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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 06/22/2023, 09/13/2024, 06/12/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 06/22/2023 has been entered. Claims 1-15 are amended and Claims 1-15 are pending.
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 5 and 8 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 5 recites “a ratio of a surface area of the positive electrode active material layer in contact with the positive electrode current collector” in Lines 14-15 and this is a ratio of surface area but is defined as a “width ratio” which is unclear in scope. Further, the specification discloses the ratio is actually an area of the active material covered by the insulating coating layer, not the surface area of the active material in contact with the current collector (Original Specification, [0010, 0059]), further clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites “a portion” of the positive electrode active material is has the same thickness as the thickness of the central portion of the positive electrode active material layer in line 11 and it is unclear which portion is being claimed.
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.
Claims 1, 11, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ohta et al. (US 20150125732 A1), hereinafter "Ohta".
In regard to Claim 1, Ohta et al. discloses an electrode assembly comprising: a positive electrode including a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active material layer on the positive electrode current collector; and a negative electrode including a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer on the negative electrode current collector, wherein the positive electrode and the negative electrode are arranged such that the positive electrode active material layer and the negative electrode active material layer face each other (Ohta, [0051]), which is a conventional lithium secondary battery electrode assembly.
Ohta et al. also discloses wherein the positive electrode includes an insulating coating layer covering an end part of the positive electrode active material layer and at least a part of the positive electrode current collector (Ohta, Abstract). Ohta et al. further discloses wherein the insulating coating layer includes at least one protrusion that protrudes toward the positive electrode active material layer at the end part of the positive electrode active material layer (Ohta, [0008]).
In regard to Claim 11, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Ohta et al. also discloses wherein the protrusion include two or more protrusions, spaced apart from each other (Ohta, [0042], Figure 3B1).
In regard to Claims 14-15, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Ohta et al. also discloses a battery cell comprising the electrode assembly as set forth in claim 1 wherein a separator is between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Ohta, [0001, 0012]).
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.
Claims 2-4, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohta et al. (US 20150125732 A1), hereinafter "Ohta" as applied to Claim 1 above. Ohta et al. is analogous prior art to the claimed invention because it pertains to the same field of endeavor, namely electrode active materials.
In regard to Claim 2, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Ohta et al. also discloses the positive electrode current collector includes a first non-coated portion where the positive electrode active material layer is absent (Ohta, [0007]). Ohta et al. further depicts the negative electrode current collector comprising a tab, which necessitates an uncoated region to connect the tab and thus discloses a second non-coated portion where the negative electrode active material layer is absent (Ohta, [0002], Figures 6B-D).
In regard to Claim 3, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 2. Ohta et al. also discloses the insulating coating layer covers at least a part of the first non-coated portion adjacent to a boundary line between the first non-coated portion and the positive electrode active material layer (Ohta, Figure 4B).
In regard to Claim 4, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 3. Ohta et al. depicts the insulating coating layer covering at least 50% of the non-coated region and also discloses the insulating coating layer extends from positive electrode active material up to as far as the positive electrode lead tab which reasonably would cover the first non-coated portion in a range of 10% to 50% of the total area of the first non-coated portion and would be easily optimized by the skilled artisan (Ohta, Figure 4B, [0027]).
In regard to Claim 9, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Ohta et al. also discloses wherein a width of the protrusion is a variable optimized by the skilled artisan in range of absolute values in which a range of 20% to 50% relative to a width of the positive electrode active material layer divided by the number of the protrusions (Ohta [0040-0042]).
In regard to Claim 12, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 11. Ohta et al. also discloses wherein a distance by which the protrusions are spaced apart from each other is optimizable by the skilled artisan to include spacing equal to or smaller than a width of the protrusions (Ohta, [0028, 0040-0041], Figure 3B1).
Claims 5-8, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohta et al. (US 20150125732 A1), hereinafter "Ohta" as applied to Claim 1 above in view of Fujii et al. (US 20180366786 A1), hereinafter "Fujii". Ohta and Fujii et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely electrode active materials.
In regard to Claim 5, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 3. Ohta et al. also discloses the insulating coating layer extends from positive electrode active material up to as far as the positive electrode lead tab (Ohta, [0027]) which by definition requires the insulating layer to cover some surface area of the positive electrode active material layer in contact with the positive electrode current collector and a surface area of the first non-coated portion, however, Ohta et al. is silent as to the ratio of this coverage.
Fujii et al. discloses an active material layer that tapers towards an uncoated region of a current collector with an insulating coating layer providing coverage (Fujii, Abstract), wherein a ratio of a surface area of the positive electrode active material layer covered to a surface area of the first non-coated portion covered by the insulating coating layer is depicted as a width ratio of 1:1 (Fujii, Figure 1), which anticipates the claimed range and would be obvious to try for the skilled artisan and would amount to nothing more than choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regard to Claim 6, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 2. Ohta et al. also discloses the end part of the positive electrode active material layer is made thinner than the thickness of the central portion of the positive electrode active material layer as it goes toward the first non-coated portion (Ohta, Figure 2B) but is silent as to the tapering of the negative electrode active material.
Fujii et al. discloses both the positive and negative active materials comprise an end part of the active material layer that is made thinner than the thickness of the central portion of the active material layer as it goes toward the non-coated portion (Fujii, Figure 7), which amounts to nothing more than an obvious variation of it for use in the same field based on design incentives or other market forces, as the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
In regard to Claim 7, Ohta et al. in view of Fujii et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 6. Ohta et al. also discloses the protrusions of the insulating coating layer must have some predetermined length and width and that those variables are optimized by the skilled artisan and that the protrusions of the insulating coating layer prevent shorting by insulating between the positive tab region and the opposing negative electrode (Ohta, [0047, 0052]).
Fujii et al. discloses the relationship between the insulating layer on the positive electrode and the tapered negative electrode (Fujii, [0062-0065]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide an insulating coating layer with protrusions that have a length optimized to protect against contact with the negative active material as disclosed in Ohta, which would reasonably cover an area that corresponds to the thickness of the negative active material at full thickness (1.0) or less as doing so would amount to nothing more than choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regard to Claim 8, Ohta et al. in view of Fujii et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 6. Ohta et al. also discloses wherein a portion of the positive electrode active material layer has the same thickness as the thickness of the central portion of the positive electrode active material layer (Ohta, Figure 4b) as "a portion" as claimed can be any portion and the thickness only tapers toward an end region so selecting a portion in the full thickness of the active material is equivalent to the central thickness region.
In regard to Claim 10, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 2. Ohta et al. also discloses the positive electrode comprises the first uncoated region but is silent as to the negative electrodes uncoated region as a second uncoated region. Fujii et al. discloses a first and second uncoated region wherein a length of the first non-coated portion is greater than a length of the second non-coated portion (Fujii, Figure 7).
In regard to Claim 13, Ohta et al. discloses the electrode assembly according to claim 2. Ohta et al. also discloses the insulating coating layer is an insulator and the voids between the protrusions allow mass transfer pathways which makes the insulating material capable of preventing lithium ions from passing through (Ohta, [0004]) and Fujii et al. discloses an insulating coating layer comprising polypropylene which is commonly known to not allow lithium ions to pass.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MAX OTERO whose telephone number is (571)272-2559. The examiner can normally be reached M-F Generally 7:30-430.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JONATHAN CREPEAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725