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
Claim 9 is cancelled.
Claims 11-16 and 22-25 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-8, 10, 17-21, 26-28 are rejected.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10, 17-18, 21, 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhamu et al. (US 20190067732 A1, “Zhamu”) in view of Tatsumi et al. (US 20100196761 A1, “Tatsumi”).
Regarding claim 1, Zhamu discloses a composite cathode material comprising a gel polymer electrolyte and particles of a cathode material, the particles of the cathode material being arranged in the gel polymer electrolyte (see abstract “cathode active material” & “polymer gel electrolyte” & “dispersed in” & see [0172] “composite cathode”, see [0200] “LiCoO2 nanoparticles as the cathode active material”). Regarding the limitation wherein the particles of the cathode material arranged in the gel polymer electrolyte have an average particle size of less than 0.1 µm, Zhamu does not explicitly disclose an average particle size of less than 0.1 µm.
Tatsumi teaches particle size (see [0034] “average particle size of primary particles” & “average particle size of primary particles” & “further preferably at least 0.05 µm” which overlaps the claimed range). Tatsumi teaches LiCoO2 (see [0003] “lithium cobalt composite oxide (LiCoO2) as a cathode active material” & see [0002] “as a cathode active material for such a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, a composite oxide of lithium and a transition metal (which may be referred to also as a lithium-containing composite oxide in the present invention) such as LiCoO2” & see abstract “A transition metal compound granule serving as a raw material for a positive electrode material for a lithium ion secondary battery, which comprises particles containing at least one element selected from the group consisting of nickel, cobalt and manganese and having an average particle size of the primary particles being at most 1 µm”).
Zhamu and Tatsumi are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely gel polymer electrolyte (see Tatsumi [0074]).
Tatsumi teaches a range of at least 0.05 µm, which overlaps the claimed range of less than 0.1 µm. 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)'.
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 “at least 0.05 µm”, as suggested by Tatsumi (see [0034]) into the composite cathode material of Zhamu because doing so is preferable, as suggested by Tatsumi (see [0034]).
Regarding claim 2, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and regarding the limitation wherein the particles of the cathode material are comprised in the composite material in an amount of at least 50 wt% of the composite cathode material, on a dry weight basis, Zhamu discloses in abstract “30% to 85% by volume of a cathode active material” which overlaps the claimed range of at least 50 wt%.
Tatsumi teaches in [0082] “to obtain a powder of lithium cobalt composite oxide” & see [0083] “LiCoO2” & “were mixed in a weight ratio of 90/5/5” & 90 lies within the claimed range of at least 50 wt%.
Regarding claim 3, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the particles of the cathode material are arranged in the gel polymer electrolyte such that they are substantially homogenously dispersed throughout the gel polymer electrolyte (see [0088] “The pre-incorporation of electrolyte (e.g. non-aqueous liquid electrolyte or polymer gel electrolyte) in the wet electrodes prior to being laminated into a cell enables and ensures good wetting and mixing of active materials with the electrolyte, thereby avoiding the formation of dry spots (electrolyte-deficient spots) in the cell” and mixing reads on homogeneously dispersed).
Regarding claim 5, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and further disclose wherein the gel polymer electrolyte comprises polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) (see [0074] “cathode layer is composed of particles of a cathode active material” & “PVDF”).
Regarding claim 6, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the gel polymer electrolyte comprises LiPF6 (see [0136] “LiPF6”).
Regarding claim 7, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the gel polymer electrolyte comprises propylene carbonate (PC) (see [0171] “propylene carbonate (PC)”).
Regarding claim 8, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the particles of the cathode material comprise lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2) (see [0153] “cathode active materials” & “LiCoO2 particles”).
Regarding claim 10, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the composite cathode material is porous (see [0122] “cathode active material” & “porous”).
Regarding claim 17, Zhamu discloses the cathode material of claim 1 and further discloses a laminate electrochemical cell (see [0026] “laminated electrochemical cell”) comprising: an anode layer; and a composite cathode layer (see abstract “anode electrode” & “cathode active material” & “depositing” & “onto a surface” which reads on layer).
Regarding claim 18, Zhamu discloses the laminate electrochemical cell of claim 17 and further discloses further comprising a gel polymer electrolyte layer arranged between the anode layer and the composite cathode layer (see abstract “polymer gel electrolyte” & “depositing” & “onto a surface of a cathode current collector to form a cathode electrode” reads on composite cathode layer; see [0088] “layer of counter electrode 316” & “multi-layer laminate” & “anode and a cathode” & see FIG. 1(C) & see [0086] “308 wet active material mixture”).
Regarding claim 21, Zhamu discloses the laminate electrochemical cell of claim 17 and further discloses wherein the anode layer comprises graphite (see [0022] “anode layer” & see [0057] “electrode layer” & “graphite”).
Regarding claim 26, Zhamu discloses a battery stack (see [0078] “stack”) comprising a plurality of laminate electrochemical cells, each cell comprising: a first current collector (see [0026] “laminated electrochemical cell”; see abstract “anode electrode” & “cathode active material” & “cathode current collector”); a composite cathode layer arranged on a surface of the first current collector, the composite cathode layer comprising a gel polymer electrolyte and particles of a cathode material, the particles of the cathode material being arranged in the gel polymer electrolyte (see [0025] “combining the cathode electrode or a portion thereof and the wet anode electrode or a portion thereof to form an electrochemical cell”; see abstract “cathode active material” & “polymer gel electrolyte” & “dispersed in”; see [0153] “wet anode active mixture and cathode active mixtures were delivered to surfaces of graphite foams for forming an anode layer and a cathode layer”); a second current collector (see [0026] “anode current collector”); and an anode layer arranged on a surface of the second current collector (see [0153] “wet anode active mixture and cathode active mixtures were delivered to surfaces of graphite foams for forming an anode layer and a cathode layer”).
Regarding the limitation wherein the particles of the cathode material have an average particle size of less than 0.1 µm, Zhamu does not explicitly disclose an average particle size of less than 0.1 µm.
Tatsumi teaches particle size (see [0034] “average particle size of primary particles” & “average particle size of primary particles” & “further preferably at least 0.05 µm” which overlaps the claimed range). Tatsumi teaches LiCoO2 (see [0003] “lithium cobalt composite oxide (LiCoO2) as a cathode active material” & see [0002] “as a cathode active material for such a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, a composite oxide of lithium and a transition metal (which may be referred to also as a lithium-containing composite oxide in the present invention) such as LiCoO2” & see abstract “A transition metal compound granule serving as a raw material for a positive electrode material for a lithium ion secondary battery, which comprises particles containing at least one element selected from the group consisting of nickel, cobalt and manganese and having an average particle size of the primary particles being at most 1 µm”).
Zhamu and Tatsumi are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely gel polymer electrolyte (see Tatsumi [0074]).
Tatsumi teaches a range of at least 0.05 µm, which overlaps the claimed range of less than 0.1 µm. 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)'.
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 “at least 0.05 µm”, as suggested by Tatsumi (see [0034]) into the composite cathode material of Zhamu because doing so is preferable, as suggested by Tatsumi (see [0034]).
Regarding claim 27, Zhamu discloses the battery stack of claim 26 and further discloses wherein the plurality of electrochemical cells comprises a first electrochemical cell and a second electrochemical cell, configured such that the first current collector of the first cell is also the first current collector of the second cell (see [0026] “multi-layer laminated electrochemical cell” & “anode current collector” & “cathode current collector”).
Regarding claim 28, Zhamu discloses the laminate electrochemical cell of claim 17 and further discloses an electrically-powered device (see [0004] “energy storage device for electric vehicle (EV)”).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhamu et al. (US 20190067732 A1, “Zhamu”) in view of Tatsumi et al. (US 20100196761 A1, “Tatsumi”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhamu et al. (US 20190051904 A1, “Zhamu2”).
Regarding claim 4, Zhamu discloses the composite cathode material of claim 1. Zhamu does not explicitly disclose wherein the gel polymer electrolyte is obtainable from a UV-crosslinkable gel polymer electrolyte precursor.
Zhamu2 teaches “UV irradiated” & “to produce a gelled product” (see [0133]) & teaches “high-elasticity polymer” (see [0140]) & “cast onto a glass surface to form several films which were polymerized and cured to obtain cross-linked polymers having different degrees of cross-linking” (see [0141]). Zhamu2 teaches “overall the high-elasticity polymer protection strategy provides the most effective protection, enabling not only the highest reversible capacity but also the most stable cycling behavior” (see [0143]).
Zhamu and Zhamu2 are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely polymer gel electrolyte (see Zhamu2 [0065]).
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 UV crosslinkable gel polymer as suggested by Zhamu2 (see [0133] & [0141]) into the composite cathode material of Zhamu because doing so provides protection and “most stable cycling behavior” as suggested by Zhamu2 (see [1043]).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhamu et al. (US 20190067732 A1, “Zhamu”) in view of Tatsumi et al. (US 20100196761 A1, “Tatsumi”) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 20190348705 A1, “Chen”).
Regarding claim 19 and claim 20, Zhamu discloses the laminate electrochemical cell of claim 17. Zhamu does not explicitly disclose further comprising a ceramic layer arranged between the anode layer and the composite cathode layer, as required by claim 19 nor wherein the ceramic layer comprises lithium phosphorous oxy-nitride (LiPON), as required by claim 20.
Chen teaches “ceramic material can be deposited onto the solid-state electrolyte material sheet” & “a LiPON layer can be used to separate the solvent electrolyte from the anode 120 and the cathode 110” (see [0073]). Chen teaches “the deposition of such a glass or ceramic coating onto the solid-state electrolyte material sheet may prevent solvent diffusion, e.g., solvent anolyte diffusion, through the solid-state electrolyte material sheet” (see [0073]).
Zhamu and Chen are analogous to the current invention because they are related to the same field of endeavor, namely gel polymer electrolyte (see Chen [0071]).
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 ceramic layer as suggested by Chen (see [0073]) into the laminate electrochemical cell of Zhamu because doing so “prevent[s] solvent diffusion”, as suggested by Chen (see [0073]).
Further regarding claim 20, Zhamu does not explicitly disclose LiPON.
Chen teaches “LiPON layer” & “gel polymer electrolyte sheet” (see [0073]) & “the diffusion preventing material can include lithium phosphorus oxy-nitride (LiPON)” (see [0074]).
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 LiPON as suggested by Chen (see [0073]) into the laminate electrochemical cell of Zhamu because doing so prevents diffusion, as suggested by Chen (see [0074]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Applicant’s arguments on P10 “Tatsumi does not teach or suggest “particles of the cathode material arranged in the gel polymer electrolyte having an average particles size of less than 0.1 µm”.” is unpersuasive because Tatsumi teaches particle size (see [0034] “average particle size of primary particles” & “average particle size of primary particles” & “further preferably at least 0.05 µm” which overlaps the claimed range).
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 “at least 0.05 µm”, as suggested by Tatsumi (see [0034]) into the composite cathode material of Zhamu because doing so is preferable, as suggested by Tatsumi (see [0034]).
Conclusion
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 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
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights