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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/13/2026 has been entered.
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 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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Senoue (US 20190334178 A1) in view of Tanaka et al. (US 20210028436 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Senoue teaches a solid-state battery (paragraph 0002, all-solid-state battery) comprising:
a plurality of (i) a positive electrode layer including a positive electrode active material layer and a positive electrode current collector layer (Senoue, positive electrode 20 has a current collector 22 and an active material layer 24, Fig. 3; paragraph 0032, the positive electrode includes a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active material layer)
(ii) a negative electrode layer including a negative electrode active material layer and a negative electrode current collector layer, and (Senoue, negative electrode 40 has a current collector 42 and an active material layer 44, Fig. 3 and Fig. 5; paragraph 0032, the negative electrode includes a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer)
(iii) a solid electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode layer and the negative electrode layer (Senoue, Paragraph 0030; Fig. 3, separator layers (solid electrolyte layers) being interposed between the positive and negative electrodes)
wherein the solid electrolyte layer is longer than the positive electrode layer and the negative electrode layer in a first direction perpendicular to a stacking direction (Senoue, Paragraph 0067; Fig. 3, The solid electrolyte 30 has the protruding portion 33 protruding outward beyond the opposed portions of the positive and negative electrodes)
the solid electrolyte layer is constituted by a solid electrolyte sheet including a porous substrate having cavities, and a solid electrolyte which is filled in at least a part of the porous substrate (Senoue, If something is porous it must have cavities by default, Paragraph 0063; Fig. 3, the separator layer is composed of various solid electrolyte particles 34 and a base material 32 having a porous structure, Paragraph 0091 also describes the separator as a sheet)
the solid electrolyte sheet has a facing portion that faces the positive electrode active material layer and the negative electrode active material layer (Senoue, Paragraph 0030; Fig. 3, separator layers (solid electrolyte layers) being interposed between the positive and negative electrodes)
and a non-facing portion located on an outer side of the facing portion in the first direction where the non-facing portion has a smaller thickness than the facing portion (Senoue, Paragraph 0067; Fig. 3, The solid electrolyte 30 has the protruding portion 33 protruding outward beyond the opposed portions of the positive and negative electrodes)
a content percentage of the solid electrolyte in the non-facing portion is lower than a content percentage of the solid electrolyte in the facing portion (Senoue, Paragraph 0067; Fig. 3, The protruding portion 33 protruding outward beyond the opposed portions of the positive and negative electrodes (laminated portions of the positive and negative electrode) is configured only of the base material 32 and does not hold the solid electrolyte particles.)
and end portions in the first direction of the non-facing portions of the neighboring solid electrolyte layers in the stacking direction are bonded. (Senoue, Paragraph 0024; Fig. 3, this view schematically shows a state after the end portions of the base material are thermally fused to form a dense structure portion).
Senoue further teaches a second direction in view of the dimensions of the constituent parts, a 2 cm x 2 cm positive electrode and 3 cm x 3 cm negative electrode are used (Senoue, paragraph 0090-0092) and placed in the center of the 4 cm x 4 cm electrode layer.
Senoue teaches both a positive and negative current collector which is covered on both sides by their respective active material layers forming a sandwich (Senoue, 0032) as well as the negative current collectors of two laminated bodies being laminated together (Senoue 0092). Senoue mentions laminating current collectors together (Senoue 0092) but is silent to how as well as the current collectors extending past the overlapping portion in a second direction.
Tanaka teaches a non-aqueous secondary battery where both the positive and negative electrode tabs of the various electrodes can be bundled respectively and taken out through the outer casing body as respective electrode current collecting plates on opposite sides (Tanaka 0115). As Senoue already teaches a second direction which is identical to the first direction in view of the square sheets used, the simple rearrangement of parts to have the electrode current collecting plates in a second direction is obvious, See MPEP 2144.04.VI.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use the battery of Senoue and have both positive and negative current collectors extend past the active material layer to form tabs that are then combined to form respective current collecting plates as doing so prevents an impact from outside and environmental deterioration at the time of use as described in Tanaka (Tanaka, 0027).
PNG
media_image1.png
226
328
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches that the electrolyte layer is produced with a central filled portion (2 cm x 2 cm coated portion) and a periphery that is not coated (4 cm x 4 cm total area leaving a periphery around a central coated region). Senoue teaches that when assembling the battery a 2 cm x 2 cm positive electrode and 3 cm x 3 cm negative electrode are used (Senoue, paragraph 0090-0092) and placed in the center of the 4 cm x 4 cm electrode layer. Thus about the entire periphery of the negative electrode is a non-facing portion extending in both the first and second directions.
Regarding claim 3, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches a non-facing portion in two directions perpendicular to the stacking direction as discussed above regarding claim 2. Senoue also teaches that the dense structure as described regarding claim 1 has a lower content percentage of electrolytes and all four sides were thermally fused to form the dense structure portion (Senoue, paragraph 0093).
Regarding claim 4, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches the solid-state battery according to claim 1, wherein, in the first direction crossing the stacking direction, the negative electrode layer is longer than the positive electrode layer (Senoue, Paragraph 0012; Fig. 3, the negative electrode 40 and the separator layer 30 each have a protruding portion protruding outward beyond end portions of opposed portions of the positive electrode 20)
the non-facing portion has an inner region which does not overlap the positive electrode layer and which overlaps the negative electrode layer, and an outer region located on an outer side of the inner region in the first direction (Senoue, Fig. 3, There is an inner and outer region to the non-facing portion and it doesn’t overlap the positive electrode 20)
PNG
media_image2.png
297
352
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and a content percentage of the solid electrolyte in the outer region is smaller than a content percentage of the solid electrolyte in the inner region. (Senoue, Fig. 5, part A of the electrolyte is in the non-facing portion and can be considered as a part of “a content percentage of the solid electrolyte in the inner region”, figure 3 shown above and paragraph 0067, also explains that there is an outer region that has a lower content percentage of solid electrolyte).
PNG
media_image3.png
254
343
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches the solid-state battery according to claim 1, wherein the non-facing portion of the solid electrolyte layer has a bonding region bonded to a non-facing portion of another solid electrolyte layer (Senoue, Paragraph 0024; Fig. 3, this view schematically shows a state after the end portions of the base material are thermally fused to form a dense structure portion, figure 3 further shows that the end portions 33A can be considered non-facing portions)
and a non-bonding region closer to the facing portion than the bonding region in the first direction (the protruding portion before the electrolyte bonding region is outside the laminated body and therefore can be considered a non-bonding region closer to the facing portion than the bonding region, Paragraph 0009; Fig. 3, the separator layer also has a protruding portion that protrudes outward beyond the opposed portions of the positive and negative electrodes. Here, since such a protruding portion protrudes from the opposed portions of the positive and negative electrodes in the laminated electrode body, the pressure applied in the lamination direction is not applied strongly in this portion)
PNG
media_image4.png
241
369
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and a length of the non-bonding region in the first direction is greater than a thickness of the positive electrode active material layer (Senoue, Paragraph 0010, Fig. 4, To be able to prevent direct contact between the positive and negative electrode, the length of the dense separator layer 33A must be longer than the positive layer is thick).
Regarding claim 6, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches that silicon based negative electrode active materials can be used by combining silicon with another element other than silicon (Senoue, paragraph 0056).
Regarding claim 7, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches the solid-state battery according to claim 1, wherein a porosity of the porous substrate in the non-facing portion is lower than a porosity of the porous substrate in the facing portion (Senoue, Fig. 3 0013, the dense non-facing portion has a lower porosity in view of its increased density).
Regarding claim 8, Senoue in view of Tanaka teaches the solid-state battery according to claim 5 wherein the solid electrolyte layer has a second direction non-facing portion on the outer side of the facing portion in view of the differing sizes of the layers as described above (Senoue 0092). Further, the bonding region includes what can be called an inner bonding region in the first direction. Because the first direction and second direction are substantially identical in view of the square plates used to make the battery, the second direction also has a non-bonding region as well as a bonding region consisting of an inner bonding region and therefore the inner bonding region in the first direction can be said to sandwich an inner non-bonding region in the second direction. Senoue states that the flexibility of the separator layer is increased to improve processability so the separator is capable of bending slightly to meet the requirements as necessary (Senoue 0006).
PNG
media_image5.png
239
348
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument that Senoue in view of Tanaka does not teach a solid-state battery comprising a solid electrolyte layer is constituted by a solid electrolyte sheet including a porous substrate having cavities, this argument is unpersuasive as Senoue teaches the solid electrolyte layer is constituted by a solid electrolyte sheet including a porous substrate having cavities, and a solid electrolyte which is filled in at least a part of the porous substrate (Senoue, If something is porous it must have cavities by default, Paragraph 0063; Fig. 3, the separator layer is composed of various solid electrolyte particles 34 and a base material 32 having a porous structure, Paragraph 0091 also describes the separator as a sheet). This explanation is also present in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding the argument that Senoue in view of Tanaka does not teach a thickness of the porous substrate in the facing portion is greater than a thickness of the porous substrate in the non-facing portion, Senoue teaches that the non-facing portion gets condensed more than the facing portion meaning that the non-facing portion has a smaller thickness than the facing portion, See the rejection of claim 1 and Senoue fig. 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN ROBERT BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-0640. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 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, Galen Hauth can be reached at (571)270-5516. 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.
/SEAN R. BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights