Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9, as filed 10 March 2023, are examined herein.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sonobe (US 20150125746 A1) in view of Nakamura (US 20040077814 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Sonobe teaches a binder composition for a non-aqueous secondary battery negative electrode comprising a particulate binder (abstract: binder resin) and a dispersion medium, ([0101] medium for adjusting the viscosity … dispersing agent)
Sonobe does not explicitly teach wherein the particulate binder has a cross-linked structure through bonding via sulfur, however Sonobe teaches [0026] “copolymerizable monomers having crosslinkable
and reactive functional groups can also be added.” And [0036-0038] “other additives may include … thiuram-based compounds. [0038] “the amount of additive … 0 to 5 parts by mass of the copolymerizable monomers.”)
Nakamura, in the field of conjugated diene rubber gels, discloses [0077] a binder material having [0035] a particle size range of 5 to 1000 nm, and at [0050] the use of chain transfer agents, including thiuram disulfides, at 0.05 to 3 parts by weight. (Examiner notes that thiuram is an organosulfur compound). As shown in Table 3, the amount of chain transfer agent influences stickiness of the binder material and [0037] the toluene swelling index. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, as of before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to select a thiuram disulfide as one of several chain transfer agent for the binder of Sonobe, with a reasonable expectation of successfully improving stickiness and the toluene swelling index of the binder. The person of ordinary skill would then be motivated to optimize the amount of thiuram disulfide with a reasonable expectation of improving stickiness and the toluene swelling index, thus rendering obvious a sulfur cross-linked structure.
Sonobe discloses [0033] the copolymer is dispersed in solvent and [0040] dispersing agents. Sonobe at [0030] discloses the number average particle size of the obtained polymer (latex) is preferably 50 to 500 nm, further preferably 70 to 400 nm from the viewpoint in that the strength and flexibility of the obtained negative electrode is improved.
Sonobe is silent on sedimentation and does not teach an amount of sediment obtained upon centrifugation of the binder composition for a non-aqueous secondary battery negative electrode at a rotation speed of 110,000 rpm is less than 5.0 parts by mass when an amount of all solid content contained in the binder composition for a non-aqueous secondary battery negative electrode is taken to be 100 parts by mass. The chemistry of the claimed binder composition has been rendered obvious Sonobe in view of Nakamura, as set forth above. The gel content of Sonobe’s binder resin (abstract: 70 to 98%) falls within the claimed range of 40% to 99.5%. Because the chemistry and gel content of the claimed invention have been rendered obvious, therefore the binder composition of Sonobe in view of Nakamura necessarily meets the sediment limitation.
The optimized amount of thiuram disulfide as set forth above also renders obvious the limitation of claim 2, wherein a proportion constituted by sulfur among all solid content is 0. 1 mass% or more.
Regarding claim 3, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches wherein the particulate binder includes an aliphatic conjugated diene monomer unit. ([0023] examples of the conjugated diene-based monomers include isoprene, 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene, 1,3-pentadiene and piperylene.)
Regarding claim 4, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches wherein the particulate binder has (abstract) a gel content of 70 to 98%, which falls within the claimed range of 40% to 99.5%.
Regarding claim 5, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches a slurry composition for a non-aqueous secondary battery negative electrode comprising: a negative electrode active material; and the binder composition for a non-aqueous secondary battery negative electrode according to any one of claim1. ([0035])
Regarding claim 6, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches wherein the negative electrode active material includes a silicon-based negative electrode active material. ([0087])
Regarding claim 7, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches wherein a proportion constituted by the silicon-based negative electrode active material among the negative electrode active material is not less than 1 mass% and not more than 50 mass%. (Table 3)
Regarding claim 8, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches a negative electrode for a non-aqueous secondary battery comprising a negative electrode mixed material layer formed using the slurry composition for a non-aqueous secondary battery negative electrode according to claim 5. ([0121-0122])
Regarding claim 9, Sonobe in view of Nakamura teaches all of the limitations as set forth above. Sonobe further teaches non-aqueous secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a separator, and an electrolyte solution, wherein the negative electrode is the negative electrode for a non-aqueous secondary battery according to claim 8. ([0129])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAIRE A RUTISER whose telephone number is (571)272-1969. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM M-F.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at 571-270-1292. 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.
CLAIRE A. RUTISER
Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/C.A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 12/30/2025