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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN110571406A) in view of Jo (KR20000028032A) and Matsubara (previously-cited US2004/0072076A1).
Wang discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed are crossed out below):
Claim 5. A method for forming an electrode for a battery, the method comprising:
coating an active material composition (second slurry; [0032], but first see [0031] and [0032]) including a graphite particles (see [0031] and [0032]), a binder (PVDF; see [0031] and [0032]) and a solvent (NMP; see [0031] and [0032]) on a current collector (see [0036]);
wherein the graphite particles include a bulk particles having an average diameter of 1 µm to 30 µm (see “1 micrometer” in [0032]) and fine particles having an average diameter that is equal to or more than 0.05 µm and less than 1 µm (see “0.1 micrometer” in [0031]), with a weight ratio of the bulk particles to the fine particles of 10:1 to 3:1 (see “9:1” in [0033]).
Wang does not disclose the limitations crossed out above.
Matsubara discloses a method for forming an electrode for a battery, wherein an active material composition (1) including graphite particles, a binder, and a solvent (see [0091]) is coated on a current collector (2). The solvent can be NMP (see [0095]). Matsubara teaches applying a magnetic field (using magnets 4; see Fig. 2 and [0096]) to the active material composition coated on the current collector to align the graphite particles (see [0098]), for enhanced discharge capacity and cycle life (see abstract).
Jo teaches an active material for an electrode for a battery, comprising graphite particles, PVDF binder, and the solvent can be NMP. A current collector coated with the active material is introduced into a freeze-drying process to volatilize the solvent. See last two paragraphs on second page, and the entire third page except the last two paragraphs.
In view of the teachings of Matsubara, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use a magnetic field to align the graphite particles for each of the slurries coated onto the current collector (see Wang, [0036]), for the same benefits as disclosed by Matsubara. Further, in view of the teachings of Ho, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use freeze drying (which is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to include freezing and subliming) to volatilize the NMP solvent, as a choice among conventional techniques for removing the solvent, with predictable results.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Jo and Matsubara, further in view of APA (admitted prior art).
Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the graphite can be natural or artificial graphite (see [0017]).
In the previous office action the examiner took official notice of the fact pyrolytic graphite is obtained by thermal decomposition. This statement is taken to be admitted prior art because applicant failed to traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice. See MPEP 2144.03(C).
Since Wang teaches the graphite could be artificial graphite, and APA teaches a known type of artificial graphite, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use pyrolytic graphite as the graphite used in the process of modified Wang.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 5 and 6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 LIVIUS R CAZAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday noon-8:30 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/LIVIUS R. CAZAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights