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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
The previous rejection of claims 3, 6, 9 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, has been withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakurai et al. (US 20190044118).
Regarding claims 1, 3-5, Sakurai discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery porous layer ([0059] heat-resistant adhesive porous layer) including: a resin containing an amide bond ([0061] para-aromatic polyamide); and a filler ([0094]) , the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery porous layer having a porosity of not less than 75% ([0107] 80%), wherein the filler contains a filler A having an average particle diameter of not more than 0.04 µm, and a filler B having an average particle diameter of not less than 0.1 µm ([0096] filler is a combination of two or more kinds thereof; [0095] average particle size is 0.01 µm-5 µm which overlaps with the claimed range). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05
Regarding claim 6, Sakurai discloses wherein the filler containing the filler A and the filler B contains a filler having a spherical shape ([0098]).
Regarding claim 7, Sakurai discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery separator (abstract) comprising: a porous film containing a polyolefin-based resin as a main component ([0039]); and the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery porous layer according to claim 1 formed on one surface or both surfaces of the porous film (abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Sakurai discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery member comprising: a positive electrode ([0154]); the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery separator according to claim 7 (abstract); and a negative electrode ([0154]); the positive electrode, the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery separator, and the negative electrode being disposed in this order ([0154]).
Regarding claim 11, Sakurai discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery ([0154]) comprising the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery separator according to claim 7 ([0154]).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakurai et al. (US 20190044118) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Hayakawa et al. (US20120258349).
Regarding claim 2, Sakurai discloses where the filler is a combination of two or more kinds there of ([0096]) but does not explicitly disclose where the filler A is contained in an amount of not less than 10% by weight and the filler B is contained in an amount of not less than 30% by weight with respect to a total weight of the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery porous layer.
Hayakawa discloses a separator for a non-aqueous electrolyte battery ([0002]). Hayakawa further discloses where the porosity of the layer is controlled by the pore diameter and or the weight ratio of the inorganic particles to the binder ([0031]).
As the porosity and efficiency of operation are variables that can be modified, among others, by adjusting said filler amount of the heat-resistant porous layer, with said porosity and operating efficiency both changing as the ratio of the filler with respect to the total weight is changed, the precise amount of filler A and filler B would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed filler A and filler B amount cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have optimized, by routine experimentation, amount of filler A and filler B in the heat-resistant porous layer of Sakurai to obtain the desired balance between the porosity and the operation efficiency (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/16/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant traverses the rejection on the grounds that the present claims incorporate a combination of both small and large-particle sized filler and exhibits a high porosity. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., combination of both small and large-particle sized filler and exhibits a high porosity) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The claims currently only require the difference in particle size which has been addressed in the previous Office Action and above. The arguments pertaining to both the particle sizes and high porosity (not less than 75%) will be considered when the limitations are present in the claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SUSAN D LEONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1487. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 8am-4pm, 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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at (571) 272-2450. 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.
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights