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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-5 and 8-9 in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/22/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al. (US 20210104773 A1) in view of Naoe et al. (US 20190006678 A1)
With regards to claim 1, Ozawa teaches a solid-state battery comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; and a solid electrolyte layer which is disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (¶ 0114 and Fig. 3). Ozawa teaches that the solid electrolyte layer includes a solid electrolyte sheet containing a porous base material filled with a solid electrolyte material and a binder (¶ 0566 and ¶ 0428). Ozawa goes on to teach that the solid electrolyte layer includes a positive electrode-side region that includes a region a prescribed distance from a contact surface with respect to the positive electrode (Fig. 3 item 3), a negative electrode-side region that includes a region a prescribed distance from a contact surface with respect to the negative electrode (Fig. 3, item 1), and an intermediate region located between the positive electrode-side region and the negative electrode-side region (Fig. 3, item 2).
Ozawa does not specifically teach that a higher percentage of the base material is disposed in the intermediate region than in the positive electrode-side region and negative electrode-side region. However, in ¶ 0116, Ozawa teaches that the thickness of the positive and negative electrode-side-regions (third and first SE layers) is 2 to 4 μm, values lower than that of the intermediate region (second SE layer: 5 to 30 μm). Fig. 3 is shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
813
1273
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to recognize that the larger size of the intermediate region taught by Ozawa would inherently include a higher percentage of the base material.
Ozawa also does not specifically teach that the content of the binder in the intermediate region is higher than content of the binder in at least one selected from the positive electrode-side region and the negative electrode-side region.
In a similar field of endeavor, Naoe teaches an electrolyte layer that includes a base material and a binder (¶ 0035). Naoe discourages having a high binder content around the active material as this reduces conductivity (¶ 0072). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to adjust the binder content of the electrode-side regions to have a lower binder concentration to promote conductivity. Adjusting the binder content as taught by Naoe in the electrolyte layer taught by Ozawa would predictably yield an intermediate layer with a higher binder content than the positive electrode-side region and the negative electrode-side region.
With regards to claim 4, Ozawa teaches that when 100% by mass is taken to mean an entirety of the solid electrolyte layer, content of the binder for binding together the solid electrolyte material in the solid electrolyte layer is equal to or higher than 10% by mass (¶ 0380). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim(s) 2-3 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al. (US 20210104773 A1) in view of Naoe et al. (US 20190006678 A1) and in further view of Oura (US 20210143482 A1).
With regards to claim 2, Ozawa teaches that the electrolyte laminate may be a transfer sheet including a release film on the positive electrode-side region (¶ 0102). However, Ozawa does not specifically teach that the content of the binder in the negative electrode-side region is higher than content of the binder in the positive electrode-side region.
In a similar field of endeavor, Oura teaches a solid-state battery formed using a transfer method with a binder concentration gradient (¶ 0032). Oura teaches that this gradient has one side having a higher binder concentration than the other to improve transfer efficiency and interlayer adhesion which suppresses the deterioration of the battery (¶ 0069 and ¶ 0110). Oura also teaches that the solid electrolyte layer may be the concentration gradient layer (¶ 0017).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the release film taught by Ozawa to include the binder concentration gradient taught by Oura to improve the transfer efficiency and interlayer adhesion. This can result in a structure where the content of the binder in the negative electrode-side region is higher than content of the binder in the positive electrode-side region.
With respect to claim 3, Ozawa teaches that the negative electrode includes a negative electrode layer containing a negative electrode active material disposed on a side of the solid electrolyte layer and a negative electrode current collector disposed on a surface side of the negative electrode (Fig. 3). Ozawa also teaches that the negative electrode-side region includes a first negative electrode-side region located on a side of the negative electrode current collector (Fig. 3 Item 1). Ozawa does not specifically teach a second negative electrode-side region located closer to the positive electrode than the first negative electrode-side region. However, Ozawa teaches that the solid electrolyte laminate may include three or more layers as this results in an excellent battery voltage (¶ 0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the negative electrode-side region taught by Ozawa to include a second negative electrode-side region closer to the positive electrode than the first negative electrode-side region. This would predictably yield a solid-state battery with improved battery voltage.
Ozawa does not teach that the content of the binder in the first negative electrode-side region is higher than the content of the binder in the second negative electrode-side region. However, as discussed earlier, Oura teaches a transfer method that utilizes a solid electrolyte layer binder concentration gradient with one side having a higher binder concentration than the other to improve transfer efficiency and interlayer adhesion (¶ 0017, ¶ 0069 and ¶ 0110).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the release film taught by Ozawa to include the binder concentration gradient taught by Oura to improve the transfer efficiency and interlayer adhesion. This can result in a structure where the content of the binder in the first negative electrode-side region is higher than content of the binder in the second negative electrode-side region.
With regards to claim 8, Ozawa teaches that when 100% by mass is taken to mean an entirety of the solid electrolyte layer, content of the binder for binding together the solid electrolyte material in the solid electrolyte layer is equal to or higher than 10% by mass (¶ 0380). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al. (US 20210104773 A1) in view of Naoe et al. (US 20190006678 A1) and in further view of Watanabe (US 20210135279 A1).
With regards to claim 5, Ozawa and Naoe do not teach that the negative electrode includes, as the negative electrode active material, at least one selected from a Li-based material and a Si-based material.
In a similar field of endeavor, Watanabe teaches a solid-state battery comprising a positive electrode and negative electrode with a solid electrolyte layer disposed between the electrodes (¶ 0031). Watanabe teaches that the negative electrode comprises an active material and current collector (¶ 0034 and ¶ 0090). In ¶ 0090, Watanabe goes on to teach at least one selected from a Li-based material and a Si-based material as common negative electrode active materials.
As these materials are commonly used as negative electrode active materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use the active materials taught by Watanabe in the battery taught by Ozawa in view of Naoe. This would predictably yield an effective solid-state battery.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al. (US 20210104773 A1) in view of Naoe et al. (US 20190006678 A1) and Oura (US 20210143482 A1), and in further view of Watanabe (US 20210135279 A1).
With regards to claim 9, Ozawa, Naoe, and Oura do not teach that the negative electrode includes, as the negative electrode active material, at least one selected from a Li-based material and a Si-based material. However, Watanabe teaches lithium and silicon-based materials as negative electrode active materials.
As these materials are commonly used as negative electrode active materials, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use the active materials taught by Watanabe in the battery taught by Ozawa in view of Naoe and Oura. This would predictably yield an effective solid-state battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNSUYADOR YUSIF whose telephone number is (571)272-4531. The examiner can normally be reached 7 am - 5 pm (M-R).
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 H 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.
/HUNSUYADOR MUGEESATU YUSIF/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/ADAM J FRANCIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728