Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/263,236

BINDER FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE SECONDARY BATTERY, BINDER COMPOSITION FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE SECONDARY BATTERY, SLURRY FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE SECONDARY BATTERY, SOLID ELECTROLYTE SHEET FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE SECONDARY BATTERY, METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME, ALL-SOLID-STATE SECONDARY BATTERY, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 27, 2023
Examiner
FRASER, STEWART A
Art Unit
1724
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Eneos Materials Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
1135 granted / 1320 resolved
+21.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1365
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1320 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 for US Patent Application No. 18/263236 by Itai et al. Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been fully considered. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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. Claims 1 and 3-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiki et al. (US 2015/0147660 A1), herein referred to as Fujiki. Regarding claim 1, Fujiki teaches [0014 and 0023] a binder (referred to in Fujiki as a second binder) having a solubility parameter (SP value) in a range of 5 MPa1/2 or more and 20 MPa1/2 or less. The binder may include a conjugated diene-based polymer such as styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), butadiene rubber (BR), nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR), styrene butadiene styrene block copolymer (SBS), a styrene ethylene butadiene block copolymer (SEB), and a styrene- (styrene butadiene)-styrene block copolymer; isoprene rubber (IR); or an ethylene-propylene-diene ternary copolymer (EPDM). The range of SP values for the conjugated diene-based polymer taught by Fujiki overlap the claimed range recited in claim 1 and therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP Chapter 2144.05). Regarding claim 3, Fujiki teaches [0023] the conjugated diene-based polymer may include has an aromatic vinyl unit based on an aromatic vinyl compound such as styrene. Regarding claim 4, Fujiki teaches [0023] the conjugated diene-based polymer may include a styrene ethylene butadiene block copolymer where the styrene is present in an amount of 33.3 percent of the block copolymer (styrene block being 1/3 of the total block copolymer). Regarding claim 5, Fujiki teaches [0023] the conjugated diene-based polymer may include nitrile butadiene rubber which has a nitrogen-based modifier. Regarding claim 6, Fujiki teaches [0097] an absolute value difference between a SP value of a non-polar solvent (liquid medium) and the SP value of the binder may be in a range of about 0 or greater to less than about 5. The absolute value difference range of SP values between the non-polar solvent and binder taught by Fujiki overlap the claimed range recited in claim 6 and therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP Chapter 2144.05). Regarding claim 7, Fujiki teaches [0026] the non-polar solvent may include an aromatic hydrocarbon such as toluene, xylene, benzene, pentane, hexane, or heptane. Regarding claim 8, Fujiki teaches [0069] the binder (second binder) is dissolved in the solvent. Regarding claims 9-11, Fujiki teaches [0006 and 0069] forming a positive electrode slurry that includes the binder discussed above, the non-polar solvent and a sulfide solid electrolyte and further forming an all-solid secondary battery comprising a positive electrode layer, a negative electrode layer and a solid electrolyte layer. The positive electrode layer is formed by applying the slurry on a current collector and subsequently drying the applied slurry to remove the solvent. Regarding claims 12-15, Fujiki teaches [0123-0125] a support (substrate) may be coated with a solid electrolyte mixture as a coating layer, heat-treated (drying) in order to remove the solvent and then vacuum-dried. An all-solid state secondary battery is then manufactured by stacking the positive electrode layer, the solid electrolyte and the negative electrode layer. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiki et al. (US 2015/0147660 A1), herein referred to as Fujiki, in view of Yamada et al. (US 2018/0037674 A1), herein referred to as Yamada. Fujiki does not appear to explicitly teach the limitations of claim 2 directed to the conjugated diene-based polymer having a value α of less than 0.7. However, from the same field of technology, Yamada recites the formation of a modified conjugated diene-based polymer. In view of claim 2 and based on Applicant’s specification regarding the meaning of diene-based polymer with a value α of less than 0.7, Yamada teaches [0141-0142] a hydrogenation ratio for a modified conjugated diene-based polymer being preferably 10 percent or more (corresponding to a value α of 0.1 or more) and 60 percent or less (corresponding to a value α of 0.6 or less). Yamada suggests that modifying a conjugated diene-based polymer to have a hydrogenation ratio within the range specified above prevents degradation of the conjugated diene-based polymer at high processing temperatures and further improves the thermal resistance and weatherability of the polymer. Therefore, at the time of the filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the binder taught by Fujiki to have the specified hydrogenation ratio taught by Yamada in order to achieve the advantages and improvements discussed above. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEWART A FRASER whose telephone number is (571)270-5126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7am-4pm, 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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. /STEWART A FRASER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 27, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603312
FUEL CELL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603306
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF DRAINING RESIDUAL WATER OF A FUEL CELL FOR A VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596299
EUV TRANSMISSIVE MEMBRANE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591173
SUBSTRATE WITH MULTILAYER REFLECTIVE FILM, REFLECTIVE MASK BLANK, REFLECTIVE MASK, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591172
EUV TRANSMISSIVE MEMBRANE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+14.2%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1320 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month