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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 05/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the finding of lack of unity of invention on the basis of the teachings of Omote et al. (US 20130112928 A1) in Requirement for Restriction/Election dated 03/23/2026, is premature as a full search of the prior art has yet to have been conducted.
This is not found persuasive because a full search of the prior art has been conducted, and Omote et al. is still relevant prior art to Claim 1 and does not follow the method of Group II, Claims 11-13.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 08/18/2023, 08/14/2025, and 01/05/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The specification filed on 06/16/2023 was reviewed and is acceptable.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/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, and dependent claims 2-10 are hereby rejected/objected due to dependency from rejected Claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “(different from the polymer block (A))” in line 7. It is unclear whether the limitation in parenthesis is required or exemplary. For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that the limitation in the parenthesis is exemplary.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer” in lines 3-4 and “a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer” in lines 6-8. It is unclear whether the “structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer” are referring to the same or different structural unit. For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that they are referring to a different structural unit.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “with respect to all the structural units thereof” in lines 2-3. It is unclear whether “with respect to all the structural units thereof” refers to all structural units in the block polymer or in polymer block (B). For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that the limitation is referring to all structural units in the polymer block (B).
Claim 5 recites the limitation “(different from the polymer block (A) and the block polymer (B))” in line 3. It is unclear whether the limitation in parenthesis is required or exemplary. For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that the limitation in the parenthesis is exemplary.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “(excluding monomers classified as an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer and the monomer (b1)) in lines 4-5. It is unclear whether the limitation in parenthesis is required or exemplary. For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that the limitation in the parenthesis is exemplary.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “with respect to all the structural units thereof” in line 2. It is unclear whether “with respect to all the structural units thereof” refers to all structural units in the block polymer or in polymer block (C). For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that the limitation is referring to all structural units in the polymer block (C).
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schellekens et al. (US 20110159306 A1, hereinafter Schellekens).
Regarding Claim 1, Schellekens discloses the limitations for a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder) comprising
a block polymer that has a polymer block (A) and a polymer block (B) (Schellekens, block copolymer comprising at least blocks [A]x[B]y, [0050]), wherein
the polymer block (A) contains a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer (Schellekens, block [A] is obtained by polymerizing monomers comprising component ii) 0 to 100 mol% of ethylenically unsaturated monomers bearing water-dispersing functional groups, which may include (meth)acrylic acid and itaconic acid, [0051, 0136]),
the polymer block (B) contains less than 30 mass% of a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer, based on all the structural units of the polymer block (B) (different from the polymer block (A) (Schellekens, obtaining block [B] by polymerizing monomers comprising ii) 0 to 15 mol % of ethylenically unsaturated monomers bearing water-dispersing functional groups; iii) 20 to 100 mol % of ethylenically unsaturated monomers selected from the group consisting of: C1 to C30 hydrocarbo (meth)acrylate, [0061-0068]; the disclosed range 0 to 15 mol% of ethylenically unsaturated monomers bearing water-dispersing functional groups overlaps the claimed range of less than 30 mass%),
a proportion of the polymer block (A) in the block polymer is from 10 mass% to 90 mass% (Schellekens, block [A] is obtained and comprises from 0 to 60 mol%, [0148]; the disclosed range of 0 to 60 mol% overlaps the claimed range of 10 mass% to 90 mass%), and
the block polymer contains no structural unit derived from a crosslinkable monomer (Schellekens, block copolymer comprising at least blocks [A]x[B]y, [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 2, Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein the polymer block (A) contains 50 mass% or more of the structural unit derived from the ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer, with respect to all the structural units of the polymer block (A) (Schellekens, block [A] is obtained by polymerizing monomers comprising component ii) 0 to 100 mol% of ethylenically unsaturated monomers bearing water-dispersing functional groups, which may include (meth)acrylic acid and itaconic acid, [0051, 0136]; the disclosed range of 0 to 100 mol% overlaps the claimed range of 50 mass% or more).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 3, Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein the polymer block (B) contains a structural unit derived from a (meth)acrylate ester monomer (Schellekens, obtaining block [B] by polymerizing monomers comprising iii) 20 to 100 mol % of ethylenically unsaturated monomers selected from the group consisting of: C1 to C30 hydrocarbo (meth)acrylate, [0061-0068]).
Regarding Claim 4, Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein the polymer block (B) contains, with respect to all the structural units thereof, 50 mass% or more of a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated monomer (hereafter referred to as "monomer (b1)" (Schellekens, obtaining block [B] by polymerizing monomers comprising iii) 20 to 100 mol % of ethylenically unsaturated monomers selected from the group consisting of: C1 to C30 hydrocarbo (meth)acrylate, [0061-0068]), excluding monomers classified as an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer) having a solubility of 20 g or less in 100 g of water at 20°C (Schellekens, Mn of block [B] is in range of from 750 to 75,000 g/mol, and the advantage of having a Mn for block [B] within the specified boundaries is to maintain a good water-dispersability of the block copolymer, [0160]; the Examiner notes that the block polymer should have good water dispersibility, which would correspond to a solubility of at least overlap the claimed 20 g or more in 100 g of water at 20°C).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 7, Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein the block polymer is a salt resulting from neutralization of 80 mol% or more of carboxyl groups of the block polymer (Schellekens, the ionic water-dispersing groups are preferably fully or partially in the form of a salt in the final composition of the invention. Ionic water-dispersing groups include cationic water-dispersing groups such as quaternary ammonium groups and (potentially) anionic water-dispersing groups such as carboxylic acid groups, [0135]; the Examiner notes that the disclosed term “fully or partially” overlaps with the claimed range of 80 mol% or more).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Claim(s) 5-6 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schellekens et al. (US 20110159306 A1, hereinafter Schellekens), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (CN 108417836 A, hereinafter Huang), filed in IDS dated 08/14/2025.
Regarding Claim 5, Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein the block polymer further comprises a polymer block (C) (Schellekens, Block copolymers may be linear, branched, star or comb like, and have structures like [A][B][C], [0098]).
Schellekens is silent regarding polymer block (C) is different from the polymer block (A) and the polymer block (B)).
Huang discloses the limitations for a secondary battery electrode binder (Huang, electrode binder for lithium ion batteries, [0009]) comprising
a block polymer (Huang, R-AAn1-b-Arn2-AAn3 triblock polymer, [0011, 0018]) that has a polymer block (A) and a polymer block (B), and polymer block (C) is different from the polymer block (A) and the polymer block (B) (Huang, add 5-20 parts by weight of AA monomer and 20-80 parts by weight of dioxane containing 0.005-0.05 parts by weight of initiator to obtain an R-AAn1-b-Arn2-AAn3-X block copolymer solution, [0018]).
Huang teaches that polyacrylic acid (PAA) blocks can enhance the adhesion between the active material and have high mechanical strength (Huang, [0012]).
Schellekens and Huang are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards a binder comprising polymer blocks.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the block copolymer of Schellekens to comprise of a C block comprising polyacrylate blocks, in order to enhance the adhesion between the active material and have high mechanical strength.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein the polymer block (C) contains, with respect to all the structural units thereof, 50 mass% or more of a structural unit derived from an ethylenically unsaturated monomer (excluding monomers classified as an ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer and the monomer (b1)) having a solubility of 1.0 g or less in 100 g of water at 20°C (Huang, add 5-20 parts by weight of AA monomer and 20-80 parts by weight of dioxane containing 0.005-0.05 parts by weight of initiator to obtain an R-AAn1-b-Arn2-AAn3-X block copolymer solution, [0018]; the Examiner notes that the AA monomer is the only structural unit in polymer block C, so the mass% of acrylic acid is 100 mass% of polymer block C; the disclosed amount of 100 mass% falls within the claimed range of 50 mass% or more.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode binder (Schellekens, binder composition that can be applied to metal surface so that it will substantially adhere thereto, [0049]; the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a binder composition that can be applied to metal surfaces may be used as an electrode binder), wherein a number-average molecular weight of the block polymer is 50,000 or higher, as a polystyrene-basis number-average molecular weight of a methyl esterification product of carboxyl groups included in the block polymer (Schellekens, block copolymer [A]x[B]y has a number average molecular weight of ≤ 50,000 g/mol, [0162]; the disclosed range of ≤ 50,000 g/mol touches the claimed range of 50,000 or higher, such that the disclosed block copolymer and the claimed block polymer would have similar properties at 50,000 g/mol).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode mixture layer composition (Huang, electrode slurry, [0057]), comprising the secondary battery electrode binder, an active material, and water (Huang, lithium iron phosphate, (meth)acrylate-acrylate block copolymer as an electrode binder, and deionized water as dispersion media, [0057]).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Schellekens discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Schellekens discloses the limitations regarding a secondary battery electrode (Huang, electrode, [0060]), comprising, on a collector surface, a mixture layer formed from the secondary battery electrode mixture layer composition (Huang, the lithium iron phosphate slurry was coated onto aluminum foil, [0057]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:50 - 7:50 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, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/K.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights