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 .
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al (CN 105218759 A, cited in IDS filed 7/24/23).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a copolymer (abstract), wherein the copolymer is a copolymer of a matrix monomer (abstract, macromonomer A) and a comonomer (abstract, arylboronic acid monomer B, see formula in paragraph [0009], shown below).
PNG
media_image1.png
188
296
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Note that Wang teaches that X and Y may be Hydrogen (paragraph [0013]) and that R may be a vinyl (paragraph [0013]) which may be at any of the positions 2, 3, or 4 (paragraph [0013]). Note that the vinyl group corresponds to the R3-C=C-R2 of the claimed comonomer when R2 and R3 is being selected from -H, and that the aryl group corresponds to the claimed R1 being a -C6 arylene-. See example in paragraph [0028], where the Arylboronic acid monomer B1 is a 4-vinylphenylboronic acid (paragraph [0028], correspond to Formula 1-1 of applicant’s claim 3).
Regarding claim 3, Wang et al teaches an example wherein the comonomer is a 4-vinylphenylboronic acid (paragraph [0028], corresponds to Formula 1-1). Note that a vinyl group at position 4 (paragraph [0013]) corresponds to Formula (1-1) as claimed in claim 3, and that a vinyl group at position 3 corresponds to Formula (1-2) as claimed in claim 3. Wang alternatively describes R may be an acryloyloxy at position 4 (paragraph [0013]), which would correspond to the claimed Formula (1-3).
Regarding claim 4, Wang et al teaches wherein the copolymer is a copolymer of the matrix monomer (abstract, macromonomer A), the comonomer shown in Formula (1) (abstract, arylboronic monomer B) and a functional monomer (abstract, polymerizable monomer C), the functional monomer is selected from at least one of acrylonitrile, acrylamide, (meth)acrylic acid, itaconic acid, 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropanesulfonic acid, hydroxymethyl acrylamide, sodium p-styrene sulfonate, sodium allyl sulfonate, sodium methylallyl sulfonate, hydroxyethyl (meth)acrylate, and hydroxypropyl (meth)acrylate (paragraph [0014]).
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xie et al (CN 107778419 A, cited in IDS filed 7/24/23).
Regarding claim 1, Xie et al teaches a copolymer (paragraph [0002], modified acrylic emulsion, paragraph [0004], general term for copolymers of various acrylic monomers), wherein the copolymer is a copolymer of a matrix monomer (paragraph [0012], 30-45 parts soft monomer) and a comonomer (paragraph [0012], 3-5 parts boric acid derivative crosslinking monomer, paragraph [0013], the boric acid derivative crosslinking monomer may be a p-vinylphenylboronic acid, corresponds to Formula 1-1 (see claim 3), where R2,R3 is -H and R1 is a C6-12 arylene).
Regarding claim 2, Xie et al teaches wherein the matrix monomer is at least one of a methyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate, n-propyl acrylate, n-butyl acrylate (paragraph [0016]), which corresponds to the claimed Formula (2) H2C=CH-R4, where R4 is selected from -C(=O)-O-R6, wherein R6 is a -C1-6alkyl.
Regarding claim 3, Xie et al teaches wherein the comonomer shown in Formula (1) is selected from Formula (1-1) (paragraph [0013], p-vinylphenylboronic acid)
Regarding claim 4, Xie et al teaches wherein the copolymer is a copolymer of the matrix monomer, the comonomer shown in Formula (1) and a functional monomer (paragraph [0012], soft monomer, boric acid derivative crosslinking monomer, and hard monomer), the matrix monomer is selected from at least one of alkyl (meth)acrylate (paragraph [0017], methyl methacrylate, ethyl methacrylate).
Regarding claim 7, Xie et al teaches a binder comprising the copolymer according to claim 1 (abstract, coating film prepared from the acrylic emulsion, paragraph [0004], acrylic emulsions are a general term for copolymers of various acrylic monomers and widely used in various industries).
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsugi et al (CN 101326209 A).
Regarding claim 1, Matsugi teaches a copolymer (paragraph [0041], polymer segments B can be introduced as a copolymer, paragraph [0055]), wherein the copolymer is a copolymer of a matrix monomer (paragraph [0041], non-reactive monomer, paragraph [0056]) and a comonomer (paragraph [0041], reactive monomer, paragraph [0053], such as 4-vinylphenylboronic acid, note that 4-vinylphenylboronic acid corresponds to Formula 1-1 (see claim 3), where R2,R3 is -H and R1 is a C6-12 arylene).
Regarding claim 2, Matsugi et al teaches wherein the matrix monomer (paragraph [0055-0056], vinyl monomers used for copolymerization with the vinyl monomers containing reactive groups) may be Styrene or its derivatives, acrylates, methacrylates, acrylamides, and dienes (paragraph [0056]), including styrene and butadiene (paragraph [0057], note that styrene corresponds to Formula (3) when -R4 is a C6 aryl group and butadiene corresponds to Formula (2) when R4 is -C(R5)=C(R5)2, where R5 is -H)
Regarding claim 3, Matsugi et al teaches wherein the comonomer shown in Formula (1) is selected from Formula (1-1) (paragraph [0053], 4-vinylphenylboronic acid).
Regarding claim 4, Matsugi et al teaches wherein the copolymer is a copolymer of the matrix monomer, the comonomer shown in Formula (1) and a functional monomer (paragraph [0057], two or more monomers to form copolymers with the vinyl monomer containing reactive groups), the matrix monomer is selected from at least one of alkyl (meth)acrylate (paragraph [0056-0057], methyl (meth)acrylate, ethyl (meth)acrylate, etc) or from styrene and at least an alkyl (meth)acrylate (paragraph [0056-0057]).
Regarding claim 7, Matsugi et al teaches a binder comprising the copolymer according to claim 1 (abstract, an adhesive, a dispersion, and the like obtained from such a polyolefin adhesive resin composition, comprises polymer segment A and polymer segment B).
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al (CN 105217859 A).
Regarding claim 5, Wang et al teaches wherein the comonomer (paragraph [0015], monomer B) shown in Formula (1) accounts for 0.5% - 5.0% of a total mass of the copolymer (paragraph [0015], thus overlapping the claimed 0.1-10 wt%), the matrix monomer (monomer A) accounts for 60%-95% of the total mass of the copolymer (paragraph [0015], thus overlapping the claimed 90-99.9 wt%), and the functional monomer (monomer C) accounts for 1% - 30% of the total mass of the copolymer (paragraph [0015], thus overlapping the claimed 0-10 wt%).
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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claim(s) 5-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsugi et al (CN 101326209 A).
Regarding claim 5, Matsugi et al teaches wherein the comonomer (paragraph [0055], vinyl monomer containing reactive group) shown in Formula (1) accounts for 0.5% - 75% of a total mass of the copolymer (paragraph [0055], thus overlapping the claimed range of 0.1-10 wt%), the matrix monomer accounts for 25%-99.5% of the total mass of the copolymer (paragraph [0055,0057], the vinyl monomers can be copolymerized with the vinyl monomers containing reactive groups individually, thus the remaining mass of the copolymer, which would be 25%-99.5%), and the functional monomer accounts can account for 0% of the total mass of the copolymer (paragraph [0057], note that the copolymer (polymer segment B) may be the vinyl monomer (matrix monomer) copolymerized individually with the vinyl monomer containing reactive groups (comonomer), thus 0%, thereby overlapping the claimed 0-10 wt%).
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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 6, wherein a glass transition temperature of the copolymer is -80 °C to 50°C , more preferably -60°C to 30°C (paragraph [0058], thereby overlapping the claimed range of -20°C to 80°C).
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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 8, Matsugi et al teaches wherein the binder is an emulsion-type binder (paragraph [0122], adhesive resin composition is dispersed in water), a particle size of the emulsion-type binder is 0-300 nm (paragraph [0072], overlapping the claimed range of 100-800 nm).
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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okayasu et al (JP 2015-173103 A) in view of Matsugi et al (CN 101326209 A).
Regarding claim 9, Okayasu et al teaches a lithium-ion battery (paragraph [0001], [0022]), comprising an electrode piece (paragraph [0135], negative electrode), wherein the electrode piece comprises a current collector (paragraph [0135], current collector) and an active material layer (paragraph [0135], active material) located on a surface of at least one side of the current collector (paragraph [0135], formed on the current collector), and the active material layer comprises a binder (paragraph [0135], active material layer further contains a binder).
Okayasu et al teaches the active material layer comprises a binder, such as a binder having an olefinic unsaturated bond (paragraph [0135]), but is quiet to the binder comprising the copolymer of claim 1, in particular, including a comonomer corresponding to Formula (1).
Matsugi et al teaches an olefin polymer composition that is heat-resistant and an adhesive resin containing said composition (paragraph [0002]), exhibiting excellent bonding strength, heat-sealing strength, and coating properties (paragraph [0129]). The olefin polymer composition includes a polyolefin segment (A) combined with an addition polymer segment (B) of a non-olefin vinyl monomer (paragraph [0013]), where the addition polymer segment (B) may be a copolymer of a vinyl monomer and a vinyl monomer containing reactive groups (paragraph [0057]), such as 4-vinylphenylboronic acid (paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Okayasu et al such that the binder comprises the adhesive resin taught in Matsugi et al, comprising an olefin polymer composition of a polyolefin segment and an additional polymer segment including a copolymer of a vinyl monomer and a vinyl monomer containing reactive group such as 4-vinylphenylboronic acid, as Okayasu et al is not specific to the type of binder (paragraph [0135], not particularly limited) but preferably includes an olefinic unsaturated bond to reduce swelling of the active material layer (Okayasu, paragraph [0136]), and that Matsugi et al teaches an adhesive resin including an olefin polymer (Matsugi, paragraph [0002]) that exhibits excellent bonding strength, heat-sealing strength, and coating properties (paragraph [0129]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches wherein a mass of the binder accounts for 10% by mass or less of a total mass of the active material layer (paragraph [0143], thereby overlapping the claimed range of 0.5-5 wt%).
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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05(I).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACKY YUEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5749. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/JACKY YUEN/
Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735