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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received 1/22/2026:
Claims 1-19 are currently pending in the application.
The rejection has been changed below in response to the arguments.
Drawings
No drawings appear to be filed with this application so no indication of acceptance or objection to the drawings is given.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered. The arguments have been addressed in the new rejection below.
Arguments directed towards Wang teaching away
Applicant argues that Wang teaches away from the claimed invention.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Wang teaches preferred amounts of primary and secondary particles in the first and second anode active material layers (see paragraphs [0041] and [0045]). Disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. In re Susi, 440 F.2d 442, 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971). “A known or obvious composition does not become patentable simply because it has been described as somewhat inferior to some other product for the same use.” In re Gurley, 27 F.3d 551, 554, 31 USPQ2d 1130, 1132 (Fed. Cir. 1994). So, a skilled artisan is capable of modifying Wang with Piao as discussed in the new rejection below.
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a total weight of the anode mixture layer" in Lines 2-3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the anode mixture layer” in the claim. For examination purposes, this will be interpreted as referring to the total weight of the combined first anode mixture layer and second anode mixture layer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. WO-2021217639-A1 (US-20220102708-A1 used as translation and cited in PTO-892) (hereinafter “Wang”) in view of Piao et al. KR- 2018033800-A (hereinafter “Piao”).
Regarding Claim 1, Wang discloses an anode 10 for a secondary battery 5 in Fig. 1 (see abstract and paragraphs [0002]-[0005] and [0105]), the anode comprising:
a first anode mixture layer 103 disposed on an anode current collector 101 and a second anode mixture layer 102 disposed on a surface of the anode 10 in Figs. 2-3 (see paragraphs [0005], [0009], and [0066]-[0067]),
wherein the first and second anode mixture layers 103/102 include a graphite-based anode active material of graphite secondary particles (the first active material may a contain a majority of primary particles, so secondary particles would also be present and the second active material includes secondary particles) (see paragraphs [0005], [0041]-[0042], [0045], and [0072]-[0073]), and
at least the second anode mixture layer 102 includes a graphite-based anode active material of graphite primary particles (second active material may a contain ≥50% of secondary particles, so primary particles would also be present) (see paragraphs [0041]-[0042] and [0072]-[0073]).
Wang additionally discloses a double coating structure in an anode where the first layer and second layer contain a specific anode active material can result in advantageous battery characteristics (see paragraph [0009]).
Wang is silent on wherein a content [A2] of graphite primary particles included in the second anode mixture layer is greater than a content [A1] of graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer.
However, in the same field of endeavor of anodes (negative electrodes) with a graphite active material (see abstract), Piao discloses an anode active material coated on a current collector comprising graphite secondary particles and graphite primary particles (which would correlate to the first anode mixture layer of Wang, which is coated on the current collector) (see paragraphs [0005]-[0009], [0016]-[0018], and [0020]-[0021]). Piao also discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 10% to 30% of primary particles in the first layer of Wang. With the disclosure of Wang suggesting the second layer may comprise 50% secondary particles (thereby having 50% primary particles) (see paragraph [0041]), a skilled artisan is capable of achieving a content [A2] of graphite primary particles included in the second anode mixture layer being greater than a content [A1] of graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer, since the disclosed ranges of Piao and Wang render this relationship obvious.
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein a content [A2] of graphite primary particles included in the second anode mixture layer is greater than a content [A1] of graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer by modifying the amount of primary particles in the first anode mixture layer, as disclosed by Piao, in order to improve adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Wang is silent on wherein the [A1] and [A2] satisfy Equation 1: [A2]≥2[A1] (Equation 1), where A1≥0 and A2>0.
However, in the combination of Wang and Piao as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 10% to 30% of primary particles in the first layer of Wang. With the disclosure of Wang suggesting the second layer may comprise ≥50% secondary particles (thereby having ≤50% primary particles) (see paragraph [0041]), a skilled artisan is capable of achieving a relationship of the content [A2] of graphite primary particles included in the second anode mixture layer and a content [A1] of graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer of [A2]≥2[A1] (Equation 1), where A1≥0 and A2>0, since the disclosed ranges of Piao and Wang render this relationship obvious (for example, using 10% ([A1]) of primary particles in the first anode layer as suggested by Piao and 50% ([A2]) of primary particles in the second anode layer as suggested by Wang).
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein the [A1] and [A2] satisfy Equation 1: [A2]≥2[A1] (Equation 1), where A1≥0 and A2>0, by modifying the amount of primary particles in the first anode mixture layer, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses second anode mixture layer may comprise ≥50% secondary particles (thereby having ≤50% primary particles) (see paragraph [0041]), which overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of the content of the graphite primary particles included in the second anode mixture layer of 10 wt% or more and 95 wt% or less.
Wang is silent on wherein the content of the graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer is 0 wt% or more and 50 wt% or less.
However, Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 10% to 30% of primary particles in the first layer of Wang. This range falls within and therefore anticipates the range of the content of the graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer of 0 wt% or more and 50 wt% or less.
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein the content of the graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer is 0 wt% or more and 50 wt% or less, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses the volume average particle size (which is the average of the particle diameters) of the graphite primary particles is 13 μm to 17 μm (see Table 1 and paragraphs [0045]-[0047] and [0160]-[0161]). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the graphite primary particles having a particle diameter of D50 of 3 to 25 µm.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Wang is silent on wherein a content [B1] of graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer and a content [B2] of graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer satisfy Equation 2: [B1]>[B2] (Equation 2), where B2>0.
However, in the combination of Wang and Piao as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 70% to 90% of secondary particles in the first layer of Wang. With the disclosure of Wang suggesting the second layer may comprise ≥50% secondary particles (see paragraph [0041]), a skilled artisan is capable of achieving a relationship of a content [B1] of graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer and a content [B2] of graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer satisfy Equation 2: [B1]>[B2] (Equation 2), where B2>0, since the disclosed ranges of Piao and Wang render this relationship obvious (for example, using 90% ([B1]) of secondary particles in the first anode layer as suggested by Piao and 50% ([B2]) of secondary particles in the second anode layer as suggested by Wang).
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein a content [B1] of graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer and a content [B2] of graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer satisfy Equation 2: [B1]>[B2] (Equation 2), where B2>0, by modifying the amount of secondary particles in the first anode mixture layer, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses the first layer has a majority of primary particles of ≥60% (see paragraphs [0045] and [0072]-[0073]), which would allow for ≤40% of secondary particles. This substantially overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of a content of the graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer being 20 wt% or more and 97 wt% or less. Wang also discloses the graphite secondary particles are included in an amount of ≥50% in the second layer (see paragraphs [0041]-[0042] and [0072]-[0073]). This substantially overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of a content of the graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer being 0 wt% or more and 85 wt% or less.
Further, in the combined invention of Wang and Piao (as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above), Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 70% to 90% of secondary particles in the first layer of Wang, which falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of a content of the graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer being 20 wt% or more and 97 wt% or less. As such, the combined invention ranges also render obvious the claimed ranges.
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein a content of the graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer is 20 wt% or more and 97 wt% or less, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses the volume average particle size (which is the average of the particle diameters) of the graphite secondary particles is 10 μm to 13 μm (see Table 1 and paragraphs [0048] and [0160]-[0161]). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the graphite primary particles having a particle diameter of D50 of 3 to 25 µm.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Wang is silent on wherein the anode includes 20 to 75 wt% of graphite primary particles and 20 to 75 wt% of graphite secondary particles based on a total weight of the anode mixture layer.
However, in the combination of Wang and Piao as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 70% to 90% of secondary particles and 10% to 30% of primary particles in the first layer of Wang. With the disclosure of Wang suggesting the second layer may comprise ≥50% secondary particles (thereby having ≤50% primary particles) (see paragraph [0041]), a skilled artisan is capable of achieving a relationship of the anode including 20 to 75 wt% of graphite primary particles and 20 to 75 wt% of graphite secondary particles based on a total weight of the anode mixture layer, since the disclosed ranges of Piao and Wang render this relationship obvious (for example, using 10% of primary particles and 90% of secondary particles in the first anode mixture layer as suggested by Piao and 50% of primary particles and 50% of secondary particles in the second anode mixture layer as suggested by Wang would result in 30% of primary particles and 70% of secondary particles based on a total weight of the anode mixture layers).
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein the anode includes 20 to 75 wt% of graphite primary particles and 20 to 75 wt% of graphite secondary particles based on a total weight of the anode mixture layer by modifying the amount of primary particles and secondary particles in the first anode mixture layer, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claims 9-11, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses the anode comprises a silicon-based anode active material (meeting Claim 9) in an amount of 2%-5% based on a total weight (W1+W2) of the anode mixture layer (see Table 1 Examples 4-7 and paragraphs [0029]-[0030] and [0160]-[0161]). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the silicon-based anode active material including 1 to 30 wt% based on a total weight of the anode mixture layer (meeting Claim 10).
Wang also discloses the amount of silicon in the first layer may be 0 and the amount of silicon in the second layer may be 2%-5% (see Table 1 Examples 4-7 and paragraphs [0029]-[0030] and [0160]-[0161]), which satisfies the claimed Equation 3: [C2]≥2[C1] (Equation 3), where [C1]≥0 and [C2]>0 and wherein [C1] is a content of the silicon-based anode active material based on a total amount of an anode active material included in the first anode mixture layer and [C2] is a content of the silicon-based anode active material based on a total amount of an anode active material included in the second anode mixture layer (meeting Claim 11).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses the conductive agent may be included in an amount of 1.5% in each of the first and second layers (see Table 1 and paragraphs [0051]-[0053] and [0160]-[0162]), which results in 1.5 wt% of conductive agent in the anode. This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the anode including 0.1 to 3 wt% of a conductive agent.
Wang also discloses the binder may be included in an amount of 1.5% in each of the first and second layers (see Table 1 and paragraphs [0051]-[0053] and [0160]-[0162]), which results in 1.5 wt% of binder in the anode. This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the anode including 1.5 to 3 wt% of a binder.
Regarding Claims 13-15, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses the first anode mixture layer and the second anode mixture layer have a thickness ratio of 5:5 in a specific embodiment (see paragraphs [0062]-[0063] and [0162]). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the first anode mixture layer and the second anode mixture layer having a thickness ratio of 5 to 8:2 to 5 (meeting Claim 15).
The thickness ratio of the first anode mixture layer and the second anode mixture layer of 5:5 also correlates to the second anode mixture layer having a thickness of 50% of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer and the first anode mixture layer having a thickness of 50% of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer. These values fall within and therefore anticipate the claimed ranges of the second anode mixture layer having a thickness greater than 20% and less than or equal to 50% of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer (meeting Claim 13) and the first anode mixture layer having a thickness of 50% or more and less than 80% of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer (meeting Claim 14).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Wang discloses the anode of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Wang further discloses a secondary battery 5 in Figs. 1 and 4 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0105]-[0106]) comprising:
an electrode assembly 52 in which the anode of the aforementioned claim 1 and a cathode (positive electrode) including a cathode mixture layer on at least one surface of a cathode current collector are alternately laminated with a separator as a boundary (see paragraphs [0085]-[0090], [0100]-[0106], [0117], and [0170]); and
a battery case (shell) 51 in which the electrode assembly 52 is accommodated and sealed (packaged) in Figs. 1 and 4 (see paragraphs [0103]-[0106] and [0117]).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery of claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above).
Wang is silent on wherein the [A1] and [A2] satisfy Equation 1 below: [A2]≥2[A1] (Equation 1), where A1≥0 and A2>0.
However, in the combination of Wang and Piao as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 10% to 30% of primary particles in the first layer of Wang. With the disclosure of Wang suggesting the second layer may comprise ≥50% secondary particles (thereby having ≤50% primary particles) (see paragraph [0041]), a skilled artisan is capable of achieving a relationship of the content [A2] of graphite primary particles included in the second anode mixture layer and a content [A1] of graphite primary particles included in the first anode mixture layer of [A2]≥2[A1] (Equation 1), where A1≥0 and A2>0, since the disclosed ranges of Piao and Wang render this relationship obvious (for example, using 10% ([A1]) of primary particles in the first anode layer as suggested by Piao and 50% ([A2]) of primary particles in the second anode layer as suggested by Wang).
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein the [A1] and [A2] satisfy Equation 1: [A2]≥2[A1] (Equation 1), where A1≥0 and A2>0, by modifying the amount of primary particles in the first anode mixture layer, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery of claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above).
Wang is silent on wherein a content [B1] of graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer and a content [B2] of graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer satisfy Equation 2: [B1]>[B2] (Equation 2), where B2>0.
However, in the combination of Wang and Piao as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Piao discloses using a ratio of secondary to primary particles in an anode layer coated on a current collector (correlating to the first anode mixture layer of Wang) of 7:3 to 9:1 (see paragraphs [0005] and [0020]-[0021]), so a skilled artisan would be motivated to use 70% to 90% of secondary particles in the first layer of Wang. With the disclosure of Wang suggesting the second layer may comprise ≥50% secondary particles (see paragraph [0041]), a skilled artisan is capable of achieving a relationship of a content [B1] of graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer and a content [B2] of graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer satisfy Equation 2: [B1]>[B2] (Equation 2), where B2>0, since the disclosed ranges of Piao and Wang render this relationship obvious (for example, using 90% ([B1]) of secondary particles in the first anode layer as suggested by Piao and 50% ([B2]) of secondary particles in the second anode layer as suggested by Wang).
Piao additionally discloses secondary particles have better expansion and rolling performance while primary particles improve the adhesion between the anode active material layer and the anode current collector and including these particles in the appropriate amounts avoids problems of reduced adhesive strength and reduced rolling performance (see paragraphs [0020]-[0021]). As such, the amounts of primary particles and secondary particles in the anode active material layer coated on the current collector are viewed as result effective variables and the discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the anode of Wang wherein a content [B1] of graphite secondary particles included in the first anode mixture layer and a content [B2] of graphite secondary particles included in the second anode mixture layer satisfy Equation 2: [B1]>[B2] (Equation 2), where B2>0, by modifying the amount of secondary particles in the first anode mixture layer, as disclosed by Piao, in order to optimize adhesive strength and rolling performance.
Regarding Claim 19, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery of claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above). Wang further discloses the anode comprises a silicon-based anode active material where the amount of silicon in the first layer may be 0 and the amount of silicon in the second material may be 2%-5% (see Table 1 Examples 4-7 and paragraphs [0029]-[0030] and [0160]-[0161]), which satisfies the claimed Equation 3: [C2]≥2[C1] (Equation 3), where [C1]≥0 and [C2]>0 and wherein [C1] is a content of the silicon-based anode active material based on a total amount of an anode active material included in the first anode mixture layer and [C2] is a content of the silicon-based anode active material based on a total amount of an anode active material included in the second anode mixture layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Thomas-Alyea et al. US-20120328942-A1 discloses an electrode (which may be a negative electrode (anode)) comprising layers with electroactive particles (which may be an anode active material, such as graphite) wherein larger particles are located in region of the electrode closest to the current collector and smaller particles are located in region of the electrode furthest from the current collector to increase cell cycle life in Fig. 1 (see paragraphs [0049], [0065]-[0068], [0098]-[0100], [0123], [0125], [0134], and [0140]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYDNEY L KLINE whose telephone number is (703)756-1729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
/S.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights