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 . If status of the application as subject to 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 a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The references with a line through them, in the information disclosure statement submitted on 2/23/2023, have not been considered by the examiner, because the references were not provided.
Status of Claims
Claims 21-40 are pending in the application. Claims 39-40 are withdrawn. Claims 21-38 are presently examined.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 21-38), in the reply filed on 11/21/2025, is acknowledged. Claims 39-40 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected groups.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 21, 25-26, 29-31, & 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US20150017543A1 (Lee).
Lee teaches the following claim 21 limitations (see Figure A below):
A device for forming batteries (paragraph 27; figure 2: plurality of unit cells), the device comprising:
a connector configured to operatively couple with a battery (figure 2), the battery comprising an electrode active material (paragraph 31);
a charging module operatively coupled with the connector and configured to charge the battery (figure 2);
a pre-lithiation module operatively coupled with the connector and configured to diffuse lithium ions to the electrode active material of the battery (paragraphs 27 & 63-64; figure 2); and
a discharging module operatively coupled with the connector and configured to discharge the battery (figure 2), the forming of the batteries comprising buffering (paragraph 27 & 63-64; figure 2)
Regarding the buffering claim limitation, the present specification teaches that pre-lithiation is buffering. Lee teaches pre-lithiation (paragraph 27 & 63-64; figure 2).
Figure A: Annotated Lee figure 2
PNG
media_image1.png
666
731
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 25, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as discussed above. Lee also teaches the following claim 25 limitations:
the battery comprises bilayers (paragraph 27; figure 2: plurality of unit cells), each bilayer of the bilayers comprises an electrode, a separator, and a counter-electrode (paragraph 27; figure 2: “each including an anode, a separator, and a cathode”); and wherein (A) the electrode of each member of the bilayers comprises an electrode current collector coupled with an electrode active material (paragraph 31), and/or (B) the counter-electrode of each member of the bilayers comprises a counter-electrode current collector coupled with a counter-electrode active material (paragraph 31)
With regard to claim 26, Lee teaches the limitations of claims 21 & 25 as discussed above. Lee also teaches the following claim 26 limitation:
the battery comprises an electrode busbar coupled to the electrode of each of the bilayers, and/or a counter-electrode busbar coupled to the counter-electrode of each of the bilayers (Figure B below)
Figure B: Annotated Lee figure 2
PNG
media_image2.png
578
690
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 29, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as discussed above. Lee also teaches the following claim 29 limitation:
the active material comprises an anode active material comprising silicon, graphite, a composite material (paragraph 32: lithium composite oxides), a blended material, carbon nanotube, or any combination thereof
With regard to claims 30-31, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as discussed above. Lee also teaches the following limitations of claims 30-31 (Figure C below):
Claim 30
the device is configured to couple with an auxiliary electrode to generate the lithium ions from the auxiliary electrode
Claim 31
the device is configured to couple with the auxiliary electrode that is coupled with the battery
Figure C: Annotated Lee figure 2
PNG
media_image3.png
584
690
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 37, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as discussed above. Lee also teaches the following limitations of claim 38:
a housing supporting a formation cluster comprising the connector, the charging module, the pre-lithiation module, and the discharging module (see Figure A above)
With regard to claim 38, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as discussed above. Lee also teaches the following claim 38 limitations:
A method of buffering the batteries, the method comprising (a) providing the device in claim 21, and (b) performing one or more operations associated with the device for the forming of the batteries (paragraphs 27 & 63-64; figure 2: prelithiation).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20150017543A1 (Lee).
With regard to claim 22, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as described above. Claim 22 recites:
the pre-lithiation module is configured to diffuse lithium ions to the electrode active material of the battery after the battery has been charged
Lee teaches both battery pre-lithiation and battery charging (see discussion under claim 21; paragraphs 27 & 63-64; figure 2; Figure A above). Lee, however, fails to teach charging the battery, and then diffusing lithium ions to the battery active material, in this order.
MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C) provides guidance for this issue: “selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results”.
This claim for charging the battery, and then diffusing lithium ions to the battery active material, is not patentable without a new or unexpected result.
With regard to claim 23, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as described above. Claim 23 recites:
the discharge module is configured to discharge the battery after lithium ions have been diffused to the electrode active material of the battery
Lee teaches both battery discharging and diffusing lithium ions to the battery active material (see discussion under claim 21). Lee, however, fails to teach diffusing lithium ions to the battery active material, and then discharging the battery, in this order.
MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C) provides guidance for this issue: “selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results”.
This claim for diffusing lithium ions to the battery active material, and then discharging the battery, is not patentable without a new or unexpected result.
With regard to claim 24, Lee teaches the limitations of claim 21 as described above. Claim 24 recites:
further comprising two or more formation clusters, each formation cluster of the two or more formation clusters comprising the connector, the charging module, the pre-lithiation module, and the discharging module
Lee teaches one formation cluster (see discussion under claim 21, and the definition of “formation cluster” in claim 24). Lee, however, fails to teach multiple formation clusters.
MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) provides guidance for this issue: “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”.
This claim is merely duplicating parts, and thus is not patentable without an unexpected result.
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20150017543A1 (Lee), as applied to claim 21, in view of US20210347787A1 (Lee2). Lee fails to teach the following limitations of claims 27-28, which are taught by Lee2:
Claim 27
at least one sensor operatively coupled with at least one controller (paragraphs 93-94: measuring and controlling prelithiation solution temperature), the at least one controller being programmed to receive a signal output by the at least one sensor and to transmit the received signal output, the at least one controller being configured to control a formation cluster, the formation cluster comprising the connector, the charging module, the pre-lithiation module (paragraphs 93-94), and the discharging module
Claim 28
the at least one sensor comprises a temperature sensor (paragraphs 93-94: measuring temperature), a voltage sensor, a current sensor, or any combination thereof
Lee2 is directed to “a highly reducing prelithiation solution capable of prelithiating a high-capacity anode for a lithium secondary battery” (paragraph 9). The lithium secondary battery can have high energy density (abstract). It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for Lee’s plurality of unit cells to measure and control prelithiation solution temperature, as taught by Lee2, as part of a high-capacity anode for a high energy density lithium secondary battery.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20150017543A1 (Lee), as applied to claims 21 & 30-31, in view of US20190089016A1 (Paz). Lee fails to teach the following claim 32 limitations, which are taught by Paz:
the device is configured to couple with the battery and with the auxiliary electrode that are enclosed in a pouch (paragraphs 31-32 & figure 1: pre-lithiation lithium provided from an internal source 130A inside the battery pouch 102)
Paz teaches continued lithiation during battery operation for increased battery life (paragraphs 51-52; figures 5C & 13). It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for Lee’s auxiliary electrode to be enclosed in a pouch, as taught by Paz, for continued lithiation during battery operation for increased battery life.
Claims 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20150017543A1 (Lee) and US20200144592A1 (Paz), as applied to claims 21 & 30-32, and further in view of US20200127337A1 (Kim).
Paz teaches the following claim 33 limitations:
the device is configured to couple with the battery and with the auxiliary electrode that are enclosed in the pouch… (paragraphs 31-32 & figure 1: pre-lithiation lithium provided from an internal source 130A inside the battery pouch 102)
Lee & Paz fail to teach the following limitations of claims 33-34, which are taught by Kim (paragraph 68 & figure 5: pouch case 230, with internal electrode assembly 210 and electrolyte solution, hermetically sealed):
Claim 33
…the pouch that is sealed
Claim 34
the pouch is sealed at least in part by being liquid tight and/or air-tight
Kim teaches hermetically sealing the pouch case 230 to protect the electrode assembly 210 and the electrolyte solution from the outside (paragraph 68). It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for modified Lee’s electrodes to be hermetically-sealed inside of a pouch, as taught by Kim, to protect the electrodes from the outside.
Claims 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20150017543A1 (Lee), as applied to claim 21, in view of US10256507B1 (Busacca). Lee fails to teach the following limitations of claims 35-36, which are taught by Busacca (column 60, lines 1-11; figures 31C-D: openings 680 in constraint 158 to allow electrolyte flow into the electrode assembly 106):
Claim 35
the battery comprises a constraint enclosing one or more unit cells of the battery, the constraint being configured to house the battery and to facilitate distribution or flow of an electrolyte solution there though, the electrolyte solution carrying the lithium ions
Claim 36
the distribution or the flow of the electrolyte solution, is through perforations in the constraint
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to add a constraint with openings to Lee’s unit cells, as taught by Busacca, to guide or direct electrolyte flow.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WEST whose telephone number is 703-756-1363 and email address is Robert.West@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am - 7 pm 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684.
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.
/R.G.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721