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 .
This is the initial Office action based on application number 18/249542 filed on 12/08/2025. Claims 1-18 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, directed to a negative electrode material sheet, a negative electrode, and a non-aqueous secondary battery as recited in claims 1-10, 17, 18, without traverse in the reply filed on 12/08/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 11-16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding to claim 1: Examiner interprets “binder” as one kind of “resin” component as described in para. 3 in the instant specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious over Lee et al. (US 20210020898 A1).
Regarding to claims 1, 5: Lee et al. disclose a method for producing a secondary battery electrode (abstract). The secondary battery electrode comprises an active material film (par. 9). The active material film (equivalent to a negative electrode material sheet) contains carbon-based negative electrode active material particles (110) (par. 163, fig. 1) (equivalent to a particulate carbon material). The carbon-based negative electrode active material can be scale-shaped graphite-based active materials (par. 162). Lee et al. teach a method of producing the active material film comprising a compression-molding step, a sintering step, and a slicing step (par. 15, 98, ). This method can produce a binder-free electrode (par. 7) (binder is equivalent to resin). Lee et al. do not specifically disclose a ratio I(110)/I(004) of a diffraction intensity of a (110) plane relative to a diffraction intensity of a (004) plane in X-ray diffraction of a principal plane thereof of 1.1 or more. However, it is the position of the examiner that the ratio I(110)/I(004) of the X-ray diffraction is inherent, given that the active material film disclosed by Lee et al. and the present application having same active material (scale-shaped graphite) and similar manufacturing process and sintering temperature. A reference which is silent about a claimed invention’s features is inherently anticipatory if the missing feature is necessarily present in that which is described in the reference. Inherency is not established by probabilities or possibilities. In re Robertson, 49 USPQ2d 1949 (1999).
In addition, Lee et al. recognizes the orientation of the active material can be controlled by the raw material (scale-shaped graphite or spherical natural graphite) (par. 162). Lee et al. further recognizes the plastic deformation of the active material can be controlled by the press (compression) molding (par. 161, 163, fig. 1) and sintering (heating temperature) (par. 173) processes. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can adjust the raw material (scale-shaped graphite or spherical natural graphite), the compressive force, and the sintering temperature to yield a desired ratio of I(110)/I(004) via changing the orientation of the scaly graphite in the active material film. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-10, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 11201329 B2), hereinafter Lee et al. 329.
Regarding to claim 1: Lee et al. 329 disclose a negative electrode and a rechargeable lithium battery (abstract). The negative electrode contains a negative active material layer (col. 4, lines 36-42, fig. 1) (equivalent to a negative electrode material sheet). The negative active material layer includes a carbon negative active material (col. 3, lines 17-24) (equivalent to a particulate carbon material), wherein the negative electrode material layer has a ratio I(110)/I(004) of a diffraction intensity of a (110) plane relative to a diffraction intensity of a (004) plane in X-ray diffraction of a principal plane thereof of 0.3-0.8 (col. 5, lines 12-20), and the negative active material layer may include a binder (col. 7, lines 1-2) (The negative active material layer can be free of a binder as the binder is optional) (Examples of the binder in col 7, lines 14-28 are resin binders). Lee et al. 329 do not specifically disclose a ratio I(110)/I(004) of a diffraction intensity of a (110) plane relative to a diffraction intensity of a (004) plane in X-ray diffraction of a principal plane thereof of 1.1 or more. However, Lee et al. 329 recognize a specific orientation of the negative active material can be obtained via a magnetic field. The X-ray diffraction intensity of a plane can be adjusted by controlling an intensity of the magnetic field, a time of exposure to the magnetic field (col. 4, lines 22-67, col. 5, lines 1-2). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can adjusting the intensity of the magnetic field and the time of exposure to the magnetic field while the negative active material composition is coated on the current collector to yield the desired ratio of I(110)/I(004). Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding to claim 2: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative active material layer may have a thickness of about 40 μm to about 650 μm (col. 1, lines 65-67). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding to claim 3: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative active material layer includes flake-shaped graphite (col. 5, lines 58-67, col. 6, lines 1-5) (equivalent to scaly graphite).
Regarding to claim 4: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative active material layer includes graphite. The graphite can be sheet-shaped, flake-shaped, spherically-shaped, fiber-shaped, or flake-shaped graphite (col. 5, lines 58-67, col. 6, lines 1-5). The spherically-shaped and flake-shaped graphite can have aspect ratio of 1-10 and 10-25, respectively, as evidenced by Sakai (JP 2020184472 A) (par. 40 in Sakai). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding to claim 5: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative electrode material layer has a ratio I(110)/I(004) of 0.3-0.8 (col. 5, lines 12-20). Lee et al. 329 do not specifically disclose a ratio I(110)/I(004) of 20 or more. However, Lee et al. 329 recognize a specific orientation of the negative active material can be obtained via a magnetic field. The X-ray diffraction intensity of a plane can be adjusted by controlling an intensity of the magnetic field and a time of exposure to the magnetic field (col. 4, lines 22-67, col. 5, lines 1-2). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can adjusting the intensity of the magnetic field and the time of exposure to the magnetic field while the negative active material composition is coated on the current collector to yield the desired ratio of I(110)/I(004). Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding to claim 6: Lee et al. 329 disclose the electrode density of the negative electrode may be about 1.0 g/cc to about 1.4 g/cc (col. 1, lines 59-60). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding to claim 7: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative active material included in the negative active material composition may stand, e.g., may be oriented at the predetermined angle on the surface of the current collector (fig. 1, col. 4, lines 61-67, col. 5, lines 1-2). Lee et al. 329 do not specifically disclose the particulate carbon material is oriented at an orientation angle θ1 of 60° or more and 90° or less with respect to the principal plane of the negative electrode material sheet. However, Lee et al. 329 recognize a specific orientation of the negative active material can be obtained via a magnetic field. The predetermined angle of the negative active material can be adjusted by controlling an intensity of the magnetic field, a time of exposure to the magnetic field, and an electrode plate density during compression of the negative electrode (col. 4, lines 22-67, col. 5, lines 1-2). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can adjusting the intensity of the magnetic field, the time of exposure to the magnetic field, and the electrode plate density during compression of the negative electrode to yield the desired angle of the negative active material. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding to claim 8: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative active material further comprising Si negative active material (col. 6, lines 6-32), wherein the negative active material composition may stand, e.g., may be oriented at the predetermined angle on the surface of the current collector (fig. 1, col. 4, lines 61-67, col. 5, lines 1-2). The angle between the axis along the longest length of the negative active material and the principal plan of the negative electrode material layer is about 45° in fig. 1 (equivalent to θ1 and θ2 being equal to about 45°). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
In addition, Lee et al. 329 recognize a specific orientation of the negative active material can be obtained via a magnetic field. The predetermined angle of the negative active material can be adjusted by controlling an intensity of the magnetic field, a time of exposure to the magnetic field, and an electrode plate density during compression of the negative electrode (col. 4, lines 22-67, col. 5, lines 1-2). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention can adjusting the intensity of the magnetic field, the time of exposure to the magnetic field, and the electrode plate density during compression of the negative electrode to yield the desired angle of the negative active material. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding to claim 9: Lee et al. 329 disclose the carbon negative active material and the Si negative active material can be mixed in a weight ratio of about 50:50 to about 99:1 (col. 6, lines 6-15) (equivalent to the silicon active material having a volume of 0.97% - 49% in a total volume of the particulate carbon material and the silicon active material) (The volume percentage is calculated based on the weight ratio and the density. A density of graphite density is 2.26 g/cm3 as evidence by Christensen et al. (US 20080206631 A1) (par. 43 in Christensen) and a density of silicon is 2.33 g/cm3 as evidence by Navarrette et al. (US 2017017949 A1) (par. 28 in Navarrette)). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding to claim 10: Lee et al. 329 disclose the negative active material layer may optionally include a conductive material. When the conductive material is included, about 1 wt % to about 5 wt % of the conductive material may be used based on a total amount of the negative active material layer (col. 7, lines 1-9). The conductive material can be a carbon fiber (col. 7, lines 38-47). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding to claim 17: Lee et al. 329 disclose a negative electrode and a rechargeable lithium battery (abstract). The negative electrode contains a negative active material film (col. 4, lines 36-42, fig. 1).
Regarding to claim 18: Lee et al. 329 disclose a negative electrode and a rechargeable lithium battery (abstract). The rechargeable lithium battery comprising the negative electrode which contains the negative active material film (col. 1, lines 39-45). The electrolyte in the battery may include a non-aqueous organic solvent (col. 9, lines 25-26).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PIN JAN WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7057. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached on 571-272-1295. 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.
/PIN JAN WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717