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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 was filed in this application after appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, but prior to a decision on the appeal. 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examination under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the appeal has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114 and prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 08 June 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims and Other Notes
Claims 1 and 3–13 are pending.
Claim 2 is canceled.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The paragraph numbers cited in this Office Action in reference to the instant application are referring to the paragraph numbering of the PG-Pub of the instant application. See US 2023/0420726 A1.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 15 May 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the final Office Action on 10 January 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 4–6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hojo et al. (US 2018/0337399 A1, hereinafter Hojo) in view of Umetsu et al. (US 2019/0035560 A1, hereinafter Umetsu), Kimura et al. (US 2020/0274169 A1, hereinafter Kimura), and Umeyama et al. (US 2017/0092951 A1, hereinafter Umeyama).
Regarding claims 1, 5, and 6, Hojo discloses an electrochemical device (100, [0039]) comprising:
an electrode body (4) including a positive electrode (10), a negative electrode (20), and a separator (30) disposed between the positive electrode (10) and the negative electrode (20, [0040]; and
an electrolyte containing a lithium salt (FIG. 2, [0053]),
wherein the negative electrode (20) includes a negative current collector (2b) and a negative electrode mixture layer (2a) supported on the negative current collector (2b, [0042]),
the negative electrode mixture layer (2a) contains a negative electrode active material that is reversibly doped with lithium ions (see negative electrode active material, [0049]),
a potential of the negative electrode (20) is less than or equal to 0.2 V with respect to a Li counter electrode in a discharged state (see discharge potential, [0023]);
wherein the negative electrode mixture layer (2a) contains a conductive additive (see conduction assistant, [0048]), and
Hojo does not explicitly disclose:
a specific surface area of the negative electrode mixture layer is in range from 30 m2/g to 60 m2/g, inclusive;
a thickness of the negative electrode mixture layer is more than or equal to 25 μm, and
wherein a thickness of the negative current collector is less than or equal to 15 μm; and
wherein the electrode body is a columnar wound body provided by winding the positive electrode having a band shape and the negative electrode having a band shape with the separator disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode.
Umetsu discloses an electrochemical device comprising an electrode body (14) that is a columnar wound body provided by winding a positive electrode (7) having a band shape and a negative electrode (10) having a band shape with a separator (13) disposed between the positive electrode (7) and the negative electrode (10, [0384]), a specific surface area of the negative electrode mixture layer is in range from 3 m2/g to 67 m2/g, inclusive ([0321]–[0323]); a content proportion of a conductive additive in the negative electrode mixture layer is in a range from 3% by mass to 15% by mass (see conductive filler, [0304]), inclusive; a thickness of the negative electrode mixture layer is more than or equal to 25 μm (see thickness, [00465]), and wherein a thickness of the negative current collector is less than or equal to 15 μm (see thickness, [0465]) to improve high load charge/discharge cycling (see negative electrode, [0030]). Umetsu discloses a specific surface area per unit volume σ and a density of the negative electrode mixture layer ρ ([0321]–[0323]). A specific surface area per unit mass Σ can be determined from the specific surface area per unit volume σ and a density ρ (i.e., Σ = σ·1/ρ). Umetsu discloses a density of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 0.45 to 1.3 g/cm3 with the strength and conductivity of the negative electrode active material layer increasing with density and ion diffusion increasing with decreasing density (see bulk density, [0321]; see bulk density, New Oxford American Dictionary; see apparent density, New Oxford American Dictionary). Umetsu discloses a specific surface area per unit volume of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 4 m2/cm3 to 30 m2/cm3 with input/output characteristic improving with increasing specific surface area per unit volume and high load charge/discharge cycle characteristic improving with decreasing specific surface area per unit volume (see BET specific surface area per unit volume, [0323]; [0331]). Σ = σ (i.e., 4 m2/cm3 to 30 m2/cm3) · 1/ρ (i.e., 0.45 to 1.3 g/cm3) = {3 m2/g, 9 m2/g, 23 m2/g, 67 m2/g}. Umetsu suggests a specific surface area of the negative electrode mixture layer is in range from 3 m2/g to 67 m2/g, inclusive. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the negative electrode of Hojo with the specific surface area, conduction additive content proportion, and thicknesses of Umetsu in order to improve high load charge/discharge cycling.
Although Umetsu does not explicitly disclose a range of 30 to 60 m2/g, Umetsu does disclose an overlapping range. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Modified Hojo does not explicitly disclose:
an opening ratio of the negative current collector is less than or equal to 1%, the opening ratio being a ratio of an area of an opening portion in a main surface of the negative current collector to an area of the main surface of the negative current collector.
Kimura discloses a negative current collector having an opening ratio less than or equal to 1%, the opening ratio being a ratio of an area of an opening portion in a main surface of the negative current collector to an area of the main surface of the negative current collector to improve the fabrication and ion conductivity of the electrode (see non-porous, [0309]). Hojo and Kimura are analogous because they are directed to lithium batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the negative current collector of modified Hojo with the opening ratio of Kimura in order to improve the fabrication and ion conductivity of the electrode.
Further modified Hojo does not explicitly disclose:
a content proportion of the conductive additive in the negative electrode mixture layer is in a range from 3% by mass to 15% by mass, inclusive, the content proportion of the conductive additive being defined as a proportion of a mass of the conductive additive to a mass of the negative electrode mixture layer.
Umeyama discloses a negative electrode mixture layer comprising a conductive additive having a content proportion in a range from 3% by mass to 15% by mass, inclusive, the content proportion of the conductive additive being defined as a proportion of a mass of the conductive additive to a mass of the negative electrode mixture layer to suppress the lithium salt concentration variation and the reduction of the battery capacity (see conductive carbon, [0060]). Hojo and Umeyama are analogous because they are directed to lithium batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the conductive additive of further modified Hojo with the content proportion as taught by Umeyama in order to suppress the lithium salt concentration variation and the reduction of the battery capacity.
Regarding claim 4, modified Hojo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an electrochemical device:
wherein the negative electrode active material contains non-graphitizable carbon (see hardly graphitizable amorphous carbon, [0049]), and
the conductive additive contains carbon black (see conduction assistant, [0050]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hojo (US 2018/0337399 A1) in view of Umetsu (US 2019/0035560 A1), Kimura (US 2020/0274169 A1), and Umeyama (US 2017/0092951 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2014/0147738 A1, hereinafter Chen).
Regarding claim 3, modified Hojo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an electrochemical device:
wherein the negative electrode mixture layer contains a conductive additive (see conduction assistant, [0048]).
Hojo does not explicitly disclose:
a specific surface area of the conductive additive is more than or equal to 800 m2/g.
Chen discloses an electrode mixture layer containing a conductive additive having a specific surface area more than or equal to 800 m2/g to improve the conductivity and restrain the agglomeration of composite due to its large specific surface area and strong adsorption capacity (see conductive additive, [0114]). Hojo and Chen are analogous because they are directed to electrochemical devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the conductive additive of Hojo with the specific surface area as taught by Chen in order to improve the conductivity and restrain the agglomeration of composite due to its large specific surface area and strong adsorption capacity.
Claims 7–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hojo (US 2018/0337399 A1) in view of Umetsu (US 2019/0035560 A1), Kimura (US 2020/0274169 A1), and Umeyama (US 2017/0092951 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Neale et al. (US 2020/0223704 A1, hereinafter Neale).
Regarding claims 7–12, modified Hojo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose an electrochemical device:
wherein a surface layer part of the negative electrode mixture layer includes a first layer containing lithium carbonate and a second layer containing a solid electrolyte that is a reaction product with the electrolyte, and
at least a part of the first layer is covered with the second layer;
wherein the second layer contains lithium carbonate, and
a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the second layer is smaller than a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the first layer;
wherein a thickness of the first layer is more than or equal to 1 nm and less than or equal to 50 nm, and
a thickness of the second layer is more than or equal to 1 nm and less than or equal to 20 nm;
wherein a ratio A/B of a thickness A of the first layer to a thickness B of the second layer is more than or equal to 0.1 and less than or equal to 1;
wherein when the surface layer part is analyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy in a depth direction, the first layer includes a first region and a second region,
the first region being a region in which an intensity of a first peak attributed to the C=O bond in Ols spectrum is larger than an intensity of a second peak attributed to the Li-O bond in Ols spectrum,
the second region being a region in which the intensity of the first peak is smaller than the intensity of the second peak, and
the second region is disposed in a deeper location than the first region;
wherein a third region in which the first peak is observed and the second peak is not observed is present,
the third region being located closer to an outermost surface of the surface layer part than the first region.
Neale discloses a negative electrode mixture layer having a surface layer part includes a first layer (120, 140A, 140B) containing lithium carbonate (FIG. 1C, [0058]) and a second layer (130) containing a solid electrolyte that is a reaction product with the electrolyte (FIG. 1C, [0058]), and at least a part of the first layer (120, 140A, 140B) is covered with the second layer (130, [0056]); wherein the second layer contains lithium carbonate (FIG. 1C, [0058]), and a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the second layer (130) is smaller than a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the first layer (120, 140A, 140B; [0067]); wherein a thickness of the first layer (120, 140A, 140B) is more than or equal to 0.1 nm and less than or equal to 500 nm (see thickness, [0065]), and a thickness of the second layer (130) is more than or equal to 0.1 nm and less than or equal to 500 nm (see thickness, [0065]); wherein a ratio A/B of a thickness A of the first layer (120, 140A, 140B) to a thickness B of the second layer (130) is more than or equal to 0.0002 and less than or equal to 5000 (see thickness, [0065]); wherein when the surface layer part is analyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy in a depth direction, the first layer (120, 140A, 140B) includes a first region and a second region, the first region (120) being a region in which an intensity of a first peak attributed to the C=O bond in Ols spectrum is larger than an intensity of a second peak attributed to the Li-O bond in Ols spectrum (FIG. 1C, [0067]), the second region (140B) being a region in which the intensity of the first peak is smaller than the intensity of the second peak (FIG. 1C, [0067]), and the second region (140B) is disposed in a deeper location than the first region (120); wherein a third region (140A) in which the first peak is observed and the second peak is not observed is present (FIG. 1C, [0067]), the third region (140A) being located closer to an outermost surface of the surface layer part than the first region (140B, [0067]) to improve capacity retention (FIG. 13D, [0108]). Hojo and Neale are analogous because they are directed to lithium batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the negative electrode mixture layer of modified Hojo with the first and second layers of Neale in order to improve capacity retention.
Although Neale does not explicitly disclose the claimed ranges of thicknesses and ratio A/B, Neale does disclose overlapping ranges. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Claims 7–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hojo (US 2018/0337399 A1) in view of Umetsu (US 2019/0035560 A1), Kimura (US 2020/0274169 A1), and Umeyama (US 2017/0092951 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nakamura et al. (WO 2021/193838 A1; see English language equivalent, US 2023/0268487 A1; hereinafter Nakamura).
Regarding claims 7–12, modified Hojo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose an electrochemical device:
wherein a surface layer part of the negative electrode mixture layer includes a first layer containing lithium carbonate and a second layer containing a solid electrolyte that is a reaction product with the electrolyte, and
at least a part of the first layer is covered with the second layer;
wherein the second layer contains lithium carbonate, and
a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the second layer is smaller than a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the first layer;
wherein a thickness of the first layer is more than or equal to 1 nm and less than or equal to 50 nm, and
a thickness of the second layer is more than or equal to 1 nm and less than or equal to 20 nm;
wherein a ratio A/B of a thickness A of the first layer to a thickness B of the second layer is more than or equal to 0.1 and less than or equal to 1;
wherein when the surface layer part is analyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy in a depth direction, the first layer includes a first region and a second region,
the first region being a region in which an intensity of a first peak attributed to the C=O bond in Ols spectrum is larger than an intensity of a second peak attributed to the Li-O bond in Ols spectrum,
the second region being a region in which the intensity of the first peak is smaller than the intensity of the second peak, and
the second region is disposed in a deeper location than the first region;
wherein a third region in which the first peak is observed and the second peak is not observed is present,
the third region being located closer to an outermost surface of the surface layer part than the first region.
Nakamura discloses a negative electrode mixture layer having a surface layer part includes a first layer containing lithium carbonate (see first layer, [0015]) and a second layer containing a solid electrolyte that is a reaction product with the electrolyte (see second layer, [0016]), and at least a part of the first layer is covered with the second layer (see covers, [0014]); wherein the second layer contains lithium carbonate (see SEI film, [0026]), and a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the second layer is smaller than a content proportion of lithium carbonate in the first layer (FIG. 2, [0026]); wherein a thickness of the first layer is more than or equal to 1 nm and less than or equal to 50 nm (TABLE 1, [0070]), and a thickness of the second layer is more than or equal to 1 nm and less than or equal to 20 nm (TABLE 1, [0070]); wherein a ratio A/B of a thickness A of the first layer to a thickness B of the second layer is more than or equal to 0.1 and less than or equal to 1 (TABLE 1, [0070]); wherein when the surface layer part is analyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy in a depth direction, the first layer includes a first region and a second region, the first region being a region in which an intensity of a first peak attributed to the C=O bond in Ols spectrum is larger than an intensity of a second peak attributed to the Li-O bond in Ols spectrum (TABLE 1, [0028]), the second region being a region in which the intensity of the first peak is smaller than the intensity of the second peak (TABLE 1, [0028]), and the second region is disposed in a deeper location than the first region (TABLE 1, [0028]); wherein a third region in which the first peak is observed and the second peak is not observed is present (TABLE 1, [0028]), the third region being located closer to an outermost surface of the surface layer part than the first region (TABLE 1, [0028]) to improve capacity retention (TABLE 1, [0088]). Hojo and Nakamura are analogous because they are directed to lithium batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the negative electrode mixture layer of modified Hojo with the first and second layers of Nakamura in order to improve capacity retention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hojo (US 2018/0337399 A1) in view of Umetsu (US 2019/0035560 A1), Kimura (US 2020/0274169 A1), and Umeyama (US 2017/0092951 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Iwanaga et al. (US 2014/0017526 A1, hereinafter Iwanaga).
Regarding claim 13, modified Hojo discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose an electrochemical device:
wherein the thickness of the negative current collector is more than or equal to 3 μm and less than or equal to 8 μm.
Iwanaga discloses a negative electrode comprising a negative current collector having a thickness of more than or equal to 3 μm and less than or equal to 8 μm (see thickness, [0037]) to improve cycling characteristics (TABLE 1, [0016]). Hojo and Iwanaga are analogous because they are directed to lithium batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the negative current collector of modified Hojo with the thickness as taught by Iwanaga in order to improve cycling characteristics.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue Umetsu does not disclose the claimed proportion of the mass of the conductive additive to the mass of the negative electrode mixture layer (P6/¶¶2–7). Nonobviousness cannot be shown by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Umeyama discloses a negative electrode mixture layer comprising a conductive additive having a content proportion in a range from 3% by mass to 15% by mass, inclusive, the content proportion of the conductive additive being defined as a proportion of a mass of the conductive additive to a mass of the negative electrode mixture layer to suppress the lithium salt concentration variation and the reduction of the battery capacity (see conductive carbon, [0060]). Therefore, the combination of references discloses the claimed proportion of the mass of the conductive additive to the mass of the negative electrode mixture layer.
Applicants argue the specific surface area disclosed in Umetsu is not technically equivalent to the specific surface area (P7/¶3). A specific surface area per unit mass Σ can be determined from the specific surface area per unit volume σ and a density ρ (i.e., Σ = σ·1/ρ). Umetsu discloses a density of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 0.45 to 1.3 g/cm3 with the strength and conductivity of the negative electrode active material layer increasing with density and ion diffusion increasing with decreasing density (see bulk density, [0321]; see bulk density, New Oxford American Dictionary; see apparent density, New Oxford American Dictionary). Umetsu discloses a specific surface area per unit volume of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 4 m2/cm3 to 30 m2/cm3 with input/output characteristic improving with increasing specific surface area per unit volume and high load charge/discharge cycle characteristic improving with decreasing specific surface area per unit volume (see BET specific surface area per unit volume, [0323]; [0331]). The specific surface area per unit mass decreases with increasing density (i.e., Σ is inversely proportional to ρ); and the specific surface area per unit mass increases with increasing specific surface area per unit volume (i.e., Σ is proportional to specific surface area per unit volume). Σ = σ (i.e., 4 m2/cm3 to 30 m2/cm3) · 1/ρ (i.e., 0.45 to 1.3 g/cm3) = {3 m2/g, 9 m2/g, 23 m2/g, 67 m2/g}. Umetsu suggests a specific surface area of the negative electrode mixture layer is in range from 3 m2/g to 67 m2/g, inclusive. The input/output characteristic and high load charge/discharge cycle characteristic improve with increasing specific surface area per unit mass, and strength, conductivity, ion diffusion of the negative electrode active material layer and increase with decreasing specific surface area per unit mass based on Umetsu. Therefore, the specific surface area disclosed in Umetsu is technically equivalent to the specific surface area.
Applicants argue sufficient explanation or evidence has not demonstrated that such a derived value corresponds to the claimed specific surface area (P7/¶3). A specific surface area per unit mass Σ can be determined from the specific surface area per unit volume σ and a density ρ (i.e., Σ = σ·1/ρ). Umetsu discloses a density of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 0.45 to 1.3 g/cm3 with the strength and conductivity of the negative electrode active material layer increasing with density and ion diffusion increasing with decreasing density (see bulk density, [0321]; see bulk density, New Oxford American Dictionary; see apparent density, New Oxford American Dictionary). Umetsu discloses a specific surface area per unit volume of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 4 m2/cm3 to 30 m2/cm3 with input/output characteristic improving with increasing specific surface area per unit volume and high load charge/discharge cycle characteristic improving with decreasing specific surface area per unit volume (see BET specific surface area per unit volume, [0323]; [0331]). The specific surface area per unit mass decreases with increasing density (i.e., Σ is inversely proportional to ρ); and the specific surface area per unit mass increases with increasing specific surface area per unit volume (i.e., Σ is proportional to specific surface area per unit volume). Σ = σ (i.e., 4 m2/cm3 to 30 m2/cm3) · 1/ρ (i.e., 0.45 to 1.3 g/cm3) = {3 m2/g, 9 m2/g, 23 m2/g, 67 m2/g}. Umetsu suggests a specific surface area of the negative electrode mixture layer is in range from 3 m2/g to 67 m2/g, inclusive. The input/output characteristic and high load charge/discharge cycle characteristic improve with increasing specific surface area per unit mass, and strength, conductivity, ion diffusion of the negative electrode active material layer and increase with decreasing specific surface area per unit mass based on Umetsu. Therefore, sufficient explanation and evidence has demonstrated that such a derived value corresponds to the claimed specific surface area.
Applicants argue the present application demonstrates that these ranges of the specific surface area produce a synergistic effect (P7/¶5–P8/¶4). It is noted that "the arguments of counsel cannot take the place of evidence in the record", In re Schulze, 346 F.2d 600, 602, 145 USPQ 716, 718 (CCPA 1965). It is the examiner’s position that the arguments provided by the applicant regarding the claimed combination of (i) a specific surface area of 30–60 m²/g and (ii) a conductive additive content of 3–15 wt% yields unexpectedly superior performance must be supported by a declaration or affidavit. As set forth in MPEP 716.02(g), "the reason for requiring evidence in a declaration or affidavit form is to obtain the assurances that any statements or representations made are correct, as provided by 35 U.S.C. 24 and 18 U.S.C. 1001." The instant specification does not describe the results presented as unexpectedly superior performance. Further, the evidence relied upon should establish "that the differences in results are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance." Ex parte Gelles, 22 USPQ2d 1318, 1319 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992). See MPEP § 716.02(b). The specification provides no statistical analysis or statement indicating that the results are of both statistical and practical significance. An affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 must compare the claimed subject matter with the closest prior art to be effective to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Burckel, 592 F.2d 1175, 201 USPQ 67 (CCPA 1979). Applicants may compare the claimed invention with prior art that is more closely related to the invention than the prior art relied upon by the examiner. In re Holladay, 584 F.2d 384, 199 USPQ 516 (CCPA 1978); Ex parte Humber, 217 USPQ 265 (Bd. App. 1961). In other words, the evidence of unexpected results must be compared with prior art. Emphasis added. See MPEP § 716.02(e). Applicants have made a comparison with devices B1 to B4, which have not been described as prior art of Hojo, which is the closest prior art relied upon. As set forth in § MPEP 716.02(d), whether unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, "objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support." In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occurred over the entire claimed range, In re Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980). Applicants have not provided data to show that the unexpected results do in fact occur over the entire claimed range of negative electrode active material, positive electrode, and electrolyte. Applicants indicate the claimed ranges improve power density and capacitance change rate. It is reasonable to expect the type of negative electrode active material, positive electrode, and electrolyte may affect the power density and capacitance change rate. Therefore, the present application does not demonstrate that the claimed combination of (i) a specific surface area of 30–60 m²/g and (ii) a conductive additive content of 3–15 wt% yields unexpectedly superior performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean P Cullen, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:00 am to 4:00 pm CT, Friday 6:00 am to 12:00 pm CT.
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, Basia A Ridley can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/Sean P Cullen, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights