Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/203,032

NON-AQUEOUS RECHARGEABLE BATTERY, ELECTRODE PLATE FOR NON-AQUEOUS RECHARGEABLE BATTERY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING NON-AQUEOUS RECHARGEABLE BATTERY

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 29, 2023
Examiner
DARBY, BRENDON CHARLES
Art Unit
1749
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Prime Planet Energy & Solutions Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
61 granted / 120 resolved
-14.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
166
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 120 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 05/31/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2022-088739 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention II (claims 7-10) in the reply filed on 11/10/2025 is acknowledged. In the Response to Restriction Requirement filed on 11/10/2025, applicant stated that claims 1-6 are canceled. However, a corresponding amendment to the claims canceling claims 1-6 was not filed. As such, claims 1-6 are merely considered withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention I, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/10/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahata (US 2018/0026314) (of record). Regarding claim 7, Takahata discloses a method for manufacturing a non-aqueous rechargeable battery (title; abstract), the non-aqueous rechargeable battery including an electrode body (80), a non-aqueous electrolyte solution, and a battery case (50) accommodating the electrode body (80) and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution ([0076]; see Fig. 1), the electrode body (80) including a negative electrode plate (20), a positive electrode plate (10) and a separator (40) arranged between the negative electrode plate (20) and the positive electrode plate (10) ([0077]; see Fig. 1), the method comprising: applying a positive electrode mixture paste (slurry), containing at least a positive electrode active material and an organic solvent (NMP), to a positive electrode substrate (positive electrode current collector) ([0038]; [0024]-[0029]); forming a positive electrode mixture layer by drying the positive electrode mixture paste (slurry) so that the organic solvent (NMP) remains in the positive electrode mixture layer ([0038]-[0039]); and charging the non-aqueous rechargeable battery in a state in which the electrode body (80) and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution are accommodated in the battery case (50) ([0062]-[0064]; [0025]). Regarding claim 10, Takahata discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 7. Takahata further discloses that the organic solvent is N-methyl pyrrolidone ([0010]; [0029]; [0083]). Claims 7-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirano (WO 2022/186083 with English Machine Translation) (of record). Regarding claim 7, Hirano discloses a method for manufacturing a non-aqueous rechargeable battery (title; [0065]), the non-aqueous rechargeable battery including an electrode body (20), a non-aqueous electrolyte solution, and a battery case (10) accommodating the electrode body (20) and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution ([0011]; [0015]; see Figs. 1 and 2), the electrode body (20) including a negative electrode plate (22), a positive electrode plate (21) and a separator (23) arranged between the negative electrode plate (22) and the positive electrode plate (21) ([0015]; see Fig. 2), the method comprising: applying a positive electrode mixture paste, containing at least a positive electrode active material and an organic solvent (NMP), to a positive electrode substrate (21A) ([0066]); forming a positive electrode mixture layer (21B) by drying the positive electrode mixture paste so that the organic solvent (NMP) remains in the positive electrode mixture layer (21B) ([0066]); and charging the non-aqueous rechargeable battery in a state in which the electrode body (20) and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution are accommodated in the battery case (10) ([0064]; [0099]-[0101]). Regarding claim 8, Hirano discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 7. Hirano further discloses that in a state in which the positive electrode plate (21), the negative electrode plate (22), and the separator (23) are stacked in a stacking direction, the electrode body (20) is rolled in a longitudinal direction intersecting the stacking direction (see Fig. 2; [0068]). Hirano further discloses that the positive electrode mixture layer (21B) includes an end region (Rx) with respect to a widthwise direction and a middle region (Ry) with respect to the widthwise direction (see Fig. 3; [0017]). Hirano further discloses that peak intensity values (Y1, X1) of the respective middle region (Ry) and end region (Rx) represent the content of the organic solvent (NMP) in the regions ([0007]; [0035]). Hirano further discloses an example in which the peak intensity value (X1) of the end region (Rx) is larger than the peak intensity value (Y1) of the middle region (Ry) (see Comparative Example 5 in Table 2), reading on the limitation that a larger amount of the organic solvent remains in an end region than in a middle region. Regarding claim 10, Hirano discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 7. Hirano further discloses that the organic solvent is N-methyl pyrrolidone ([0007]; [0018]). 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. 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 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahata (US 2018/0026314) (of record) in view of Liu (CN 2758991 Y with English Machine Translation). Regarding claim 8, Takahata discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 7. Takahata further discloses that in a state in which the positive electrode plate (10), the negative electrode plate (20), and the separator (40) are stacked in a stacking direction, the electrode body (80) is rolled in a longitudinal direction intersecting the stacking direction ([0077]). Takahata fails to disclose, however, that a larger amount of the organic solvent (NMP) remains in an end region of the positive electrode mixture layer with respect to a widthwise direction intersecting the stacking direction and the longitudinal direction than in a middle region with respect to the widthwise direction. Liu teaches a similar method for manufacturing a non-aqueous rechargeable battery (title; [0021]-[0028]), the non-aqueous battery including an electrode body, a non-aqueous electrolyte solution, and a battery case accommodating the electrode body and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution ([0021]), the electrode body including a negative electrode plate (2), a positive electrode plate (1), and a separator (3) arranged between the negative electrode plate (2) and the positive electrode plate (1) (see Fig. 1; [0021]-[0022]). Liu further teaches that in forming a positive electrode mixture layer (4) on the positive electrode plate (1), it is preferable for a thickness of the positive electrode mixture layer (4) to smoothly increase from the middle to both ends of the positive electrode plate (1) in the width direction (see Fig. 1; [0022]). Liu further teaches that creating a higher density of the positive electrode mixture layer (4) in the end regions in this way improves the battery cycle performance and the safety performance ([0013]; [0023]; [0032]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-aqueous rechargeable battery disclosed by Takahata such that a thickness of the positive electrode mixture layer in forming the positive electrode mixture layer smoothly increases from the middle region to both end regions, as taught by Liu, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would improve the battery cycle performance and the safety performance. Furthermore, because Takahata discloses that the organic solvent (NMP) remains in the positive electrode mixture layer even after drying (Takahata: [0038]-[0039]), it is clear that the above modification in view of Liu would lead to a larger amount of the organic solvent (NMP) remaining in an end region than in a middle region with respect to the widthwise direction of the positive electrode mixture layer since a larger thickness of the positive electrode mixture layer would necessarily result in a larger amount of the organic solvent (NMP). Thus, modified Takahata satisfies all of the limitations in claim 8. Regarding claim 9, modified Takahata discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 8. Modified Takahata further discloses that when the non-aqueous rechargeable battery is charged, the organic solvent composed of NMP oxidizes and decomposes (Takahata: [0060]; [0065]). Because the oxidation of N-methyl pyrrolidone leads to the generation of gas, it is considered inherent that the NMP solvent vaporizes and forms bubbles during this charging. Furthermore, because Liu teaches that the thickness of the positive electrode mixture layer continuously increases from the middle region to the end regions (Liu: see Fig. 1; [0022]), under BRI, any portion of the end regions would necessarily contain a larger amount of organic solvent than a corresponding portion of the middle region. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily interpreted the claimed end region as having a separation distance from an end of the positive electrode mixture layer that is less than or equal to a radius of the bubbles formed during the charging. Thus, modified Takahata satisfies all of the limitations in claim 9. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENDON C DARBY whose telephone number is (571)272-1225. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30am - 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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at (571) 270-5545. 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. /B.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1749 /KATELYN W SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 29, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600173
A NOISE IMPROVING TREAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583265
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570108
MOTORCYCLE TIRE FOR RUNNING ON ROUGH TERRAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12508846
TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12485705
PNEUMATIC TIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 02, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+16.0%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 120 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month