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 .
Applicant’s amendments were received on 4/17/26. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 10 and 15 are withdrawn-currently amended.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerasopoulos et al. in view of Kii, on claims 1-9 are withdrawn because the Applicant amended the claims.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gerasopoulos et al. (US Publication 2019/0237803) in view of Chopra et al. (WO2021034899).
Regarding claim 1, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses an electrochemical device, comprising an anode, a cathode, and a cured electrolyte composition disposed between the anode and the cathode. At least a portion of the electrolyte composition interpenetrates at least a portion of both the anode and the cathode; and the cathode and the anode exhibits a stacked geometry (Abstract, P6). The Gerasopoulos reference further discloses the cured electrolyte composition comprises polymeric crosslinking networks that may include acrylate but is silent in specifying block copolymer comprising at least two polycaprolactone chains coupled with a polymer center block of polylactic acid, polyethylene imine polyglycolic acid, however, the Chopra et al. discloses copolymer for cured electrolytes that may include acrylates but a more specific example is at least two polycaprolactone (PCL) chains attached or coupled with a polymeric center block (CB). For example, the copolymer may be a block copolymer or a graft copolymer including at least two PCL chains coupled with the polymeric center block, such as PCL-CB-PCL. In another example, the copolymer may be a block copolymer or a graft copolymer including at least one or more of polylactic acid (PLA), polyglycolic acid (PGA), polyethylene imine (PEI) or combinations thereof, coupled with the polymeric center block. These electrolytes can be biodegradable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate copolymer of two polycaprolactone chains coupled with a polymer center block of polylactic acid, polyethylene imine polyglycolic acid for the teaching of cured electrolytes polymers comprising acrylates disclosed by the Chopra et al. reference for the cured electrolytes polymers comprising acrylates disclosed by Gerasopoulos reference in order to provide biodegradable materials for environmentally friendly or biodegradable batteries that may be recycled.
Regarding claim 2, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses the cured electrolyte composition is a single layer without an interface (the interface is not simple planar but the electrolyte penetrates into the electrodes; P66).
Regarding claims 3, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses wherein the cured electrolyte composition comprises a gel polymer electrolyte (P24).
Regarding claims 4, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses the gel polymer electrolyte comprises a hydrogel of a copolymer and a salt dispersed in the hydrogel of a copolymer (P30, P45).
Regarding claim 5, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses wherein the cured electrolyte composition comprises a biodegradable electrolyte composition (water).
Regarding claim 6, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses the cured electrolyte composition comprises an aqueous-based (hydrogel) electrolyte composition.
Regarding claim 7, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses the cured electrolyte composition comprises a non-aqueous electrolyte composition (organic; P44).
Regarding claim 8, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses the cured electrolyte composition comprises an organic electrolyte composition (P44). .
Regarding claim 9, the Gerasopoulos et al. reference discloses the cured electrolyte composition further comprises a lithium salt (P45).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on 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 HELEN OI CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5162. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at 5712728760. 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.
/Helen Oi K CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights