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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/15/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
In view of the amendment, the claim emphasizes the continuity of the carbon phase. In view of the amendment, the examiner provided a new rejection focusing on the monolithic structure of the electrode while “holding” active material together “within” the continuous structure.
The previous art rejections are removed.
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.
Claims 3, 15, 19 and 20 are 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.
Claims 3 and 15 recites the limitation "the one or more additives" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 19 and 20 recite the limitation “the hard carbon phase”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 14, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PARK et al. (US 2011/0020701).
Regarding claims 1 and 9,
PARK teaches an electrode body that is made by pyrolyzing a carbon precursor mixture to form a carbon phase that is self-supporting monolithic (continuous phase in the entire electrode) [0045]. The precursor mixture can include graphite active material and silicon particles [0045]. The carbonized precursor holds carbon composite together in addition to distributing silicon throughout (held within) the composite [0045]. The electrode structures are also porous [0040]. The carbon electrode is deposited or placed with a second electrode and separator to make a complete cell [0059]
Regarding claim 14,
The limitation of this claim describes a quality of the active material as being one that an “cast onto copper”. The examiner notes any active material can be cast onto a current collector.
If the limitation is meant to require the use of a current collector in the claimed cell, PARK teaches the carbon anode formed can minimize the need for a copper sheet current collector [0036]-[0037]. The scope of the reference therefore includes using a copper current collector.
Regarding claims 16 and 17,
The claim is directed to an electrochemical cell product with a carbon material. This claim is directed to a step of replacing polymer precursor with carbon. The product is only limited to structures necessitated by the method. In this instance there is no additional required structural limitations by the replacing other than the presence of carbon. In addition the pyrolysis process is expected to carbonize the precursor organics in PARK such that “significant amounts” do not exist (a material amount).
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) 2, 4, 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al. (US 2011/0020701) in view of MITCHELL (US 6,007,588).
Regarding claims 2, 6, and 8
For the purposes of this rejection the “cell attachment substance” is considered equivalent to a “electrode attachment substance” described in the specification.
PARK teaches an electrode and cell according to claim 1 and notes that the cell is made using an attachment substance [0010] but does not teach a cell attachment substance with the claimed carbon content. However, MITCHELL teaches an adhesive layer (cell attachment substance) coated onto a current collector that includes conductive filler and binder column 4 lines 1-15. The conductive filler is 15-25 wt% carbon column 4 line 15. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the adhesive layer of MITCHELL to prevent the cell from delaminating.
Regarding claim 4,
When adhering the electrode to the current collector with an adhesive layer, the other side of the electrode is exposed to an electrolyte/separator without being coated.
Claim(s) 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al. (US 2011/0020701) in view of MITCHELL (US 6,007,588) and RAMASUBRAMANIAN et al. (US 2012/0115026).
Regarding claims 2 and 5,
PARK teaches an electrode and cell according to claim 1 and notes that the cell is made using an attachment substance [0010], and more specifically separator is deposited on the electrode [0059] but does not teach a cell attachment substance with the claimed carbon content.
PARK does not teach the loading of carbon in the attachment layer coated on the anode. However, MITCHELL teaches that when forming a layer of material, such as an adhesive layer of polymeric material and conductive carbon the conductivity of the layer is determined by the loading of conductive carbon (particles) and the conductive carbon can be loaded at 15-25 wt% column 4 lines 1-15. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to load conductive carbon into an adhesive layer between layers to lower total resistivity of the cell.
In addition to the reduced resistivity of the cell, RAMASUBRAMANIAN
teaches that when using a monolithic anode, a uniform ion transport structure can be provided on the anode to improve ion transport to the anode [0029]-[0030]. The layer is made of binder and carbon black [0029]. Accordingly, in addition to the benefit of reduced resistivity, the binder and carbon layer further improves ion conductivity into the anode.
Regarding claim 6 and 8,
The conductive carbon and carbon black are included in the modified bonding layer described above.
Regarding claims 10, 11, and 13,
PARK teaches an electrode and cell according to claim 1 and notes that the cell is made using an attachment substance [0010], and more specifically separator is deposited on the electrode [0059] but does not teach a cell attachment substance with the claimed carbon content.
PARK does not teach the loading of carbon in the attachment layer coated on the anode. However, MITCHELL teaches that when forming a layer of material, such as an adhesive layer of polymeric material and conductive carbon the conductivity of the layer is determined by the loading of conductive carbon (particles) and the conductive carbon can be loaded at 15-25 wt% column 4 lines 1-15. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to load conductive carbon into an adhesive layer between layers to lower total resistivity of the cell.
In addition to the reduced resistivity of the cell, RAMASUBRAMANIAN
teaches that when using a monolithic anode, a uniform ion transport structure can be provided on the anode to improve ion transport to the anode [0029]-[0030]. The layer is made of binder and carbon black [0029]. Accordingly, in addition to the benefit of reduced resistivity, the binder and carbon layer further improves ion conductivity into the anode.
Claim(s) 7, 12, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al. (US 2011/0020701) in view of LOPEZ et al. (US 2011/0111294).
Regarding claims 7 and 12,
PARK teaches adding conductive material to the anode and notes that the electrode can include metal [0038]. The reference does not expressly teach the claimed metals as conductive particles. However, LOPEZ teaches an anode formation is similarly done by pyrolyzation [0078] and teaches electrically conductive powder distinct from the active material, such as stainless steel fibers (particles) [0055]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use stainless steel particles as the metal in PARK to reduce overall resistivity of the formed anode.
Regarding claim 18
PARK teaches using silicon in the composite [0045] but does not teach a porous silicon that gets filled with carbon phase. However, LOPEZ teaches an anode that includes silicon and carbon and further notes the silicon can be nanostructured [0077]. The formation is similarly done by pyrolyzation [0078]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use nanostructured silicon in the anode of PARK as a known morphology of silicon active material used in anodes.
When using a nanostructure (porous) silicon, the same pyrolysis and carbonization will result in the same “filling” with carbon material.
Regarding claim 19,
PARK teaches pyrolyzing and carbonizing a precursor to make the carbon body [0045] but is silent to the carbon phase morphology as amorphous or crystalline. However, LOPEZ teaches that when pyrolyzing a precursor to form carbon for an anode, the pyrolytic carbon formed can be amorphous and diamond (crystalline) structure [0097]. It would be reasonable to expect the pyrolyzed carbon in PARK to form the same morphology of amorphous and crystalline carbon, because the same process is being used to make carbon material in an anode.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al. (US 2011/0020701) in view of ARAMATA et al. (US 2006/0003227).
Regarding claim 20,
PARK teaches the silicon particles create a silicon-carbon composite [0052] but does not teach formation of silicon carbide. However, ARAMATA teaches that a silicon carbide layer can be formed between silicon and carbon and is desirable to do so to prevent swelling [0011]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the use a SiC layer with silicon to provide structural support against the swelling that occurs in the silicon during battery cycling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MURATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5596. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571272-1418. 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.
/AUSTIN MURATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712