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 .
BINDER FOR NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY, ELECTRODE MIXTURE, ELECTRODE, AND NON-AQUEOUS ELECTORLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY
Examiner: Adam Arciero S.N. 18/262,675 Art Unit: 1727 February 4, 2026
DETAILED ACTION
The Application filed on July 24, 2023 has been received. Claims 1-13 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites an intended use for a binder. The courts have held that “if the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction.” Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See also Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478, 42 USPQ2d 1550, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation"). See MPEP 2111.02.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “one or more types of additives”. The courts have held that the addition of the word “type” to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. Ex parte Copenhaver, 109 USPQ 118 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1955), see MPEP 2173.05(b), III, E.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hochstetter et al. (US 2016/0017136 A1; as found in IDS dated 12/10/2025).
As to Claims 1-6 and 10-12, Hochstetter discloses a rechargeable battery, comprising a binder for conductive particles (reads on the claimed electrode having a current collector and the electrode mixture layer having an active material), wherein said binder comprises: a composition comprising a PVdF homopolymer, a copolymer of vinylidene fluoride and hexafluoropropylene, and a plasticizer (additive) such as dioctyl phthalate (same as additive used in the original disclosure of the present invention and it reads on the claimed formula), wherein the plasticizer is present in an amount of 1-5 wt%, thereby reading on the claimed mass ratio (paragraphs [0040 and 0073] and claims 1, 3, 9, 19).
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.
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) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochstetter et al. (US 2016/0017136 A1; as found in IDS dated 12/10/2025) in view of Bauer et al. (US 2004/0188880 A1).
As to Claims 7-8, Hochstetter does not specifically disclose the claimed compounds.
However, Bauer teaches of a plasticizer used in a binder composition of an electrode for a non-aqueous secondary battery, wherein the plasticizer is triethyl phosphate, tripropyl phosphate, tributyl phosphate, triisobutyl phosphate, tripentyl phosphate, trihexyl phosphate, trioctyl phosphate, tris(2-ethylhexyl) phosphate, tridecyl phosphate, diethyl n-butyl phosphate, tris(butoxyethyl) phosphate, and tris(2-methoxyethyl) phosphate (Abstract and paragraph [0125]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the binder of Hochstetter to comprise the claimed compounds because Bauer teaches that such compounds are suitable for use as a plasticizer (paragraph [0125]).
Claim(s) 9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochstetter et al. (US 2016/0017136 A1; as found in IDS dated 12/10/2025) in view of Nishimura et al. (JP 2000-256616A; as found in IDS dated and using machine translation for citation purposes).
As to Claims 9 and 13, Hochstetter does not specifically disclose wherein the binder further comprises a polyisocyanate-based compound comprising a blocking agent (claim 9) or wherein the rechargeable battery is a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (claim 13).
However, Nishimura teaches of a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, comprising: a binder composition comprising: a polyisocyanate-based compound containing a blocking agent, such as tolylene diisocyanate, hexamethylene isocyanate, isophorone diisocyanate ([6]). At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the binder and the battery of Hochstetter to comprise the claimed compound and a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery because Nishimura teaches that the ease of production and yield are improved and a safe battery can be provided (Technical Field and [6]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ARCIERO whose telephone number is (571)270-5116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5 ET.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/ADAM A ARCIERO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727