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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/2/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-7, 9-13, 15-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al., CN 111710832 A in view of Kato et al., U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2014/0186699 A1 [hereinafter Kato]; Uemura, U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2013/0224587 A1; and as evidenced by the Int’l Gem Society, Understanding Mohs Hardness Scale (2025) for claim 7. A machine translation was used for Zhu et al. [hereinafter Zhu].
The body of the claim is generally written with parentheses following the limitations indicating the prior art’s teachings and/or examiner notes.
1. The following references render this claim obvious.
I. Zhu
An electrochemical apparatus, comprising:
a negative electrode (negative electrode sheet; Zhu abstract, [0010]) comprising:
a current collector (current collector; Zhu abstract, [0011]);
a first coating (porous composite layer; Zhu abstract, [0012]); and
a second coating (silicon-containing negative electrode material layer; Zhu abstract, [0013]);
wherein the second coating is provided on at least one surface of the current collector;
wherein the first coating is provided between the current collector and the second coating (the silicon-containing negative electrode material layer is located on the porous composite layer which is on the current collector; Zhu abstract, [0012]-[0014]) and
comprises inorganic particles (inorganic particles; Zhu [0016]-[0019]), a conductive agent (inorganic conductive material may be one or more materials such as a conductive carbon nanotube; Zhu [0019]), a binder (the polymer material may be one or more materials such as polyvinyl alcohol; Zhu [0020]),
…
wherein the first coating has a thickness L of 100 nm to 2 µm (20 nm – 12 µm; Zhu [0017]) … .
II. Boehmite – Uemura
Zhu is silent on wherein the inorganic particles comprise boehmite particles.
However, Uemura teaches the use of boehmite as an inorganic particle. Uemura [0023]. Uemura teaches that this inorganic particle leads to a high adhesion force. Uemura [0014].
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s apparatus with Uemura’s boehmite particles to impart a high adhesion force.
Zhu is silent on wrapped by the binder within the first coating.
However, the Applicant’s specification teaches that preparing the first coating slurry involves mixing the styrene-butadiene rubber binder with quartz sand inorganic particles, which would then lead to the binder wrapping the inorganic particles. App. Spec. [0091]-[0092].
Zhu also teaches mixing the components of the slurry, thus this would inherently lead to the polyvinyl alcohol binder wrapping the boehmite particles. See Zhu [0042].
III. Peeling Force - Kato
Zhu is silent on wherein a peeling force F between the first coating and the second coating satisfies 15 N≤F≤30 N, the peeling force F being a force value in N obtained from an adhesion test between the first coating and the second coating.
But the coatings must have some peeling force.
Kato teaches an adhesion force of at least 0.7 N/20 mm used on a film which is 2 cm in width, or 2 cm * 0.3 N/20 mm = 0.6 N. Kato [0092]. Kato teaches this adhesion force avoids interlayer delamination during conveyance or handling. Id.
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s peeling force to be at least 0.6 N to avoid interlayer delamination during conveyance or handling.
Given that this is an apparatus claim, different methods of measuring the peeling force would have been expected to come up with similar values for the apparatus claim. Since the prior art teaches the claimed peeling force, the peeling force is taught regardless of what method of measurement is used.
2. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein 16 N≤F≤25 N (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 1 rejection).
3. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a Dv50 particle size of the inorganic particles satisfies 50 nm≤Dv50≤1 μm (average particle size from 10 nm to 10 μm). Zhu [0019].
4. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein 50 nm≤Dv50≤800 nm (rejected for the reasons stated in the claim 3 rejection).
5. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein 100 nm≤Dv50≤400 nm (rejected for the reasons stated in the claim 3 rejection).
6. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein 150 nm≤Dv50≤350 nm (rejected for the reasons stated in the claim 3 rejection).
7. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein Mohs hardness of the inorganic particles is 2.5 to 7.5 (silver, which has a Mohs hardness of 2.5-3). Zhu [0019], see Int’l Gem Society p. 7.
9. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first coating further comprises a dispersant (the polymer material may be one or more materials such as sodium alginate; Zhu [0020]); and
based on a total mass of the first coating, a mass ratio of the inorganic particles, the binder, the conductive agent, and the dispersant is (2%–10%):(30%–60%):(30%–60%):(2%–5%) (the mass ratio of the polymer material/inorganic conductive material can be 5:95 to 90:10 which would encompass these ratios such as 5% inorganic particles:45% polyvinyl alcohol:45% carbon nanotube: 5% sodium alginate which would work out to 50% polymer material/50% inorganic conductive material). Zhu [0021].
10. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 9, wherein
the binder comprises at least one of styrene-butadiene rubber, polyacrylic acid, polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene glycol, polyacrylic ester, polyacrylonitrile, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyvinyl chloride, formaldehyde resin, cyclodextrin, or cyanoacrylate (polyvinyl alcohol). Zhu [0020].
11. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the dispersant comprises at least one of sodium hydroxymethyl cellulose, lithium hydroxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate, propylene glycol alginate, methylcellulose, starch sodium phosphate, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium alginate protein, casein, sodium polyacrylate, polyoxyethylene, or polyvinylpyrrolidone (sodium alginate). Zhu [0020].
12. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the conductive agent comprises at least one of a zero-dimensional conductive agent or a one-dimensional conductive agent (one-dimensional carbon nanotube). Zhu [0019].
13. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 12, wherein at least one of the following characteristics is satisfied:
the zero-dimensional conductive agent comprising at least one of conductive carbon black, acetylene black, or Ketjen black, and Dv50 of the zero-dimensional conductive agent being 50 nm to 1 μm; or
the one-dimensional conductive agent comprising at least one of a conductive carbon tube or a conductive carbon rod, and an average diameter of the one-dimensional conductive agent being 50 nm to 1 μm (conductive carbon nanotube with an average particle size of 10 nm – 10 microns; a person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the size could apply to the diameter of the nanotube). Zhu [0019].
15. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein 0.02 mg/cm2≤X≤ 0.15 mg/cm2; and X is an area density of the first coating (0.3 g/m2 & 1.0 g/m2, or 0.03 mg/cm2 & 0.1 mg/cm2). Zhu [0100] & [0108].
16. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a cover rate of the first coating is 50% to 100% (since the porous composite layer is located on the current collector, a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that to mean that it is entirely covered). Zhu [0010]-[0014].
17. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a peeling force between the first coating and the current collector is 10 N/m to 300 N/m (0.5-100 N/m). Zhu [0023].
19. An electronic apparatus, comprising an electrochemical apparatus (battery; Zhu claim 10),
the electrochemical apparatus comprising:
a negative electrode comprising:
a current collector;
a first coating; and
a second coating;
wherein the second coating is provided on at least one surface of the current collector;
wherein the first coating is provided between the current collector and the second coating and comprises inorganic particles, a conductive agent, and a binder,
wherein the organic particles comprise boehmite particles wrapped by the binder within the first coating, wherein the first coating has a thickness L of 100 nm to 2 µm, and
wherein a peeling force F between the first coating and the second coating satisfies 15 N≤F≤30 N, the peeling force F being a force value in N obtained from an adhesion test between the first coating and the second coating (rejected for similar reasons stated in the claim 1 rejection).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Kato as applied to claim 1 previously, and further in view of Suzuki et al., U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2013/0004843 A1 [hereinafter Suzuki].
18. The electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a resistance of the negative electrode is 1 mΩ to 100 mΩ. Zhu is silent on this.
However, Zhu’s negative electrode must have some resistance.
Suzuki teaches that 80 and 85 mΩ are suitable resistances for a negative electrode. Suzuki [0081], table 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the aforementioned prior art’s apparatus with Suzuki’s resistances of 80 or 85 mΩ to yield the predictable result of having a suitable resistance for a negative electrode.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s latest filed arguments have been fully considered and are addressed below.
The Examiner has considered Applicant’s argument that Zhu does not teach the peeling force. Remarks p. 9.
The Examiner respectfully submits that Kato teaches this.
The Examiner has considered Applicant’s argument that Kato’s layer 1 is not a first coating nor a second coating in claim 1 and that Kato’s adhesion disclosure is directed to a different purpose and different tested interface. Remarks pp. 9-10.
The Examiner respectfully submits that Kato teaches the adhesion force avoids interlayer delamination, which a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize would be desirable to have no matter what layers there are and would have wanted to avoid interlayer delamination in Zhu’s teachings.
The Examiner has considered Applicant’s argument that Uemura does not describe the claimed peeling force.
The Examiner respectfully submits that Kato teaches this.
The Examiner has considered all the other Applicant’s arguments such as Kato does not describe wrapped boehmite particles and that Zhu teaches the polymer in a dot-like or network-like manner and there’s no wrapping. Remarks pp. 8-10.
The Examiner respectfully submits that these arguments are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hosung Chung whose telephone number is (571)270-7578. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 AM - 5 PM CT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Lin can be reached on (571) 272-8902. 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.
/HOSUNG CHUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights