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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted 05/25/2023 has been received and considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5-15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang et al. US-20200106106-A1 (hereinafter “Liang”) in view of Lalau et al., Electrophoretic Deposition for Lithium-Ion Battery Electrode Manufacture, 2019, Batteries & Supercaps, 2(6), 551–559 (hereinafter “Lalau”).
Regarding Claim 1, Liang discloses composite pole piece (current collector) (see abstract), comprising:
a supporting layer, comprising an insulating layer 101/201 and a conductive layer 102/202 arranged on a side of the insulating layer 101/201 in Figs. 2-7 (see abstract and paragraphs [0008] and [0098]-[0104]); and
an active composite layer, arranged on a side of the conductive layer 102/202 away from the insulating layer 101/201 and comprising an active layer 11/21 and a metal foil layer (protective layer made of metal) 1031/2031, wherein the active layer 11/21 comprises a plurality of active particles stacked on the conductive layer 102/202, and the metal foil layer 1031/2031 is attached to the conductive layer 102/202, and configured to fix the plurality of active particles on the conductive layer 102/202 (the plurality of active particles are fixed on the conductive layer via the metal foil layer) (see paragraphs [0095], [0102], [0107], [0121], and [0128]).
Liang is silent on fixing the plurality of active particles on the conductive layer during deposition.
However, in the same field of endeavor of battery manufacturing (see abstract), Lalau discloses the known technique of electrophoretic deposition which includes placing a substrate with a working electrode and a counter electrode in a colloidal solution containing battery active materials and depositing the active materials on the substrate via an electric field (see pages 551-552 Section 2.1 and Fig. 1). When combining this method with the invention of Liang, the substrate would be the composite pole piece of Liang and a skilled artisan is capable of using the technique taught by Lalau to deposit active particles onto the composite pole piece.
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 composite pole piece of Laing wherein the plurality of active particles are fixed on the conductive layer during deposition, as disclosed Lalau, as a known technique to manufacture a battery electrode.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Liang further discloses wherein a thickness of the supporting layer (insulation layer + conductive layer) is 6.3 μm (see Table 1 Positive current collector 1). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of a thickness of the supporting layer being 2 μm -20 μm.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Liang further discloses wherein a material of the insulating layer is an organic polymer material (see paragraph [0060]).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Liang further discloses wherein when the composite pole piece is a positive pole piece, the metal foil layer is a metal aluminum layer, and an active component in the active particles is lithium nickel cobalt manganate (NCM) (see paragraph [0129] and Table 1), and
when the composite pole piece is a negative pole piece, the metal foil layer is a metal copper layer, and the active component in the active particles is graphite (see paragraph [0130] and Table 1).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Liang further discloses wherein a side of the active layer away from the conductive layer is provided with an active plane in Figs. 4-6 (see paragraphs [0008], [0013], [0100]-[0103], and [0132]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Liang further discloses a battery cell, comprising: a positive pole piece and a negative pole piece, wherein at least one of the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece comprises the composite pole piece according to the aforementioned claim 1 (see paragraphs [0008]-[0010], [0108], and [0133]-[0134]).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Liang discloses the battery cell according to claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above). Liang further discloses wherein the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece are both the composite pole pieces; when thicknesses of the active composite layers of the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece are both less than a thickness of a corresponding supporting layer, the insulating layers of the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece are PE layers, PP layers or PP/PE/PP composite layers (see paragraphs [0008]-[0010], and [0061]);
the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece are sequentially stacked to form a bare battery cell, and the active composite layer of one of the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece is attached to the side, away from the conductive layer, of the insulating layer of the other (see paragraphs [0133]-[0134]); and
when the thicknesses of the active composite layers of the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece are both greater than or equal to the thickness of the corresponding supporting layer, the bare battery cell further comprises an isolation film (separator) arranged between the positive pole piece and the negative pole piece; the positive pole piece, the isolation film and the negative pole piece are sequentially stacked to form a bare battery cell; and the battery cell also comprises a shell and an electrolyte, and the bare battery cell and the electrolyte are accommodated in the shell (see paragraphs [0133]-[0134]).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Liang discloses the battery cell according to claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above). Liang further discloses wherein the positive pole piece comprises two composite pole pieces, and the sides, away from the active composite layer, of the two supporting layers of the two composite pole pieces are attached to each other (both sides of current collector have supporting layers); the negative pole piece comprises two composite pole pieces, and the sides, away from the active composite layer, of the two supporting layers of the two composite pole pieces are attached to each other (both sides of current collector have supporting layers) in Figs. 4-6 (see paragraphs [0100]-[0104] and [0133]-[0134]);
the bare battery cell further comprises an isolation film (separator), and the positive pole piece, the isolation film and the negative pole piece are sequentially stacked to form the bare battery cell; and the battery cell also comprises a shell and an electrolyte, and the bare battery cell and the electrolyte are accommodated in the shell (see paragraphs [0133]-[0134]).
Regarding Claims 12 and 13, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Liang further discloses a preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 1, comprising: stacking a plurality of active particles on the conductive layer to form an active layer; and depositing metal ions on a surface of the conductive layer from a side of the conductive layer close to the active layer to form the metal foil layer, and fixing the plurality of active particles on the conductive layer (see paragraphs [0112]-[0132]). Liang also discloses attaching a side of the insulating layer away from the conductive layer to a first electrode plate (see paragraphs [0081], [0100]-[0104], and [0110]-[0116]).
Liang is silent on wherein the step of stacking the plurality of active particles on the conductive layer to form the active layer specifically comprises: placing the supporting layer in a colloidal solution containing the plurality of active particles for electrophoretic deposition, and depositing the plurality of colloidal active particles on a side of the conductive layer away from the insulating layer to form the active layer and wherein the step of electrophoretic deposition specifically comprises: attaching a side of the insulating layer away from the conductive layer to a first electrode plate and then putting same into the colloidal solution; putting a second electrode plate with a polarity opposite to that of the first electrode plate into the colloidal solution and arranging same at an interval from the first electrode plate; and electrifying the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate.
However, in the same field of endeavor of battery manufacturing (see abstract), Lalau discloses the known technique of electrophoretic deposition which includes placing a substrate with a working electrode and a counter electrode in a colloidal solution containing battery active materials and depositing the active materials on the substrate via an electric field (see pages 551-552 Section 2.1 and Fig. 1). When combining this method with the invention of Liang, the substrate would be the composite pole piece of Liang where the active material particles are positioned on a side of the conductive layer away from the insulating layer. As such, a skilled artisan is capable of using the technique taught by Lalau to deposit active particles on a side of the conductive layer away from the insulating layer to form the active layer.
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 preparation method disclosed by Liang wherein the step of stacking the plurality of active particles on the conductive layer to form the active layer specifically comprises: placing the supporting layer in a colloidal solution containing the plurality of active particles for electrophoretic deposition, and depositing the plurality of colloidal active particles on a side of the conductive layer away from the insulating layer to form the active layer, as disclosed Lalau, as a known technique to manufacture a battery electrode.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 13 (see rejection of claim 13 above).
Liang is silent on wherein a distance that a circumferential direction of the first electrode plate exceeds a circumferential direction of the insulating layer is 5 mm-100 mm; and/or, an area of each of the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate is 0.001 m2-200 m2; and/or, a distance between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate is 5 mm-5 m; and/or, the colloidal solution has a pH of 7-10; and/or, after the insulating layer is put into the colloidal solution, the insulating layer exceeds a liquid level of the colloidal solution by 5 mm-100 mm.
However, Sasaki discloses a distance between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate is 1 cm (see page 557 Electrophoretic Deposition Details), which falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of a distance between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate is 5 mm-5 m. A skilled artisan would recognize this as an appropriate technique to manufacture an electrode.
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 preparation method disclosed by Liang wherein a distance between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate is 5 mm-5 m, as disclosed Lalau, as a known technique to manufacture a battery electrode.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 13 (see rejection of claim 13 above).
Liang is silent on the preparation method before placing the supporting layer in the colloidal solution, further comprising: dispersing the active particles in an organic solvent, and stirring same to obtain the colloidal solution containing the colloidal active particles; in the process of stirring to obtain the colloidal solution, a stirring speed is 5 rpm-2000 rpm and a stirring time is 30 min-300 min.
However, Sasaki discloses dispersing the active particles in an organic solvent, and stirring same to obtain the colloidal solution containing the colloidal active particles and stirring, where a stirring speed is 100 rpm, and a stirring time is 1 hour. The values fall within and therefore anticipate the claimed ranges of a stirring speed of 5 rpm-2000 rpm and a stirring time of 30 min-300 min.
A skilled artisan would recognize this as an appropriate technique to manufacture an electrode.
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 preparation method disclosed by Liang wherein the preparation method further comprises: dispersing the active particles in an organic solvent, and stirring same to obtain the colloidal solution containing the colloidal active particles; in the process of stirring to obtain the colloidal solution, a stirring speed is 5 rpm-2000 rpm and a stirring time is 30 min-300 min., as disclosed Lalau, as a known technique to manufacture a battery electrode.
Regarding Claim 19, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12 above). Liang further discloses the preparation method, before stacking the plurality of active particles on the conductive layer, further comprising coating or depositing a conductive substance on a side of the insulating layer to form the conductive layer on the insulating layer (see paragraphs [0081] and [0100]-[0104]).
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Lalau as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang CN-113594466-A (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Liang is silent on a projection plane of the metal foil layer on the conductive layer in a direction perpendicular to the conductive layer is a first projection plane, and a projection plane of the active layer on the conductive layer in the direction perpendicular to the conductive layer is a second projection plane; and an area of the first projection plane is larger than an area of the second projection plane, and the second projection plane falls within a range of the first projection plane.
However, in the same field of endeavor of composite pole pieces (current collectors), Wang discloses a current collector with a foil layer, conductive material layer, and active material wherein the conductive layer (comparable to the metal foil layer of Liang, since it is the layer the active material is coated on) extends beyond the ends of the active material layer in Figs. 1-3 (see paragraphs [n0014], [n0043]-[n0045], [n0047], and [n0050]). As such, the circumferential direction of the metal foil layer is beyond a circumferential direction of the active layer, which meets the claimed second projection plane falling within a range of the first projection plane (as discussed in paragraph [0111] of the published instant application).
Wang additionally discloses allowing the conductive layer to extend beyond the ends of the active material layer avoids coating difficulty (see paragraph [n0050]).
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 composite pole piece of Liang wherein a projection plane of the metal foil layer on the conductive layer in a direction perpendicular to the conductive layer is a first projection plane, and a projection plane of the active layer on the conductive layer in the direction perpendicular to the conductive layer is a second projection plane; and an area of the first projection plane is larger than an area of the second projection plane, and the second projection plane falls within a range of the first projection plane, as disclosed by Wang, in order to avoid coating difficulty.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Liang is silent on wherein in a width direction of the conductive layer, two sides of the metal foil layer are aligned with two sides of the conductive layer, and two sides of the active layer are aligned with the two sides of the conductive layer, wherein in a length direction of the conductive layer, one end of two ends of the metal foil layer is aligned with a corresponding end of the conductive layer, the other end of the two ends of the metal foil layer is at a first preset distance from the other corresponding end of the conductive layer, one end of two ends of the active layer is aligned with the corresponding end of the conductive layer, and the other end of the two ends of the active layer is at a second preset distance from the corresponding end of the conductive layer; or, in the length direction of the conductive layer, the two ends of the metal foil layer are aligned with the two ends of the conductive layer, and the two ends of the active layer are aligned with the two ends of the conductive layer, wherein in the width direction of the conductive layer, a side of the two sides of the metal foil layer is aligned with a corresponding side of the conductive layer, the other side of the two sides of the metal foil layer is at the first preset distance from the other corresponding side of the conductive layer, one end of the two sides of the active layer is aligned with the corresponding side of the conductive layer, and the other side of the two sides of the active layer is at the second preset distance from the corresponding side of the conductive layer.
However, Wang discloses the active material being a preset distance away from an edge of the conductive material layer and that the portion of the conductive layer that extends beyond the active material layer can be removed by cutting (thus aligning an end of the active layer and conductive layer) to increase energy density and that the conductive layer completely covers the foils layer (thus aligning the ends of the conductive layer and metal foil layer) so that elemental metals are not deposited on the outer surface of the electrode (see paragraphs [n0014], [n0043]-[n0044], and [n0050]). There would necessarily be a distance between the ends of the layers. Wang additionally discloses allowing the conductive layer to extend beyond the ends of the active material layer avoids coating difficulty (see paragraph [n0050]).
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 composite pole piece of Liang wherein, in the length direction of the conductive layer, the two ends of the metal foil layer are aligned with the two ends of the conductive layer, and the two ends of the active layer are aligned with the two ends of the conductive layer, wherein in the width direction of the conductive layer, a side of the two sides of the metal foil layer is aligned with a corresponding side of the conductive layer, the other side of the two sides of the metal foil layer is at the first preset distance from the other corresponding side of the conductive layer, one end of the two sides of the active layer is aligned with the corresponding side of the conductive layer, and the other side of the two sides of the active layer is at the second preset distance from the corresponding side of the conductive layer, as disclosed by Wang, in order to ease coating difficulty, increase energy density, and avoids elemental metals being deposited on the outer surface of the electrode
Regarding Claim 4, modified Liang discloses the composite pole piece according to claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3 above).
Liang is silent on wherein the first preset distance is 0-1 mm; and/or the second preset distance is 5 mm-100 mm.
However, Wang discloses the that the conductive layer completely covers the foil layer (thus aligning the ends of the conductive layer and metal foil layer) so that elemental metals are not deposited on the outer surface of the electrode (see paragraphs [n0014], [n0043]-[n0044], and [n0050]). This would fall within and therefore anticipate the claimed range of the first preset distance being 0-1 mm.
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 composite pole piece of Liang wherein the first preset distance is 0-1 mm, as disclosed by Wang, in order to avoid elemental metals being deposited on the outer surface of the electrode.
Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Lalau and further in view of Palmans et al. US-20020127348-A1 (hereinafter “Palmans”).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12 above). Liang further discloses using deposition to deposit metals, such as depositing the conductive layer on the insulation layer and depositing the metal foil layer on the conductive layer (see paragraphs [0081], [0095], [0119], and [0121]). Liang also discloses copper being conventionally used for negative pole pieces and aluminum being conventionally used for positive pole pieces (see paragraphs [0042], [0048], and [0078] and Tables 1 and 2).
Liang is silent on wherein the step of depositing the metal ions on the surface of the conductive layer from the side of the conductive layer close to the active layer to form the metal foil layer specifically comprises: placing the supporting layer with the active particles stacked in an ionic solution containing the metal ions for electrodeposition, so as to form the metal foil layer by deposition on the surface of the conductive layer, wherein when the composite pole piece is a negative pole piece, the ionic solution is a copper ionic solution, and a concentration of the copper ionic solution is 0.001 mol/L-0.1 mol/L; and when the composite pole piece is a positive pole piece, the ionic solution is an aluminum ionic solution, and a concentration of the aluminum ionic solution is 0.001 mol/L-0.1 mol/L.
However, in the same field of endeavor of deposition (see abstract), Palmans discloses preparing an ionic solution with copper ions and using electrodeposition to deposit copper on a substrate (see paragraphs [0002], [0017]-[0020], and [0047]). Palmans further discloses the copper ion concentration affects the deposition and may range from 0.01-0.05 mol/L and is preferably 0.029 M in Fig. 6 (see paragraphs [0044]). This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of concentration of the copper ionic solution being 0.001 mol/L-0.1 mol/L.
Further, electrodeposition is a known and common technique and concentration of the ionic solution is known to affect deposition rate, as taught by Palmans. As such, a skilled artisan is capable using the appropriate aluminum ionic solution concentration to similarly achieve appropriate deposition.
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 preparation method of the composite pole piece disclosed by Liang wherein the step of depositing the metal ions on the surface of the conductive layer from the side of the conductive layer close to the active layer to form the metal foil layer specifically comprises: placing the supporting layer with the active particles stacked in an ionic solution containing the metal ions for electrodeposition, so as to form the metal foil layer by deposition on the surface of the conductive layer, wherein when the composite pole piece is a negative pole piece, the ionic solution is a copper ionic solution, and a concentration of the copper ionic solution is 0.001 mol/L-0.1 mol/L; and when the composite pole piece is a positive pole piece, the ionic solution is an aluminum ionic solution, and a concentration of the aluminum ionic solution is 0.001 mol/L-0.1 mol/L, as disclosed by Palmans, in order to achieve appropriate electrodeposition.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Lalau and Palmans, as applied to Claim 16 above, and further in view of Wada US-20120003498-A1 (hereinafter “Wada”).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above). Liang further discloses a deposition thickness of the metal foil layer may be 100 nm. This falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the deposition thickness metal foil layer being 0.05 µm-6 μm.
Lang is silent on the deposition thickness of the metal foil layer being adjusted according to the claimed rules.
However, Palmans discloses how deposition thickness and rate are affected by various factors, such as thickness being affected by the deposition time and the deposition rate being affected by temperature and concentration in Figs. 4-6 (see paragraphs [0024] and [0043]-[0044]).
Additionally, in the same field of endeavor of electrodeposition, Wada discloses a current density range and its effect on plating time (see paragraphs [0012], [0031], and [0046] and Table 1). A skilled artisan is capable of choosing the appropriate composite pole piece area for the size of battery they are creating, and using the current density to determine the proper current. Further, with the teachings of Palmans and Wada, a skilled artisan is capable of optimizing the parameters that affect deposition rate and thickness to achieve a desired thickness of the metal foil layer during electrodeposition.
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 preparation method of the composite pole piece wherein the deposition thickness of the metal foil layer are adjusted according to the claimed rules, as taught by Palmans and Wada, in order to optimize the parameters that affect deposition rate and thickness to achieve a desired thickness of the metal foil layer.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Lalau, Wada, and Palmans as applied to Claim 16 above, and further in view of Xue et al. CN-110943200-A (US-20220037672-A1 used as translation and cited PTO-892) (hereinafter “Xue”).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16 above).
Modified Liang is silent on, in the electrodeposition step, the insulating layer exceeds a liquid level of the ionic solution by 0-1 mm.
However, in the same field of endeavor of composite pole pieces (current collectors) (see abstract), Xue discloses in Fig. 17 (see paragraphs [0185]-[0186]).
Xue additionally discloses a person skilled in the art understands that the clear area on the electrode plate is disposed for processing convenience, safety, or the like, and the clear area is optional (see paragraph [0186]). As such, it is within the ambit of a skilled artisan to allow the insulating layer to exceed a liquid level of the ionic solution by 0-1 mm in the electrodeposition in order to form a clear area (as the area exceeding the liquid level would not be coated). Additionally, it is within the ambit to provide no clear area (as Xue teaches it is optional) and a skilled artisan would allow the insulating layer to exceed a liquid level of the ionic solution by 0 mm in that case.
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 preparation method of the composite pole piece disclosed by Liang wherein the insulating layer exceeds a liquid level of the ionic solution by 0-1 mm, as disclosed by Xue, a known skill in the art and to achieve processing convenience and safety.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Lalau as applied to Claim 12 above, and further in view of Xue and Kizu et al. US-20030165739-A1 (hereinafter “Kizu”).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Liang discloses the preparation method of the composite pole piece according to claim 12 (see rejection of claim 12 above).
Modified Liang is silent on the preparation method, after forming the metal foil layer by deposition on the surface of the conductive layer, further comprising performing rolling operation to enable the active layer to press against the conductive layer and enable a side of the active layer away from the conductive layer to form an active plane, a rolling pressure of the rolling operation is 5 T-500 T, and a rolling temperature is 50° C.-90° C.
However, Xue discloses bonding a conductive to a support layer by applying a pressure of 30 T to 50 T to tightly bond the layers together (see paragraph [0215]). A skilled artisan would recognize this rolling method would also bond the layers of Liang, enabling the active layer to press against the conductive layer and enabling a side of the active layer away from the conductive layer to form an active plane.
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 preparation method of the composite pole piece disclosed by Liang wherein the preparation method, after forming the metal foil layer by deposition on the surface of the conductive layer, further comprises performing rolling operation to enable the active layer to press against the conductive layer and enable a side of the active layer away from the conductive layer to form an active plane, a rolling pressure of the rolling operation is 5 T-500 T, as disclosed by Xue, as it is a known method to tightly bond the layers together.
Liang and Xue are silent on a rolling temperature being 50° C.-90° C.
However, in the same field of endeavor of electrode formation, Kizu discloses using a rolling temperature of 20° C.-100° C. (see paragraph [0083]). This substantially overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of a rolling temperature being 50° C.-90° C.
Kizu further discloses when the rolling temperature is lower than the range, spring back occurs due to low temperature rolling and the obtained lithium ion secondary battery shows lower safety and when the rolling temperature is higher than the range, the electrode will have greater resistance (see paragraph [0084]). As such, the rolling temperature is a result effective variable 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 preparation method of the composite pole piece disclosed by Liang wherein a rolling temperature is 50° C.-90° C, as disclosed by Kizu, in order to avoid lowering safety and increasing resistance.
Conclusion
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