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
In response to the amendments received in the Remarks on October, 14th, 2025:
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-12, 14-15, and 17-20 are pending in the current applications. Claims 1, 3, 12, 14, 19 and 20 have been amended, claims 2, 5, 13, and 16 have been cancelled.
Claim 1 has been amended to exclude “one or more transition metal chalcogenides” and include “a plurality of layers including a first transition metal sulfide layer interposed between a second, different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer and an individual particle of the plurality of active material particles, wherein the first transition metal sulfide layer is of a more sulfur-rich material composition as compared to a second, different-metal transition metal sulfide layer.”
Claim 3 has been amended to exclude “one or more transition metal chalcogenides” and include “first or second transition metal layers”.
Claim 12 has been amended to exclude “one or more transition metal chalcogenides” and include “a plurality of layers including a first transition metal sulfide layer interposed between a second, different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer and an individual particle of the plurality of active material particles, wherein the first transition metal sulfide layer is of a more sulfur-rich material composition as compared to a second, different-metal transition metal sulfide layer.”
Claim 14 has been amended to exclude “one or more transition metal chalcogenides” and include “first or second transition metal layers”.
Claim 19 has been amended to exclude “one or more transition metal chalcogenides” and include “a plurality of layers including a first transition metal sulfide layer interposed between a second, different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer and an individual particle of the plurality of active material particles, wherein the first transition metal sulfide layer is of a more sulfur-rich material composition as compared to a second, different-metal transition metal sulfide layer.”
Claim 20 has been amended to exclude “one or more transition metal chalcogenides” and include “first or second transition metal layers”.
Status of Objections and Rejections Pending from the Office Action of July 15th, 2025:
The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) have been overcome in view of the amendments received in the remarks on October 14th, 2025.
The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C 103 have been overcome in view of the amendments received in the remarks on October 14th, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed October 14th, 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 12 and 19 under Li et al (already on the record) and Keates et al (already on the record) and Li et al, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Li et al (already on the record) and Yoshino et al, US 20210020368 A1 and Keates et al (already on the record), Li et al, and Yoshino et al, US 20210020368 A1.
Yoshino et al teaches an electronic component comprising a base electrode layer including a first Ni, nickel, plated layer and an upper, or second, Ni plated layer [Yoshino, 0006], wherein the S, sulfur, concentration in the first Ni layer is not less than 1.5 times the S concentration in the second Ni layer [Yoshino, 0039].
Applicant argues that neither Li nor any of the other references teach or suggest the feature of the first and second coating layers are formed from different transition metal sulfides.
In response to applicants argument, Li teaches a silicon negative electrode material comprising a double coating layer structure of a transition metal sulfide and carbon [Li, 0010], while Li does not teach the second layer comprising a transition metal sulfide layer, Li teaches on the advantages of utilizing a transition metal sulfide as a layer on the negative electrode active material, such as better energy density, cycle life, inhibition of pole piece volume expansion and battery safety [Li, 0064], therefore, it would not be inconceivable to think a second layer, of a different transition metal sulfide, replacing the carbon layer.
Applicant should submit an argument under the heading “Remarks” pointing out disagreements with the examiner’s contentions. Applicant must also discuss the references applied against the claims, explaining how the claims avoid the references or distinguish from them.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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, 3-4, 6-11 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al, CN 111540889 A (already on the record) and Yoshino et al, US 20210020368 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Li discloses a lithium ion battery comprising a negative electrode sheet [Li, 0060], comprising a negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material, corresponding to the electrode compound layer, coated on one for both sides of the of the current collector comprising the double-layer coated silicon material [Li, 0047], wherein the active material is double-layered with a first and second layer, wherein the first layer is close to the active material particles and the second layer is far away [Li, 0013]. The first coating layer is a transition metal sulfide, including MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017]. However, Li is silent to teach on the second layer comprising a different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer, wherein the first transition metal sulfide layer is of a more sulfur-rich material composition as compared to the second, different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer.
Yoshino teaches on an electronic component, that may be a ceramic battery [Yoshino, 0017], including a base electrode layer on which a first Ni plated layer is provided on [Yoshino, 0035], that includes an S, sulfur, compound, wherein the concentration of S is not less than 5.2x1018 atoms/cm3 [Yoshino, 0036], and further comprises a second Ni plated layer on the first Ni plated layer [Yoshino, 0037], wherein the second Ni plated layer includes an S, sulfur compound, with a S concentration of S that is not less than 3.5x1018 atoms/cm3 [Yoshino, 0038]. Specifically, the S concentration in the first layer is not less than 1.5 times the S concentration in the second layer.
Yoshino and Li are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious, to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Li to include the second Ni-S layer as taught by Yoshino because such modification would result in an improved wettability on the surface of the coating [Yoshino, 0086], which in turn decreased the insulation resistant and improves the electronic component [Yoshino, 0087].
Therefore, it would have been obvious, to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Li to include the higher S concentration in the first layer as compared to the second layer as taught by Yoshino because such modification allows the first layer to act as a hydrogen trap and reduce the diffusion of hydrogen from the first layer into the body portion and reduce or prevent the degradation of electrical characteristics or the electronic component [Yoshino, 0089].
Regarding Claim 3, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the first coating layer is specifically selected from compounds including MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017].
Regarding Claim 4, modified Li teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the active material has a double-layer coating [Li, 0013], with a first layer thickness of between 0.1 nm to 10 nm [Li, 0018], but is silent to teach on the one more layer having a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% without an additive or reinforcement, or a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature. However, Li teaches the coating material layer of the claim, MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017], with an overlapping thickness, therefore, the material taught by Li should have the same properties, a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% without an additive or reinforcement and a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature, of the claim.
Moreover, according to MPEP 2112.01, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the plurality of active material particles is silicon nanoparticles [Li, 0014].
Regarding Claim 7, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein figure 1 of Li depicts the silicon nanoparticles active material as spherical with a particle size of 50 nm to 100 nm [Li, 0015].
Regarding Claim 8, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the average particle size of the silicon nanoparticles is between 50 nm to 100 nm [Li, 0015], and in example one, nano-silicon powder is stated to be used [Li, 0077].
Regarding Claim 9, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode current collector and the current collector is coated on one or both sides with the active material [Li, 0047].
Regarding Claim 10, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein a slurry is formed of the silicon active material and is then coated onto a copper foil, corresponding to a current collector, and then combined with a positive electrode sheet [Li, 0097].
Regarding Claim 11, modified Li discloses the battery of claim 1, wherein present invention is to prepare a battery cell with good safety [Li, 0010].
Regarding Claim 19, Li discloses a method for preparing the double-layer coated silicon material [Li, 0022], wherein the silicon material, corresponding to the active material of the claim, is first coated in the transition metal sulfide layer[Li, 0023], including MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017], and then coated in the material for the second layer [Li, 0024], whilst the negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material, corresponding to the electrode compound layer, is coated on one or both sides of the current collector comprising the double layer coated silicon material [Li, 0047]. However, Li is silent to teach on the second layer comprising a different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer, wherein the first transition metal sulfide layer is of a more sulfur-rich material composition as compared to the second, different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer.
Yoshino teaches on an electronic component, that may be a ceramic battery [Yoshino, 0017], including a base electrode layer on which a first Ni plated layer is provided on [Yoshino, 0035], that includes an S, sulfur, compound, wherein the concentration of S is not less than 5.2x1018 atoms/cm3 [Yoshino, 0036], and further comprises a second Ni plated layer on the first Ni plated layer [Yoshino, 0037], wherein the second Ni plated layer includes an S, sulfur compound, with a S concentration of S that is not less than 3.5x1018 atoms/cm3 [Yoshino, 0038]. Specifically, the S concentration in the first layer is not less than 1.5 times the S concentration in the second layer.
Yoshino and Li are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious, to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Li to include the second Ni-S layer as taught by Yoshino because such modification would result in an improved wettability on the surface of the coating [Yoshino, 0086], which in turn decreased the insulation resistant and improves the electronic component [Yoshino, 0087].
Therefore, it would have been obvious, to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Li to include the higher S concentration in the first layer as compared to the second layer as taught by Yoshino because such modification allows the first layer to act as a hydrogen trap and reduce the diffusion of hydrogen from the first layer into the body portion and reduce or prevent the degradation of electrical characteristics or the electronic component [Yoshino, 0089].
Regarding Claim 20, modified Li discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the first coating layer can be selected from compounds including MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al, CN 111540889 A (already on the record) and Yoshino et al, US 20210020368 A1, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of He et al, US 20200028178 A1 (already on the record).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Li teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the active material has a double-layer coating [Li, 0013], with a first layer thickness of between 0.1 nm to 10 nm [Li, 0018], but is silent to teach on the one more layer having a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% without an additive or reinforcement, or a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature.
While modified Li does not explicitly teach the proprieties of a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% or a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature, Li does not explicitly teach away from these properties, therefore it can be assumed the material of Li has a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% and a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature. Furthermore, He teaches a lithium sulfur battery, comprising an anode/cathode protective layer comprising a sulfonated elastomer, with a recoverable tensile strain from 2% to 500% and a lithium ion conductivity from 10-7 S/cm to 5 x 10-2 S/cm [He, 0019], sulfur/sulfur containing compounds are highly insulating, both electrically and ionically [He, 0006], wherein, the sulfonated elastomer layer helps maintain a good contact between an alkali metal layer and an electrolyte phase during the charge/discharge of the battery, which is also applicable in alkali-metal sulfur cells comprising lithiated silicon particles as an anode material, to maintain the lithium ion migration paths to operate a battery [He, 0093]. There are a finite number of identified predictable solutions for the material taught by Li, either it has the recoverable tensile strain and lithium ion conductivity, or it does not, therefore, it would be obvious to optimize the sulfur containing compounds of Li to have the properties taught by He to achieve an operating battery cell with good lithium ion migration pathways [He, 0093], and absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, where the material of Li comprises the desired tensile strength and lithium ion conductivity, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, see MPEP 2143 (E).
Claims 12, 14, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keates et al, US 20190006706 A1 (already on the record), Li et al, CN 111540889 A (already on the record) and Yoshino et al, US 20210020368 A1.
Regarding Claim 12, Keates teaches an electronic system comprising a processor and a battery port to receive the battery system connected to the processor [Keates, 0043], however, Keates is silent to teach the limitations directed to the battery.
Li discloses a lithium ion battery comprising a negative electrode sheet [Li, 0060], comprising a negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material, corresponding to the electrode compound layer, coated on one for both sides of the of the current collector comprising the double-layer coated silicon material [Li, 0047], wherein the active material is double-layered with a first and second layer, wherein the first layer is close to the active material particles and the second layer is far away [Li, 0013]. The first coating layer is a transition metal sulfide, including MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017].
Li and Keates are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to replace the battery of Keates with the battery of Li, because it is well-known to use batteries in electronic systems. Further a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results supports prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2143, I, B).
However, modified Keates is silent to teach on the second layer comprising a different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer, wherein the first transition metal sulfide layer is of a more sulfur-rich material composition as compared to the second, different-metal, transition metal sulfide layer.
Yoshino teaches on an electronic component, that may be a ceramic battery [Yoshino, 0017], including a base electrode layer on which a first Ni plated layer is provided on [Yoshino, 0035], that includes an S, sulfur, compound, wherein the concentration of S is not less than 5.2x1018 atoms/cm3 [Yoshino, 0036], and further comprises a second Ni plated layer on the first Ni plated layer [Yoshino, 0037], wherein the second Ni plated layer includes an S, sulfur compound, with a S concentration of S that is not less than 3.5x1018 atoms/cm3 [Yoshino, 0038]. Specifically, the S concentration in the first layer is not less than 1.5 times the S concentration in the second layer.
Yoshino and Keates are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious, to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Keates to include the second Ni-S layer as taught by Yoshino because such modification would result in an improved wettability on the surface of the coating [Yoshino, 0086], which in turn decreased the insulation resistant and improves the electronic component [Yoshino, 0087].
Therefore, it would have been obvious, to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Keates to include the higher S concentration in the first layer as compared to the second layer as taught by Yoshino because such modification allows the first layer to act as a hydrogen trap and reduce the diffusion of hydrogen from the first layer into the body portion and reduce or prevent the degradation of electrical characteristics or the electronic component [Yoshino, 0089].
Regarding Claim 14, modified Keates teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the first coating layer is specifically selected from compounds including MoS2, WS2 and TiS2 [Li, 0017].
Regarding Claim 17, modified Keates teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the plurality of active material particles is silicon nanoparticles [Li, 0014].
Regarding Claim 18, modified Keates teaches the system of claim 12, wherein figure 1 of Li depicts the silicon nanoparticles active material as spherical with a particle size of 50 nm to 100 nm [Li, 0015].
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keates et al, US 20190006706 A1 (already on the record), Li et al, CN 111540889 A (already on the record) and Yoshino et al, US 20210020368 A1, as applied to claim 12 above, in further view of He et al, US 20200028178 A1 (already on the record).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Keates teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the active material has a double-layer coating [Li, 0013], with a first layer thickness of between 0.1 nm to 10 nm [Li, 0018], but is silent to teach on the one more layer having a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% without an additive or reinforcement, or a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature.
While modified Keates does not explicitly teach the proprieties of a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% or a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature, modified Keates does not explicitly teach away from these properties, therefore it can be assumed the material of modified Keates has a recoverable tensile strain no less than 10% and a lithium ion conductivity no less than 10-5 S/cm at room temperature. Furthermore, He teaches a lithium sulfur battery, comprising an anode/cathode protective layer comprising a sulfonated elastomer, with a recoverable tensile strain from 2% to 500% and a lithium ion conductivity from 10-7 S/cm to 5 x 10-2 S/cm [He, 0019], sulfur/sulfur containing compounds are highly insulating, both electrically and ionically [He, 0006], wherein, the sulfonated elastomer layer helps maintain a good contact between an alkali metal layer and an electrolyte phase during the charge/discharge of the battery, which is also applicable in alkali-metal sulfur cells comprising lithiated silicon particles as an anode material, to maintain the lithium ion migration paths to operate a battery [He, 0093]. There are a finite number of identified predictable solutions for the material taught by modified Keates, either it has the recoverable tensile strain and lithium ion conductivity, or it does not, therefore, it would be obvious to optimize the sulfur containing compounds of modified Keates to have the properties taught by He to achieve an operating battery cell with good lithium ion migration pathways [He, 0093], and absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected from the finite number of identified, predictable solutions disclosed above, where the material of modified Keates comprises the desired tensile strength and lithium ion conductivity, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so, see MPEP 2143 (E).
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 LILIAN ALICE ODOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 5PM 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, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/LILIAN ALICE ODOM/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722