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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/20/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/12/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
3. Applicant’s amendments with respect to claims filed on 07/20/2026 have been entered. Claims 1 and 4-10 remain pending in this application and are currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (Pub. No. US 20150333359 A1) in view of Nakayama et al. (Pub. No. US 20220263122 A1 ) in view of Otohata (Pub. No. US 20190245249 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches an electrode assembly (structure in Fig. 2C, see [0052]) comprising: an electrode structure (101/102/103, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) including a positive electrode (101, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) a negative electrode (102, Fig. 2C, see [0052]); and polymer layers (110a/110b, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) at both ends of the electrode assembly (structure in Fig. 2C, see [0052], see in Fig. 2C where the top end and bottom end of the electrode assembly includes 110a and 110b respectively), and wherein a thickness of each of the polymer layers (110a/110b, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) is 1000 μm or less (greater than 15 microns, see Claim 2 wherein the cushioning material has a larger thickness than the separator, see [0049] where a thickness of the separator is 15 to 30 microns, further see [0104] provides a specific example of a cushioning layer with a thickness of 300 microns which falls within the claimed range, see [0106] the embodiment can be combined with embodiment 1 and the cushioning material is a sheet like shape), but fails to teach a solid electrolyte layer between the positive electrode and the negative electrode and wherein a yield strength of the polymer layer is 5 MPa or more and 20 MPa or less, and wherein a thickness of each of the polymer layers satisfies Equation 1 below: Thickness (μm)≥2.5(μm.Math.cm.sup.2/mAh.Math.number)×X(mAh/cm.sup.2)×Y(number) [Equation 1] wherein X represents a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode, and Y represents a number of positive electrodes in the electrode assembly.
However, Takahashi teaches wherein each of the polymer layers (110a/110b, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) is formed of rubber (styrene-butadiene rubber, see [0013] where the cushioning material is styrene-butadiene rubber).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Takahashi such that the cushioning material of 110a and 110b is made of styrene-butadiene rubber as Takahashi teaches it is known in the art to do so. Further Takahashi teaches that modifications can be made (see [0034] of Takahashi).
Therefore Takahashi teaches wherein a yield strength of each of the polymer layers (110a/110b, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) is 5 MPa or more and 20 MPa or less (12-20 MPa, as evidenced by *Matmake, the Yield Tensile Strength of SBR is 12-20 MPa).
Takahashi fails to teach a solid electrolyte layer between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and wherein a thickness of each of the polymer layers satisfies Equation 1 below: Thickness (μm)≥2.5(μm.Math.cm.sup.2/mAh.Math.number)×X(mAh/cm.sup.2)×Y(number) [Equation 1] wherein X represents a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode, and Y represents a number of positive electrodes in the electrode assembly.
However, Nakayama teaches an electrode structure (battery, see [0013]) including a positive electrode (positive electrode layer, see [0013]), a negative electrode (negative electrode layer, see [0013]), and a solid electrolyte layer (solid electrolyte layer, see [0013]) between the positive electrode (positive electrode layer, see [0013]) and the negative electrode (negative electrode layer, see [0013]), wherein the solid electrolyte layer (solid electrolyte layer, see [0013]) comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (sulfide solid electrolyte, see [0040]) having an argyrodite structure (argyrodite-type crystal phase, see [0040]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Takahashi substitute the separator and electrolytic solution at taught by Takahashi for a solid electrolyte layer comprising a sulfide-based solid electrolyte having an argyrodite-type crystal structure placed in between the positive electrode 101 and the negative electrode 102 as taught by Nakayama to improve safety and durability (see [0003] of Nakayama). Further Takahashi teaches that modifications can be made (see [0034] of Takahashi) and teaches the electrolytic solution and separator can be replaced with a solid electrolyte (see [0061] of Takahashi).
Takahashi in view of Nakayama fails to teach wherein a thickness of each of the polymer layers satisfies Equation 1 below: Thickness (μm)≥2.5(μm.Math.cm.sup.2/mAh.Math.number)×X(mAh/cm.sup.2)×Y(number) [Equation 1] wherein X represents a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode, and Y represents a number of positive electrodes in the electrode assembly.
However, Otohata teaches wherein X (3 to 15 mAh/cm.sup.2, see [0094]) represents a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode (cathode, see [0094]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Takahashi in view of Nakayama such that the capacity per unit are of the positive electrode is 2 to 15 mAh/cm.sup.2 as taught by Otohata for safety (see [0094] of Otohata) and favorably suppress short circuit (see [0016] of Otohata). Further Takahashi in view of Nakayama teaches that modifications can be made (see [0034] of Takahashi).
Therefore Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches wherein a thickness of each of the polymer layers (110a/110b, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) satisfies Equation 1 below: Thickness (μm) (greater than 15 microns/300 microns, see Claim 2, see [0049], see [0104] provides a specific example of a cushioning layer with a thickness of 300 microns) ≥2.5(μm.Math.cm.sup.2/mAh.Math.number)×X(mAh/cm.sup.2) (3 to 15 mAh/cm.sup.2, see [0094] of Otohata, see modifications above) ×Y(number) (1, Fig. 2C, see there is only one positive electrode, see math calculations below) [Equation 1] wherein X (3 to 15 mAh/cm.sup.2, see [0094] of Otohata, see modifications above) represents a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode (101, Fig. 2C, see [0052]), and Y (1, Fig. 2C, see where there is only 1 positive electrode) represents a number of positive electrodes (101, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) in the electrode assembly (structure in Fig. 2C, see [0052]).
*Additional Evidence provided by Matmake 2024, wherein the table provided shows the inherent properties of SBR where the inherent known yield tensile strength of SBR is 12-20 MPa. The Examiner would like to note although Matmake is from after the effective filing date of the present invention, it is being used only to show an inherent property of SBR, and further the references provided by Matmake are from 2018 and earlier.
Regarding claim 4, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches wherein the polymer layer (110a/110b, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) is formed of rubber (styrene-butadiene rubber, see [0013] where the cushioning material is styrene-butadiene rubber) or silicone resin.
Regarding claim 5, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches wherein the solid electrolyte layer (solid electrolyte layer, see [0013] of Nakayama, see modifications above) comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (sulfide solid electrolyte, see [0040] of Nakayama, see modifications above), an oxide-based solid electrolyte, a polymer-based solid electrolyte, or two or more thereof.
Regarding claim 6, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches wherein the solid electrolyte layer (solid electrolyte layer, see [0013] of Nakayama, see modifications above) comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (sulfide solid electrolyte, see [0040] of Nakayama, see modifications above) having an argyrodite structure (argyrodite-type crystal phase, see [0040] of Nakayama, see modifications above).
Regarding claim 8, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches wherein the electrode assembly (structure in Fig. 2C, see [0052]) comprises a structure in which 1 to 100 (1 structure, see Fig. 2C where this example shows one electrode structure is formed of stacked plates, further see [0038] where there is at least one of each 101/102/103, therefore it can be more than one) of the electrode structures (101/102/103, Fig. 2C, see [0052]) are stacked.
Regarding claim 9, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata fails to teach wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material, a sulfide-based solid electrolyte, an electrically conductive material, and a binder.
However, Nakayama further teaches wherein the positive electrode (positive electrode layer, see [0013]) comprises a positive electrode active material (positive-electrode active material, see [0067]), a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (sulfide solid electrolyte, see [0066-0067]), an electrically conductive material (conductive auxiliary agent, see [0067]), and a binder (binder, see [0067]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata such that the positive electrode is formed of a positive-electrode active material including a sulfide solid electrolyte, a conductive auxiliary agent, and a binder as further taught by Nakayama as an art effective equivalent composition for a positive electrode to improve safety and durability (see [0003] of Nakayama). Further Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches that modifications can be made (see [0034] of Takahashi), and further Takahashi teaches wherein the battery can be entirely solidified (see [0061] of Takahashi).
Regarding claim 10, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches the electrode assembly (structure in Fig. 2C, see [0052]) according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to teach in the embodiment of Fig. 2C a pouch-type secondary battery comprising the electrode assembly.
However in a different embodiment, Takahashi teaches a pouch-type secondary battery (100, Fig. 1A, see [0038], see in Fig. 1A the battery is enclosed by an exterior body 107 which is a pouch type enclosure) comprising the electrode assembly (see Fig. 1A and [0038] the battery includes 101, 102, and 103 as well as a cushioning material).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the embodiment of Fig. 2C of Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata to be enclosed by an exterior body making a pouch type secondary battery as taught by the embodiment of Fig. 1A of Takahashi. Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art. Further Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches that modifications can be made (see [0034] of Takahashi).
6. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (Pub. No. US 20150333359 A1) in view of Nakayama et al. (Pub. No. US 20220263122 A1 ) in view of Otohata (Pub. No. US 20190245249 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (Pub. No. US 20240055650 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata fails to teach wherein the solid electrolyte layer comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of Li.sub.2S—P.sub.2S.sub.5, Li.sub.6PS.sub.5Cl, Li.sub.10GeP.sub.2S.sub.12, Li.sub.3PS.sub.4, and Li.sub.7P.sub.3S.sub.11.
However, Wang teaches wherein the solid electrolyte layer (sulfide composite electrolyte, see [0008]) comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of Li.sub.2S—P.sub.2S.sub.5, Li.sub.6PS.sub.5Cl (see Example 2, and [0050] where the sulfide composite electrolyte comprises Li.SUB.6.PS.SUB.5.Cl), Li.sub.10GeP.sub.2S.sub.12, Li.sub.3PS.sub.4, and Li.sub.7P.sub.3S.sub.11.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata such that the solid electrolyte layer is formed using Li.sub.6PS.sub.5Cl as taught by Wang to exhibit stability, flexibility, and desirable electrochemical performance (see [0007] of Wang). Further Takahashi in view of Nakayama in view of Otohata teaches that modifications can be made (see [0034] of Takahashi).
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 4-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
8. 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