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 .
Rejections Repeated
1. The 35 U.S.C. 103(a) rejection of claims 1,5,7-15 unpatentable over Kashiwagi in view of Serizawa et al. has been repeated as previously made in office action 3/17/26.
2. The 35 U.S.C. 103(a) rejection of claims 6 unpatentable over Kashiwagi in view of Tian et al. has been repeated as previously made in office action 3/17/26.
New Rejections
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.
3. Claim(s) 16,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US20080102370) in view of Zhang et al. (CN109167046).
Kashiwagi discloses the electrochemical cell described above. Kashiwagi fail to disclose wherein the silicon layer is formed of a film including a plurality of through-holes, and the second carbon material layer is located on the surface of the first current collector exposed through the plurality of through-holes.
Zhang et al. teaches wherein the silicon layer is formed of a film including a plurality of through-holes, and the second carbon material layer is located on the surface of the first current collector exposed through the plurality of through-holes for the purpose of providing a more stable binding of silicon to carbon (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to Kashiwagi with wherein the silicon layer is formed of a film including a plurality of through-holes, and the second carbon material layer is located on the surface of the first current collector exposed through the plurality of through-holes for the purpose of providing a more stable binding of silicon to carbon (abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/8/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art fails to disclose that the second portion of the first electrode active material is surrounded by the first portion as viewed in plan, Kashiwagi discloses in figure 4c that the second portion which is the carbon portion between then the two silicon island regions is surrounded by the first portion which is the silicon island region 12 and current collector 11 and carbon portion 14.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANE J RHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1499. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (10-6:30).
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.
/JANE J RHEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights