flame retardant and may be approximately 20 wt%, wherein a broader teaching provides said blending amount of said flame retardant is preferably in said range of 5 to 20 wt % relative to said polymer that retains said electrolyte (e.g. supra); and, said flame-retardant coating of Liu having said composition including said flame retardant additive in said amount of 15-50 wt%, preferably 35-50 wt%, solvent in said amount of 45-80 wt%, preferably 55-65 wt%; and, and said adhesive 0.5-12 wt%, preferably 2-10 wt% (e.g. supra),
wherein said negative electrode layer corresponds with the claimed “second layer” and a portion of “first layer” as further defined in claim 8; and,
wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu corresponding with the claimed “third layer,”
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed relationship, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the third layer has a fire retardant content of more than that of the second layer.”
Still regarding claim 14, wherein Arai as modified teaches the battery of claim 8, wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu having said composition including said flame retardant additive in said amount of 15-50 wt%, preferably 35-50 wt%, solvent in said amount of 45-80 wt%, preferably 55-65 wt%; and, and said adhesive 0.5-12 wt%, preferably 2-10 wt% (e.g. supra),
wherein said flame-retardant coating of Liu corresponding with the claimed “third layer,”
establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a ratio of the fire retardant contained in the third layer relative to the third layer as a whole is 50% or more by mass.”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims (e.g. claim 19).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: none of the timely art of record teaches the specifically claimed fire retardants of claims 20-21 included in the first layer of claim 1, which includes the specifically claimed negative electrode active materials of independent claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed May 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, the applicant alleges the following.
The Applicant has amended independent claim 1 to include the features of dependent claims 2, 6, and 7. The Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of Arai and Noguchi does not teach, suggest or render obvious at least, for example, the features of “the first layer further includes a fire retardant including a halogen atom, the negative electrode active material includes graphite and particles, the particles including at least one type selected from the group consisting of first particles of silicon oxide represented by a formula SiOx (0.5 X< 1.6), second particles including a lithium silicate phase and silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase, and when a mass ratio between the negative electrode active material and the fire retardant in the first layer is represented by, the negative electrode active material the fire retardant = 100: a, the “a” is 1 or more and less than 5,” as recited in amended independent claim 1.
(Remarks, at 7:1.)
In response, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Second, the applicant alleges the following.
Further, the Applicant’s Disclosure describes, “[t]he negative electrode active material may include, in an embodiment, particles (P) and graphite. Here, the particles (P) are at least one type of particles selected from the group consisting of: first particles including silicon oxide represented by a formula SiOx (0.5 ≤ X < 1.6), second particles including a lithium silicate phase and silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase. In this specification, the silicon particles included in the second particles can be regarded as a silicon phase, and the silicon particles included in the third particles can be regarded as a silicon phase. By using the particles (P) including silicon (Si) as the negative electrode active material, the battery capacity can be increased. Meanwhile, as described in Examples, the inventors of the present application found that when the particles (P) are used, the battery temperature tends to increase under an abnormal situation (e.g., in nail penetration test). Furthermore, the inventors of the present application found that the battery temperature increase under an abnormal situation can be suppressed by using a specific fire retardant without greatly reducing battery characteristics. The present disclosure is based on such new findings.” See at ¶¶ [0011] and [0012], of the Specification as originally filed (emphasis added). Thereby, according to amended claim 1, by using particles (P) containing silicon selected from first to third particles in combination with graphite, as the negative electrode active material, the battery capacity can be increased, and the battery temperature increase under an abnormal situation can be suppressed by using a fire retardant containing halogen atoms, without greatly reducing battery characteristics.
Furthermore, the Applicant’s Disclosure describes, “[s]ome battery production conditions and evaluation results are shown in Table 1. In Table 1, the value (mass ratio) “a” showing the fire retardant content illustrates a fire retardant mass, when setting the negative electrode active material mass in the negative electrode active material layer as 100. In batteries Al to A12, and B1 and B2, the negative electrode active material content and the fire retardant content were changed, while setting total of the negative electrode active material content and the fire retardant content in the negative electrode active material layer to a constant value. In Table 1, the fire retardant r1 is ethylene-1,2-bispentabromophenyl (SAYTEX (registered trademark)-8010 manufactured by Albemarle Japan). The fire retardant r2 is ethylene bistetrabromophthalimide (halogen atom content 67 mass%). The fire retardant r3 is potassium citriate.
[Table 1 removed, but see Annotated Table 1, infra]
Table 1 shows that the batteries Al to A12 in which the fire retardant (R) was added, the heat generation amount in the nail penetration test was reduced compared with battery C1, while reduction in the initial capacity and capacity retention rate was suppressed. That is, in the batteries Al to A12, the amount of heat generation was reduced, and both high charge/discharge performance and high safety were achieved. The batteries Al to A5 and batteries A7 to A11 with the value “a” of 0.1 or more and 5 or less achieved the initial capacity and capacity retention rate of about the same or more as that of the battery C1 in which no fire retardant was added. The batteries A3, A4, A9, and A10 with the value “a” of 1 or more and less than 5 kept the initial capacity as that of the battery C1, while obtaining significantly low heat generation amount, and the capacity retention rate improved more than the battery C1. With the batteries B1 and B2, the discharge capacity dropped to about 70% of the initial capacity after 70 charge/discharge cycles, and the capacity retention rate after 100 charge/discharge cycles dropped to almost 0% so that charge/discharge could not be performed. In contrast, with the batteries Al to A12, reduction in the initial capacity and capacity retention rate was suppressed even compared with the battery C1. Thus, when including the fire retardant (R) in the negative electrode active material layer, the battery function was kept even after performing charge/discharge of 100 cycles.” See at [00152-0156] of the Specification as originally filed (emphasis added). Thereby, as shown in Examples of the present specification, in the batteries Al to A12, in which the ratio “a” of the fire retardant to the negative electrode active material was 0.1 or higher, the heat generation in the nail penetration test was reduced, with less decrease in the initial capacity and the capacity retention rate. Especially in the batteries A3, A4, A9, and A10, in which the ratio “a” was 1 or more and less than 5, while the amount of heat generation was significantly low, the initial capacity was maintained equivalent to that of the battery C1 in which no fire retardant was added, and the capacity retention rate was improved as compared to that in the battery C1.
Furthermore, the Applicant’s Disclosure describes, “even when the negative electrode active material includes the particles (P), by adding the fire retardant to the negative electrode mixture layer, the battery temperature increase at nail penetration test can be suppressed ... the batteries A13 and A14, in which the above-described fire retardant (R) was used, the battery temperature at nail penetration test was low, and a high capacity retention rate was achieved.” See at ¶¶ [0167] and [0168], of the Specification as originally filed (emphasis added). Thereby, in the batteries A13 and A14, even when the negative electrode active material contained the particles (P), by adding the fire retardant to the negative electrode active material layer, not only the increase of battery temperature in the nail-penetration test was suppressed, but also high capacity imparted by the particles (P) was achieved.
(Remarks, at 7:2-10:2, underlining in the original bolded underlining added.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that the argument/data is not commensurate with the scope of the newly amended claim 1, and refers to Annotated Table 1 below.
PNG
media_image1.png
774
1082
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As noted in Annotated Table 1, only A3, A4, A9, and A10 are within the scope of the newly amended claim 1. However, samples that are disclosed as examples (i.e. within the scope of the instant invention) are outside the scope of the newly amended claim 1. Such examples provide similar data to those within the scope of the newly amended claim 1. For illustrative purposes, the examiner refers to the following example samples that are outside the scope of newly amended claim 1.
Example A5 has an “a” value outside the scope of claim 1 (a=5), and has low heat generation (16.7J), and good capacity retention (88.5%);
Example A10 has an “a” value outside the scope of claim 1 (a=10), and has low heat generation (14.5J), and good capacity retention (84.2%); and,
Example A11 has an “a” value outside the scope of claim 1 (a=5), and has low heat generation (20.2J), and good capacity retention (84.2%).
Fourth, the applicant alleges the following.
It was alleged in the Office Action that:
Regarding independent claim 1, Arai teaches a nonaqueous secondary battery comprising a positive electrode ... a negative electrode ... a nonaqueous electrolyte, and a separator/solid polymer electrolyte layer…Regarding claims 6-7, Arai teaches... wherein said negative electrode layer includes said example of said blending amount of said active material may be approximately 80 wt% of said negative electrode layer, said polymer that retains said electrolyte plus said flame retardant and may be approximately 20 wt%, wherein a broader teaching provides said blending amount of said flame retardant is preferably in said range of 5 to 20 wt % relative to said polymer that retains said electrolyte (e.g. supra).
See Office Action at pages 5 and 7 (emphasis added).
Arai describes “[a] non-aqueous solvent battery according to the present invention has a function of insulating a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a non- aqueous electrolyte, the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and holding the electrolyte. A separator, wherein at least one of the positive electrode, the negative electrode, and the separator includes a flame retardant that generates a volatile incombustible substance at a high temperature ... [t]he polymer electrolyte secondary battery according to the present invention comprises: One of the electrolyte layers A and B described below is disposed between one of the positive electrodes A and B described later and one of the negative electrodes A and B described later ... the solid polymer electrolyte layer, the positive electrode and the negative electrode will be described .. [t]he solid polymer electrolyte layer A contains a non-aqueous electrolyte, a polymer holding the non-aqueous electrolyte, and a flame retardant which generates a volatile incombustible substance at high temperatures ... Examples of the flame retardant include tetrabromobisphenol A (T) having the structural formula shown below. Etrabromobisphenol A) or those composed of the above-mentioned tetrabromobisphenol A and antimony oxide (e.g., Sb2O3) can be used.” See Arai at ¶¶ [0008] and [0011-0015] (emphasis added).
Arai describes the non-aqueous solvent battery including the positive electrode, the negative electrode, the separator, and the non-aqueous electrolyte. Arai further describes that the at least one of the positive electrode, the negative electrode, and the separator contains the fire retardant, such as tetrabromobisphenol A and Sb2O3. Arai further describes that the polymer electrolyte secondary battery includes the positive electrode, the negative electrode, and the solid polymer electrolyte layer. Arai further describes that the at least one of the positive electrode, the negative electrode, and the solid polymer electrolyte layer contains the fire retardant.
Therefore, nowhere in Arai is there any teaching that, in a secondary battery using the particles (P) in combination with graphite as negative electrode active material, by including a specific amount of a fire retardant containing halogen atom in the negative electrode, the increase of battery temperature under an abnormal situation can be significantly suppressed, without greatly reducing battery characteristics. The present invention exerts a remarkable effect unpredicted from Arai. Therefore, the present invention is to solve a unique problem that arises when the negative electrode active material contains silicon-containing particles. However, Arai fails to recognize such a problem.
Further, Arai describes “[t]he amount of the flame retardant is preferably in the range of 5 to 20% by weight based on the polymer holding the non-aqueous electrolyte. This is due to the following reasons. If the amount is less than 5% by weight, it may be difficult to sufficiently exhibit the flame retardant action. On the other hand, if the amount exceeds 20% by weight, the mechanical strength of the solid polymer electrolyte layer may be extremely reduced, which may adversely affect the shape retention of the battery ... [a] solution of a polymer holding a non-aqueous electrolyte was prepared, the flame retardant and the active material were added to this solution, and these were mixed to form a film to form a negative electrode layer.” See Arai at ¶¶ [0016] and [0043] (emphasis added).
Arai describes that the amount of the flame retardant is preferably in the range of 5 to 20% by weight. Arai further describes that if the amount of the flame retardant is less than 5% by weight, it is difficult to sufficiently exhibit the flame retardant action. Arai further describes that the flame retardant and the active material were added to solution, and these were mixed to form the film to form the negative electrode layer. However, Arai does not describe a mass ratio between the active material and the fire retardant in the first layer is 100: a, where the “a” is 1 or more and less than 5 and “a” corresponds to the fire retardant.
Further, the additional cited reference (Noguchi) does not remedy the above- noted deficiencies of Arai.
Accordingly, the Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of Arai and Noguchi does not teach, suggest or render obvious at least, for example, the features of "the first layer further includes a fire retardant including a halogen atom, the negative electrode active material includes graphite and particles, the particles including at least one type selected from the group consisting of first particles of silicon oxide represented by a formula SiOx (0.5 < X< 1.6), second particles including a lithium silicate phase and silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and third particles including a carbon phase and silicon particles dispersed in the carbon phase, and when a mass ratio between the negative electrode active material and the fire retardant in the first layer is represented by, the negative electrode active material the fire retardant = 100: a, the “a” is “or more and less than 5,” as recited in amended independent claim 1.
Therefore, amended independent claim 1 is not taught, suggested, or rendered obvious over the combination of Arai and Noguchi.
(Remarks, at 10:3-14:1, underlining and bolding in the original.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Further, the examiner respectfully notes the argument is not commensurate with the scope of the rejection. The rejection provides the following.
wherein said negative electrode layer includes said example of said blending amount of said active material may be approximately 80 wt% of said negative electrode layer, said polymer that retains said electrolyte plus said flame retardant and may be approximately 20 wt%, wherein a broader teaching provides said blending amount of said flame retardant is preferably in said range of 5 to 20 wt % relative to said polymer that retains said electrolyte (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on said newly added limitation.
(e.g. supra, underlining added plus italicized underlining in the original.)
Finally, the Noguchi does not need to remedy the disclosure of Arai regarding the limitation at issue.
Fifth, the applicant alleges the following.
The Applicant respectfully submits that dependent claim 18 is not anticipated by Arai based at least on the dependence on amended independent claim 1. Further, dependent claim 18 separately recites subject matter not described or suggested by Arai.
…
The Applicant respectfully submits that dependent claims 16 and 17 are not taught, suggested, or rendered obvious over Arai based at least on the dependence on amended independent claim 1. Further, each of dependent claim 16 and 17 separately recites subject matter not described or suggested by the cited references, whether taken individually or in combination.
…
Liu does not remedy the above-noted deficiencies of Arai. The Applicant respectfully submits that dependent claims 8 and 10-14 are not taught, suggested, or rendered obvious over Liu and Arai based at least on the dependence on amended independent claim 1. Further, each of dependent claims 8 and 10-14 separately recites subject matter not described or suggested by the cited references, whether taken individually or in combination.
…
The Applicant respectfully submits that dependent claims 3-5 and 15 are also not taught, suggested, or rendered obvious over Arai and Noguchi based at least on the dependence on amended independent claim 1. Further, each of dependent claims 3-5 and 15 separately recites subject matter not described or suggested by the cited references, whether taken individually or in combination.
Applicant respectfully submits that the art of record does not provide for the aspects of new claims 19-21 at least based on their dependency to base claim 1 which has been distinguished as noted above. Further, applicant respectfully submits that the art of record does not provide for the specific aspects of claims 19-21. Most specifically, in regard to the halogen content in the tetrabromobisphenol A used in Arai is 58.7 mass%; and in Arai, there is no suggestion of cyclic compounds other than the tetrabromobisphenol A. The remaining art of record has not been cited in regard to these aspects.
(Remarks, at 14:2-15:2.)
In response, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jang (US 2022/0255080);
Jang et al (US 2022/0190438);
Jang et al (US 2022/0190437);
Jang et al (US 2022/0190346);
Yoon et al (US 2021/0098791);
Kagami et al (US 2018/0019458);
Tsujikawa et al (US 2013/0252090);
Tsujikawa et al (US 2013/0230773);
Tsujikawa et al (US 2013/0216908);
Patterson et al (US 2013/0108930); and,
Timberlake et al (US 2012/0065297).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights