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.
Drawings
The examiner notes the presence of Korean characters in Figure 2. The examiner recommends Applicant amend the Figure with the English translation for the sake of clarity and consistency.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 9 be found allowable, claim 10 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Applicant is advised that should claim 10 be found allowable, claim 9 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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, 3, 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 2018/0166688), hereinafter referred to as Ahn, in view of Zhu et al. (US 2021/0095143), hereinafter referred to as Zhu.
Regarding Claim 1, Ahn teaches a method of preparing a negative electrode for a rechargeable lithium battery (Abstract), wherein:
forming a coated portion on a current collector, wherein the coated portion comprises an active material layer (Par. 0012, “applying the above-described electrode slurry onto at least one surface of an electrode current collector to form an electrode active material layer”)
forming an uncoated region on the current collector, wherein the uncoated region does not include the active material layer and the coated portion and the uncoated portion are alternatively arranged (Par. 0006, “active material slurry is dragged, formed on a surface of the uncoated portion”)
While Ahn teaches similar content to the capillary number of the electrode slurry (Abstract, “preparing an electrode slurry for lithium secondary batteries in which the physical properties of the electrode slurry are improved”), Ahn does not explicitly teach wherein the coated portion is formed by coating a first negative active material layer composition having a capillary number of about 0.25 to about 1.50 on the current collector and coating a second negative active material layer composition having a capillary number of about 0.28 to about 1.50 on the first negative active material layer composition. However, Zhu teaches:
wherein the coated portion is formed by coating a first negative active material layer composition having a capillary number of about 0.25 to about 1.50 on the current collector and coating a second negative active material layer composition having a capillary number of about 0.28 to about 1.50 on the first negative active material layer composition (Par. 0051, “the ink composition has a capillary number (Ca) of about 0.8 to about 1.2”)
Ahn and Zhu are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of preparing a coating for a substrate to minimize drag effects. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ahn to incorporate the teachings of Zhu by modifying the properties of both of the slurries to fall within the range of preferable capillary numbers. Doing so would prevent the slurry from creating drag-lines which decrease pattern fidelity. (Zhu, Par. 0068)
Regarding Claim 3, Ahn and Zhu teach the method as claimed in Claim 1, and Ahn further teaches:
wherein the first negative active material layer composition has a solid content of about 42 wt% to about 80 wt% based on the total 100 wt%, of the first negative active material layer composition (Par. 0025, “the solid concentration of the first electrode slurry is in the range of 70 to 80%”)
a second negative active material layer composition has a solid content of about 41 wt% to about 80 wt% based on the total 100 wt%, of the second negative active material layer composition (Par. 0029, “the solid concentration of the second electrode slurry is in the range of 60 to 70%”)
Regarding Claims 5, Ahn and Zhu teach the method as claimed in Claim 1, Zhu further teaches:
wherein the first negative active material layer composition has a capillary number of about 0.25 to about 0.82 (Par. 0029, “the ink composition has a capillary number (Ca) of about 0.8 to about 1.2”
Ahn and Zhu are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of creating a coating for a substrate. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ahn to incorporate the teachings of Zhu by modifying the properties of the first electrode slurry to fall within the range of preferable capillary numbers. Doing so would prevent the slurry from creating drag-lines which decrease pattern fidelity. (Zhu, Par. 0068)
Regarding Claims 6, Ahn and Zhu teach the method as claimed in Claim 1, Zhu further teaches:
wherein the second negative active material layer composition has a capillary number of about 0.28 to about 0.85 (Par. 0029, “the ink composition has a capillary number (Ca) of about 0.8 to about 1.2”
Ahn and Zhu are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of creating a coating for a substrate. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ahn to incorporate the teachings of Zhu by modifying the properties the second electrode slurry fall within the range of preferable capillary numbers. Doing so would prevent the slurry from creating drag-lines which decrease pattern fidelity. (Zhu, Par. 0068)
Regarding Claim 7, Ahn and Zhu teach the method as claimed in Claim 1. While neither reference explicitly teaches wherein a difference between a capillary number of the first negative active material layer composition and a capillary number of the second negative active material layer composition is about 0.03 to about 1.25, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have varied the physical parameters of the electrode slurries according to the prior teaching of Zhu to have the difference of capillary numbers fall between the claimed range. For example, one of ordinary skill in the art could prepare a first negative active material layer composition having a capillary number of about 0.81 and prepare a second negative active material layer composition having a capillary number of about 0.85. In such an example, the difference between the capillary numbers is about 0.04, which falls between the claimed range.
Regarding Claim 8, Ahn and Zhu teach the method of preparing a negative electrode according to Claim 1, Ahn further teaches:
a negative electrode for a rechargeable lithium battery (Par 0040, “method of manufacturing an electrode”)
Regarding Claim 9, Ahn and Zhu teach the negative electrode of Claim 8, Ahn further teaches:
a rechargeable lithium battery (Par 0048. “lithium secondary battery”)
a positive electrode (Par 0048, “positive electrode”)
an electrolyte (Par 0048, “electrolytic solution”)
Regarding Claim 10, Ahn and Zhu teach the negative electrode prepared according to Claim 1, Ahn further teaches:
a rechargeable lithium battery (Par 0048. “lithium secondary battery”)
a positive electrode (Par 0048, “positive electrode”)
an electrolyte (Par 0048, “electrolytic solution”)
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn and Zhu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yao et al. (US 2022/0149340), hereinafter referred to as Yao.
Regarding Claim 2, Ahn and Zhu teach the method as claimed in Claim 1, but both fail to teach wherein the coating the first negative active material layer composition on the current collector and the coating the second negative active material layer composition on the first negative active material layer composition are concurrently performed. However, Yao teaches:
wherein the coating the first negative active material layer composition on the current collector and the coating the second negative active material layer composition on the first negative active material layer composition are concurrently performed (Par 0084, Figure 8, “In some examples, steps 804 and 806 may be performed substantially simultaneously”)
Ahn, Zhu and Yao are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of creating a coating for a substrate. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ahn and Zhu with the Teachings of Yao by modifying the process to coat the first layer on the substrate and the second layer on the first layer at the same time. Doing so decreases manufacturing time of the electrode, resulting in a more efficient process.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn and Zhu as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Cha (KR 20200144378).
Regarding Claim 4, Ahn and Zhu teach the method as claimed in Claim 1. While Ahn teaches a thickener weight percentage range close to the claimed invention (Par 0036, “content of the cellulose-based compound may be in the range of 0.03 to 5 wt % based on the total weight of the electrode active material slurry”), neither reference explicitly teaches wherein the first negative active material layer composition comprises a first thickener and an amount of the first thickener is about 0.006 wt% to about 0.012 wt% based on the total 100 wt%, of the first negative active material layer composition, and the second negative active material layer composition comprises a second thickener and an amount of the second thickener is about 0.007 wt% to about 0.013 wt% based on the total 100 wt%, of the second negative active material layer composition. However, Cha teaches:
wherein the first negative active material layer composition comprises a first thickener and an amount of the first thickener is about 0.006 wt% to about 0.012 wt% based on the total 100 wt%, of the first negative active material layer composition (Par 0033, the content of the cellulose-based compound may be 0.8 weight% or less)
Ahn, Zhu and Cha are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of creating a coating for a substrate. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ahn and Zhu with the teachings of Cha by modifying the composition of the first negative active material layer to include a weight percentage of a thickener that falls within the claimed range. Doing so allows the viscosity of the composition to be easily controlled. (Cha, Par 0033)
While Cha does not explicitly teach the second negative active material layer composition comprises a second thickener and an amount of the second thickener is about 0.007 wt% to about 0.013 wt% based on the total 100 wt%, of the second negative active material layer composition, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ahn and Zhu with the teachings of Cha by modifying the composition of the second negative active material layer to include a weight percentage of a thickener that falls within the claimed range. Doing so would result in a similar control of viscosity as seen in the first layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ungorr Nassery whose telephone number is (571)305-5068. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 EST.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-0604. 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.
/U.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1784
/HUMERA N. SHEIKH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights