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 .
Response to Amendment
1. Applicant’s amendments with respect to claims filed on 06/30/2026 have been entered. Claims 1-6, 8, and 11-12 remain pending in this application and are currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Claims 9-10 have been withdrawn. Claim 7 has been cancelled.
The amendments and remarks filed are sufficient to cure the previous 35 U.S.C 112 rejections set forth in the Non-Final office action mailed on 04/01/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
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.
3. Claim(s) 1-5, 8, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitazawa (Pub. No. JP 2014232708 A) in view of Wang et al. (Pub. No. CN 114078609 A).
Regarding claim 1, Kitazawa teaches a slurry composition (slurry, see [0023]) for a positive electrode (see [0031] active material used in slurry is for positive electrode) for a lithium secondary battery (lithium-ion secondary battery, see [0031]), the slurry composition (slurry, see [0023]) comprising a positive electrode active material (active material, see [0023], see [0031] where the active material is positive electrode active material), an electrically conductive material (conductive auxiliary agent, see [0023]), a binder (binder, see [0023]), a thickener (cellulose-based polymer compound having carboxyl group, see [0023]), an additive (water-soluble carbodiimide compound, see [0023]) and a solvent (water as dispersion medium, see [0023]), and wherein the additive (water-soluble carbodiimide compound, see [0023]) comprises a carbodiimide-based compound (see [0023], the water-soluble carbodiimide compound is a carbodiimide based compound), but fails to teach wherein the thickener comprises a lithiated carboxymethyl cellulose (LiCMC), and is silent to wherein the slurry composition for the positive electrode has a thixotropic index (T) of 0.1 to 0.4.
However, Wang teaches wherein the thickener (thickener, see [0058] CMC-Li is a thickener) comprises a lithiated carboxymethyl cellulose (LiCMC) (CMC-Li, see [0058]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kitazawa to substitute the cellulose-based polymer compound having carboxyl group for CMC-Li as taught by Wang as an art effective equivalent thickener/dispersant to reduce emission of organic solvents and improve environmental impacts (see [0058] of Wang). Further, Kitazawa teaches that modifications can be made (see [0041] of Kitazawa).
Kitazawa in view of Wang is silent as to wherein the slurry composition for the positive electrode has a thixotropic index (T) of 0.1 to 0.4.
However, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches the same slurry composition as the claimed invention including an additive comprising a carbodiimide-based compound, therefore it is the examiner’s position that if the thixotropic index of the slurry composition as taught by Kitazawa in view of Wang was measured in the same way as the claimed invention the thixotropic index would lie inside the claimed range or overlap the claimed range in a way that is obviates the recited limitation of the thixotropic index (T) of 0.1 to 0.4.
Regarding claim 2, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches wherein the carbodiimide-based compound (see [0023], the water-soluble carbodiimide compound is a carbodiimide based compound) comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of 1-ethyl-3-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]-carbodiimide hydrochloride (EDC) (1-ethyl-3- (3-dimethylaminopropyl) carbodiimide hydrochloride, see [0019]), 1-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-3-ethylcarbodiimide, N,N′-diisopropylcarbodiimide, and N,N′-di-tert-butylcarbodiimide.
Regarding claim 3, Kitazawa in view Wang fails to teach wherein the thickener is contained in an amount of 0.5% by weight to 5% by weight (0.43%-4.5% by mass of a CMC based compound, see explanation/calculations below) based on the total weight of the solid content of the slurry composition. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Kitazawa teaches wherein the thickener (cellulose-based polymer compound having carboxyl group, see [0023]) is contained in an amount of 0.5% by weight to 5% by weight (0.43%-4.5% by mass of a CMC based compound, see explanation/calculations below) based on the total weight of the solid content (see explanation/calculations below) of the slurry composition (slurry, see [0023]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kitazawa in view of Wang such that the weight of the cellulose-based polymer compound having a carboxyl group is contained in 0.5-4.5% by weight of the total weight of the slurry Kitazawa teaches an overlapping range of 0.43% to 4.5% based on total solid weigh of the slurry and a prima facie case of obviousness exists “in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” (MPEP 2144.05.I). Further, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches that modifications can be made (see [0041] of Kitazawa).
Explanation/Calculations of thickener weight: see [0020] CMC and therefore the cellulose-based polymer is present in 0.5-5 parts by mass per 100 parts by mass of active material, and carbodiimide compound is 0.05-0.5 parts by mass per 100 parts of active material. See [0034] where conductive auxiliary agent is contained in 1-10 parts by mass per 100 parts by mass of active material. See [0043] binder is contained in 5 parts by mass.
Maximum Thickener wt%: [(Max Weight of cellulose based polymer)/((Weight Active Material)+(min carbodiimide weight)+(min conductive agent weight)+(parts of binder)+(max weight of cellulose based polymer))]*100 = 5/(100+0.05+1+5+5)*100 = 4.5%
Minimum Thickener wt% = [(Min Weight of cellulose based polymer)/((Weight Active Material)+(max carbodiimide weight)+(max conductive agent weight)+(parts of binder)+(min weight of cellulose based polymer))]*100 = 0.5/(100+0.5+10+5+0.5)*100 = 0.43%
Regarding claim 4, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches wherein the additive (water-soluble carbodiimide compound, see [0023]) is contained in an amount of 0.01% by weight to 5% by weight (0.042% to 0.47% by weight of carbodiimide compound, see explanation/calculations below) based on the total weight of the solid content (see explanation/calculations below) of the slurry composition (slurry, see [0023]). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
Explanation/Calculations of Additive Weight: see [0020] CMC and therefore the cellulose-based polymer is present in 0.5-5 parts by mass per 100 parts by mass of active material, and carbodiimide compound is 0.05-0.5 parts by mass per 100 parts of active material. See [0034] where conductive auxiliary agent is contained in 1-10 parts by mass per 100 parts by mass of active material. See [0043] binder is contained in 5 parts by mass.
Maximum Carbodiimide Compound wt%: [(max weight of carbodiimide compound)/((Weight Active Material)+(max carbodiimide weight)+(min conductive agent weight)+(parts of binder)+(min weight of cellulose based polymer))]*100 = 0.5/(100+0.5+1+5+0.5)*100 = 0.47%
Minimum Carbodiimide Compound wt% = [(Min Weight of carbodiimide compound)/((Weight Active Material)+(min carbodiimide weight)+(max conductive agent weight)+(parts of binder)+(max weight of cellulose based polymer))]*100 = 0.05/(100+0.05+10+5+5)*100 = 0.042%
Regarding claim 5, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches wherein the solvent (water as dispersion medium, see [0023]) comprises one or more selected from an organic solvent and an aqueous solvent (see [0023] the dispersion medium is water), wherein the organic solvent comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), methoxy propyl acetate, butyl acetate, glycol acid, butyl ester, butyl glycol, methyl alkyl polysiloxane, alkylbenzene, propylene glycol, xylene, monophenyl glycol, aralkyl modified methyl alkyl polysiloxane, polyether modified dimethyl polysiloxane copolymer, polyacrylate, alkylbenzene, diisobutylketone, organically modified polysiloxane, butanol, isobutanol, modified polyacrylate, modified polyurethane, and polysiloxane modified polymer, and wherein the aqueous solvent (see [0023] the dispersion medium is water) comprises water (see [0023] the dispersion medium is water).
Regarding claim 8, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches a positive electrode (positive electrode, see [0016]) for a lithium secondary battery (secondary battery, see [0016], see [0031] where the secondary battery is a lithium-ion battery), the positive electrode (positive electrode, see [0016]) comprising a positive electrode current collector (positive electrode side current collector, see [0016]); and a positive electrode active material layer (positive electrode active material layer, see [0016]) formed on one surface (surfaces, see [0016]) of the positive electrode current collector (positive electrode side current collector, see [0016]), wherein the positive electrode active material layer (positive electrode active material layer, see [0016]) is formed of the slurry composition (slurry, see [0023], see [0018] where the slurry is applied to form the active material layer) of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 11, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches a lithium secondary battery (secondary battery, see [0031] where the active material includes lithium and therefore is a lithium battery, see [0043] gives a specific example using lithium based active material) comprising the positive electrode (positive electrode, see [0016]) according to claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above), a negative electrode (negative electrode, see [0016]), a separator (separator, see [0016]), and an electrolyte solution (electrolytic solution, see [0016]).
4. Claim(s) 6 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitazawa (Pub. No. JP 2014232708 A) in view of Wang et al. (Pub. No. CN 114078609 A) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Han et al. (Pub. No. US 20190386292 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Kitazawa in view of Wang fails to teach wherein the positive electrode active material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of elemental sulfur (S.sub.8), Li.sub.2S.sub.n(n≥1, n is an integer), organic sulfur compound and carbon-sulfur polymer [(C.sub.2S.sub.x).sub.n, 2.5≤x≤50, n≥2, x and n are integers].
However, Han teaches wherein the positive electrode active material (active material, see [0078] where the active material is for a positive electrode) comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of elemental sulfur (S.sub.8) (sulfur (s.sub.8), see [0078]), Li.sub.2S.sub.n(n≥1, n is an integer), organic sulfur compound (organic sulfur compound, see [0078]) and carbon-sulfur polymer [(C.sub.2S.sub.x).sub.n, 2.5≤x≤50, n≥2, x and n are integers].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the positive electrode active material of Kitazawa in view of Wang to include sulfur (s.sub.8) and/or an organic sulfur compound as taught by Han as an art effective equivalent positive electrode active material for the similar purpose of making a positive electrode for a secondary battery (see [0038] the positive electrode and therefore the positive electrode active material is for a lithium-sulfur battery, see [Fig. 4 shows cycling of the battery therefore it is a secondary battery). Further, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches that modifications can be made (see [0041] of Kitazawa).
Regarding claim 12, Kitazawa in view of Wang fails to teach wherein the lithium secondary battery is a lithium-sulfur secondary battery.
However, Han teaches wherein the lithium secondary battery (lithium-sulfur battery, see [0089], see Fig. 4 shows the battery cycling, therefore is a secondary battery) is a lithium-sulfur secondary battery (lithium-sulfur battery, see [0089], see Fig. 4 shows the battery cycling, therefore is a secondary battery) wherein the positive electrode active material (active material, see [0078] where the active material is for a positive electrode) comprises one or more of elemental sulfur (S.sub.8) (sulfur (s.sub.8), see [0078]) or an organic sulfur compound (organic sulfur compound, see [0078]) and wherein the negative electrode (negative electrode, see [0089]) comprises lithium metal (lithium metal, see [0095]) and wherein the positive electrode contains maghemite (maghemite, see [0039]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kitazawa in view of Wang such that the lithium-secondary battery is a lithium-sulfur battery by modifying the positive electrode active material comprises one or more of elemental sulfur (S.sub.8) or an organic sulfur compound and the negative electrode is lithium metal, and the positive electrode contains maghemite as taught by Han to have very high capacity, higher theoretical energy density, be eco-friendly, and exhibit low cost (see [0009] of Han) and further exhibit increasing discharge capacity and life (see [0032] of Han). Further, Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches that modifications can be made (see [0041] of Kitazawa).
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's arguments filed 06/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Kitazawa and Wang fail to teach the claimed thixotropic index range and that the thixotropic index range is not an inherent property. The Examiner respectfully disagrees as the combination of Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches a slurry composition with the same composition as the claimed invention including a positive electrode active material, a binder, an electrically conductive component, a thickener of LiCMC, and an additive of a carbodiimide therefore since Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches the same composition it would exhibit the same characteristics and would therefore inherently exhibit a thixotropic index which is within or overlaps the claimed range.
Further there is no showing of criticality of a specific active material, specific binder, specific electric conductive material, or a specific solvent leading to the claimed thixotropic index, therefore the range of thixotropic index of the slurry appear to rely on a combination of the LiCMC and carbodiimide compound which is present in the composition taught by Kitazawa in view of Wang.
Further, the specification provides no showing of criticality that a specific amount or weight of the active material, the binder, the electrically conductive material, the binder, or the solvent in the slurry composition contribute to the claimed thixotropic index, and it appears reliant on the specific combination of a LiCMC compound and a carbodiimide compound to provide the thixotropic index range which is taught by the combination of Kitazawa and Wang. Therefore it is the Examiner’s position that Kitazawa in view of Wang would inherently exhibit a thixotropic index range which falls within or overlaps the claimed range.
Further, Kitazawa in view of Wang teach the LiCMC in an amount of 0.43% to 4.5% by weight based on a total weight of solid content of the slurry (see math calculations in rejection of claim 3 above) and the carbodiimide compound added in 0.042% to 0.47% by weight based on a total solid content of the slurry (see math calculations in rejection of claim 4 above), however neither of these ranges has been shown to be critical for the slurry composition to exhibit the claimed thixotropic index range. Therefore it is the Examiner’s position that Kitazawa in view of Wang would inherently exhibit a thixotropic index range which falls within or overlaps the claimed range.
Regarding applicant’s arguments that Kitazawa in view of Wang fail to teach the specific interaction between LiCMC and carbodiimide compound to control thixotropy. This argument is moot as the claims are directed to a product claim not a method claim and therefore the prior art of record is not required to teach a method of interaction between the two compounds. Further, as the combination of Kitazawa in view of Wang teaches the same composition as claimed including LiCMC and a carbodiimide compound, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect a slurry composition with the same composition to exhibit the same characteristics including the same thixotropic index.
Regarding applicant’s argument that there is a lack of motivation to substitute LiCMC of Wang for CMC in Kitazawa because Wang teaches using LiCMC for an entirely different purpose. The Examiner respectfully disagrees as both Kitazawa and Wang teach using CMC and LiCMC as thickening agents and dispersant in lithium-ion batteries, therefore they are art effective equivalent thickeners/dispersants. Further, Wang gives motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to use LiCMC, in reducing cost, reducing discharge of organic solvents, and it is an environmentally friendly and non-toxic compound.
Conclusion
6. 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 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 DOUGLAS CALEB MARROQUIN whose telephone number is (571)272-0166. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5:00 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, Tiffany Legette 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.
/DOUGLAS C MARROQUIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights