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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received April 6, 2026:
Claims 1-24 and 28-30 are pending. Claims 25-27 have been cancelled as per applicant’s request.
The previous claim objections are withdrawn in light of the amendment.
The previous 112 rejections have been withdrawn in light of the amendment.
The previous provisional statutory double patenting rejection has been withdrawn. However, a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection has been made below in light of the amendments.
The core of the previous prior art rejection is maintained with slight changes made in light of the amendment in view of Harada et al. (US 2017/0077495), Zhao et al. (CN 110299516A), Teranishi et al. (US 2017/0373338) and Um et al. (US 2015/0072236). All changes to the rejection are necessitated by the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10, 12-18, 20-22 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaben (WO2019/215407A) in view of Harada et al. (US 2017/0077495). The U.S. version (US 2021/0074991A) is used as the English translation and is referenced below.
Regarding Claim 1, Gaben teaches a method for manufacturing a porous electrode layer (Para. [0021], [0024]) for a battery (Para. [0324]) having an anode, cathode and separator (Table 1 and Fig. 3) wherein the porous electrode layer is an anode (Para. [0001]) having a porosity greater than 30% by volume (Para. [0021]) and not exceeding 50% by volume (Para. [0028]) (i.e. comprising a porous layer with a porosity between 25% and 50% by volume), the average diameter of pores is between 8 nm and 20 nm (Para. [0028]) (i.e. pores with an average diameter of less than 50 nm), wherein the method includes providing a substrate (Para. [0023]) and a colloidal suspension containing agglomerates of nanoparticles of at least one material P having an average primary diameter of less than or equal to 50 nm, wherein the colloidal suspension is monodispersed (Para. [0022], [0030]) (i.e. providing a colloidal suspension including monodisperse primary particles, the monodisperse primary particles being in the form of agglomerates) wherein the nanoparticles are an anode material P (Para. [0113]) (i.e. of at least one active material of anode A), the primary particles having a primary diameter D50 of less than or equal to 50 nm (Para. [0030]) (i.e. overlapping with an average primary diameter D-50 of between 2 nm and 100 nm) and the porous layer is impregnated by an ionic liquid (Para. [0016]) (i.e. the colloidal suspension also comprises a liquid constituent), the anode material P is TiNb2O7 -(Para. [0118] and claim 14) (i.e. said material A is mixed oxide of niobium with titanium), depositing a porous electrode later by electrophoresis, ink-jet printing, doctor blade, roll coating, curtain coating or dip coating from the colloidal suspension (Para. [0024]) (i.e. step b of the instant claim), the layer is dried (Para. [0025]) (i.e. drying said layer obtained in step b) and consolidating it by a pressing and/or heat treatment step (Para. [0027]) (i.e. step c). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Gaben does not teach the active material of anode A being selected from one of the formulas as claimed.
However, Harada et al. teaches an active material including niobium-titanium composite oxide, wherein a constituent element of Nb2TiO7, wherein Nb and Ti may be substituted (Para. [0019]) wherein Nb may be substituted by Mo, W, Na and K (formula 3 in Para. [0019]) (i.e. reading on M1 as claimed) and wherein the subscript of the Nb substitution x is 0<x≤1 (Para. [0040]) (i.e. within the claimed M1 range of 0≤y<2) and further teaches Ti may be substituted by Ge wherein the amount of substitution is half or less with respect to Ti sites (i.e. 0<x<0.5, within the claimed range of 0<x<1) (Para. [0050]) and thus at the very least one of ordinary skill in the art could at once envisage Ti0.75Ge0.25NbMo0.8K0.2O7 reading on the claimed formulas Ti1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 (and thus, reads on z < 1), LiwTi1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 and w = 0 (and thus reads on 0 ≤ w ≤ 5), Ti1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-zM2z wherein z = 0 (and thus, reads on z ≤ 0.3) and LiwTi1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 and w = 0 (and thus reads on 0 ≤ w ≤ 5).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lithium niobium oxide of the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of the substitution of Ti and Ge as taught by Harada et al. such that the claimed formulas are provided, as such elements having large radii provide enlarged conductive path for lithium ions providing high capacity and high rapid charge and discharge performance and improvement in life performance (Para. [0033], [0050]).
Regarding Claim 2, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches depositing lithium lanthanum zirconium oxide on and inside the pores of the porous mesoporous layer (Para. [0043]) (i.e. depositing on and within the pores of said porous layer a coating of an electronically conductive material comprising an electronically conductive oxide material).
Regarding Claim 3, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches the lithium lanthanum zirconium oxide is deposited by ALD (i.e. the deposit of said coating of electronically conductive material is performed by atomic layer deposition ALD).
Regarding Claim 6, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches the primary nanoparticles in the form of aggregates or agglomerates having an average diameter of between 100 nm and 200 nm (Para. [0031]) (i.e. said primary nanoparticles are in the form of aggregates or agglomerates having an average diameter between 50 nm and 300 nm).
Regarding Claim 7, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches the porous layer has a specific surface area of 43.80 m2/g (Para. [0297]) (i.e. said porous layer has a specific surface area of between 10 and 500 m2/g).
Regarding Claim 8, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches a thickness of the porous electrode layer is between 1 micrometer and 6 micrometers (Para. [0092]).
Regarding Claim 10, Gaben teaches a porous electrode layer (Para. [0024]) which is an anode (Para. [0001]) having a porosity greater than 30% by volume (Para. [0021]) and not exceeding 50% by volume (Para. [0028]) (i.e. comprising a porous layer with a porosity between 25% and 50% by volume), the average diameter of pores is between 8 nm and 20 nm (Para. [0028]) (i.e. pores with an average diameter of less than 50 nm), nanoparticles which form an interconnected mesoporous network (Para. [0063]) (i.e. a porous network of a material A) and the nanoparticles are TiNb2O7 -(Para. [0118] and claim 14) (i.e. said material A is mixed oxide of niobium with titanium) and depositing lithium lanthanum zirconium oxide on and inside the pores of the porous mesoporous layer (Para. [0043]) (i.e. depositing on and within the pores of said porous layer a coating of an electronically conductive oxide material).
Gaben does not teach the active material of anode A being selected from one of the formulas as claimed.
However, Harada et al. teaches an active material including niobium-titanium composite oxide, wherein a constituent element of Nb2TiO7, wherein Nb and Ti may be substituted (Para. [0019]) wherein Nb may be substituted by Mo, W, Na and K (formula 3 in Para. [0019]) (i.e. reading on M1 as claimed) and wherein the subscript of the Nb substitution x is 0<x≤1 (Para. [0040]) (i.e. within the claimed M1 range of 0≤y<2) and further teaches Ti may be substituted by Ge wherein the amount of substitution is half or less with respect to Ti sites (i.e. 0<x<0.5, within the claimed range of 0<x<1) (Para. [0050]) and thus at the very least one of ordinary skill in the art could at once envisage Ti0.75Ge0.25NbMo0.8K0.2O7 reading on the claimed formulas Ti1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 (and thus, reads on z < 1), LiwTi1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 and w = 0 (and thus reads on 0 ≤ w ≤ 5), Ti1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-zM2z wherein z = 0 (and thus, reads on z ≤ 0.3) and LiwTi1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 and w = 0 (and thus reads on 0 ≤ w ≤ 5).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lithium niobium oxide of the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of the substitution of Ti and Ge as taught by Harada et al. such that the claimed formulas are provided, as such elements having large radii provide enlarged conductive path for lithium ions providing high capacity and high rapid charge and discharge performance and improvement in life performance (Para. [0033], [0050]).
Regarding Claim 12, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the porous anode in claim 10 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches a method of manufacturing lithium-ion battery comprising the porous electrode (i.e. a method of manufacturing a battery comprising the porous anode according to claim 10) (Para. [0187], [0240], [0263]).
Regarding Claim 13, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the method of claim 12 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches wherein battery comprises at least one separator and at least one porous cathode (Table 1 and Fig. 3), comprising the steps of providing at least two flat conducting substrates (Para. [0190]) (i.e. providing a first substrate, a second substrate are provided), providing a colloidal suspension comprising aggregates or agglomerates of monodispersed nanoparticles of at least one cathode material with an average primary diameter D50 less than or equal to 50 nm (Para. [0062], [0188]) (i.e. providing a first colloidal suspension comprising aggregates or agglomerates of monodisperse primary nanoparticles, the monodisperse primary nanoparticles have an average primary diameter overlapping with an average primary diameter D-50 of between 2 nm and 100 nm) wherein the nanoparticles are an anode material P (Para. [0113]) (i.e. of the material A), the primary nanoparticles in the form of aggregates or agglomerates having an average diameter of between 100 nm and 200 nm (Para. [0031]) (i.e. said monodisperse primary nanoparticles of the material A are in the form of aggregates or agglomerates having an average diameter between 50 nm and 300 nm), the anode material P is TiNb2O7 -(Para. [0118] and claim 14) (i.e. said material A is mixed oxide of niobium with titanium), providing a colloidal suspension comprising aggregates or agglomerates of monodispersed nanoparticles of at least one cathode material with an average primary diameter D50 less than or equal to 50 nm (Para. [0062], [0189]) (i.e. providing a second colloidal suspension comprising aggregates or agglomerates of monodisperse primary nanoparticles, the monodisperse primary nanoparticles of at least one active material of cathode C have an average primary diameter overlapping with an average primary diameter D-50 of between 2 nm and 100 nm) wherein the nanoparticles are a cathode material P (Para. [0109]) (i.e. of at least one active material of cathode C is provided), the primary nanoparticles in the form of aggregates or agglomerates having an average diameter of between 100 nm and 200 nm (Para. [0031]) (i.e. said primary nanoparticles are in the form of aggregates or agglomerates having an average diameter between 50 nm and 300 nm), and a colloidal suspension of nanoparticles of Li3PO4 in the form of aggregates or agglomerates with a particle size of 10 nm (Para. [0309], [0310], [0312]) (i.e. providing a third colloidal suspension is provided comprising agglomerates of nanoparticles of at least one inorganic material E, the nanoparticles of the at least inorganic material E having an average primary diameter of between 2 nm and 100 nm) wherein the aggregates or agglomerates are obtained in the size of 100 nm (Para. [0108], [0194]) (i.e. the aggregates or agglomerates have an average diameter D50 between 50 nm and 300 nm), depositing at least one layer of cathode and anode from the suspensions on the substrates (Para. [0191]) (i.e. on at least one face of said substrate an anode layer form said first colloidal suspension supplied in step a is deposited, and on at least one face of said second substrate a cathode layer from said second colloidal suspension), drying the layers (Para. [0192]) (i.e. said anode and cathode layers are dried), hot pressing of layers to obtain an assembled stack of layers of anode and cathode, obtaining mesoporous inorganic cathode and anode layers) (Para. [0194], [0197]) (i.e. and each layer is consolidated by pressing and heating, to obtain) wherein the cathode includes lithium composite oxides (Para. [0110]) (i.e. an inorganic porous cathode layer) and the anode includes titanium niobium oxide (Para. [0118]) (i.e. porous inorganic anode layer), depositing thin porous layers of Li3PO4 on the surface of the anode and cathode by applying an electric field to the colloidal suspension of nanoparticles of Li3PO4 (Para. [0309], [0312]) (i.e. depositing a porous inorganic layer form the third colloidal suspension on the porous anode layer and the porous cathode layer by a technique of electrophoresis), followed by drying then calcination treatment at 350 in the air (Para. [0312]) (i.e. drying and heat treating the porous inorganic layer under a flow of air, at a temperature higher than 130 degrees Celsius), then the electrodes are stacked in such a way that the films of Li3PO4 were in contact in the stack (Para. [0314]) (i.e. forming a multilayer stack by stacking the porous anode layer and the porous cathode layer face-to-face such that the porous inorganic layer is disposed therebetween) and hot pressing the stack at 450 degrees Celsius (Para. [0314], [0315]) (i.e. subjecting the multilayer stack to a thermocompression treatment between 120 and 600 degrees Celsius). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Regarding Claim 14, Gaben as modified by Harada teaches all of the elements of the method of claim 13 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches the Li3PO4 is an electron insulator (Para. [0108]) (i.e. wherein the at least one inorganic material E is an electrical insulator).
Regarding Claim 15, Gaben as modified by Harada teaches all of the elements of the method of claim 13 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches impregnating the assembly (i.e. multilayer stack) in an electrolyte solution (i.e. after step g, impregnating the multilayer stack with an electrolyte) comprising PYR14TFSI and LiTFSI (Para. [0317]) comprising LiPF6 dissolved in aprotic solvent (Para. [0185]) (i.e. an electrolyte composed of at least one ionic liquid and at least one lithium salt).
Regarding Claim 16, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the method of claim 12 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches the cathode material may be LiCoPO4, LiMn1.5Ni0.5O4, LiNi1/xCo1/yMn1/zO2 with x+y+z=10, LiMn1.5Ni0.5-xXxO4 where X is selected from Al, Fe, Cr, Co, Rh, Nd, other rare earths such as Sc, Y, Lu, La, Ce, Pr, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb where 0<x<0.1, LiNi0.8Co0.15Al0.05O2 (Para. [0110], [0111]).
Regarding Claim 17, Gaben teaches a lithium-ion battery (Para. [0187]) comprises at least one porous anode, at least one separator and at least one porous cathode (Table 1 and Fig. 3), wherein the porous electrode layer is an anode (Para. [0001]) having a porosity greater than 30% by volume (Para. [0021]) and not exceeding 50% by volume (Para. [0028]) (i.e. comprising a porous layer with a porosity between 25% and 50% by volume), the average diameter of pores is between 8 nm and 20 nm (Para. [0028]) (i.e. pores with an average diameter of less than 50 nm), the porous electrode layer comprising nanoparticles which form an interconnected mesoporous network (Para. [0063]) (i.e. a porous network of a material A) and the nanoparticles are TiNb2O7 -(Para. [0118] and claim 14) (i.e. said material A is mixed oxide of niobium with titanium), the separator is a porous layer of material such as silica, alumina and zirconia between the electrodes (Para. [0107]) (i.e. the separator is a porous inorganic layer and is between the anode and the cathode).
Gaben does not teach the material A being selected from one of the formulas as claimed.
However, Harada et al. teaches an active material including niobium-titanium composite oxide, wherein a constituent element of Nb2TiO7, wherein Nb and Ti may be substituted (Para. [0019]) wherein Nb may be substituted by Mo, W, Na and K (formula 3 in Para. [0019]) (i.e. reading on M1 as claimed) and wherein the subscript of the Nb substitution x is 0<x≤1 (Para. [0040]) (i.e. within the claimed M1 range of 0≤y<2) and further teaches Ti may be substituted by Ge wherein the amount of substitution is half or less with respect to Ti sites (i.e. 0<x<0.5, within the claimed range of 0<x<1) (Para. [0050]) and thus at the very least one of ordinary skill in the art could at once envisage Ti0.75Ge0.25NbMo0.8K0.2O7 reading on the claimed formulas Ti1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 (and thus, reads on z < 1), LiwTi1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 and w = 0 (and thus reads on 0 ≤ w ≤ 5), Ti1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-zM2z wherein z = 0 (and thus, reads on z ≤ 0.3) and LiwTi1-xGexNb2-yM1yO7-z wherein z = 0 and w = 0 (and thus reads on 0 ≤ w ≤ 5).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lithium niobium oxide of the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of the substitution of Ti and Ge as taught by Harada et al. such that the claimed formulas are provided, as such elements having large radii provide enlarged conductive path for lithium ions providing high capacity and high rapid charge and discharge performance and improvement in life performance (Para. [0033], [0050]).
Regarding Claim 18, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 17 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches the battery comprises at least one ionic liquid containing PYR14TFSI (Para. [0175]) with more than 50% by weight of PYR14TFSI (Para. [0180]) (i.e. an electrolyte liquid contains at least 50% by mass ionic liquid, which is Pyr14TFSI).
Regarding Claim 20, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 17 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches a thickness of the porous electrode layer is about 50 micrometers (Para. [0205]) (i.e. wherein it has electrodes with a thickness greater than 10 micrometers).
Regarding Claim 21, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 17 as explained above.
Gaben as modified above teaches the same structure of the anode of the battery of claim 21. Accordingly, the anode of Gaben as modified above would either (a) be expected to satisfy the mass capacity or (b) differences in the mass capacity set forth in the instant claim, having a mas capacity greater than 200 mAh/g would be slight differences in ranges that would be obvious. With respect to (a): The reasons regarding expectedness are that the structure/composition is identical to that of the instant claim, therefore it is expected that the anode of Gaben as modified above would satisfy this condition. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." See MPEP 2112.01. With respect to (b): If it is shown that such characteristics are not present, then any differences (regarding the mass capacity) would be small and obvious. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Regarding Claim 22, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 17 as explained above.
Gaben as modified above teaches the same structure and composition of the battery of claim 22. Accordingly, the anode of Gaben as modified above would either (a) be expected to satisfy being configured for use at temperature below -10 degrees Celsius or at a temperature higher than 50 degrees Celsius or (b) differences in the operating temperature set forth in the instant claim, being configured for use at temperature below -10 degrees Celsius or at a temperature higher than 50 degrees Celsius would be slight differences in ranges that would be obvious. With respect to (a): The reasons regarding expectedness are that the structure/composition is identical to that of the instant claim, therefore it is expected that the battery of Gaben as modified above would satisfy this condition. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. "When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not." See MPEP 2112.01. With respect to (b): If it is shown that such characteristics are not present, then any differences (regarding being configured for use at a temperature below -10 and above 50 degrees Celsius) would be small and obvious. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Regarding Claim 28, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 13 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches depositing lithium lanthanum zirconium oxide on and inside the pores of the porous mesoporous layer (Para. [0043]) (i.e. depositing a coating of an electronically conductive material on and inside the pores of the porous anode layer and/or the porous cathode layer).
Regarding Claim 29, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 13 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches providing at least two flat conducting substrates (Para. [0190]) (i.e. the first substrate and/or the second substrate are configured to act as a collector of electric current).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaben (WO2019/215407A) in view of Harada et al. (US 2017/0077495) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Zhao et al. (CN 110299516A). The English machine translation of Zhao et al. is attached and is referenced below.
Regarding Claim 4, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 3 as explained above.
Gaben does not teach wherein depositing the coating of the electrically conductive material is performed by immersion in the liquid phase, wherein the precursor is a carbon-rich compound, such as a carbohydrate, and wherein transformation of the precursor into the electronically conductive material is done by pyrolysis.
However, Zhao et al. teaches a method of forming an electrode material of lithium titanate (Para. [0009]) comprising immersing vertical carbon nanotube array in a lithium titanate precursor solution to provide dried carbon nanotube array loaded with lithium titanate precursor (i.e. depositing a coating of electrically conductive material comprising carbon, performed by immersion in the liquid phase comprising a precursor of the electrically conductive material, where the precursor is carbon nanotubes, or a carbon-rich compound) wherein the dried carbon nanotube array loaded with lithium titanate precursor is placed in a tube furnace, heated to 500 degrees Celsius under argon atmosphere protection and held for 4 hours and then cooled to room temperature to obtain the flexible electrode material of carbon nanotube array loaded with lithium titanate (Para. [0061]) (i.e. followed by the transformation of the precursor into electronically conductive material, wherein transformation of the precursor into the electronically conductive material is done by pyrolysis).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of depositing the coating of the electronically conductive material of Gaben, to incorporate the method as taught by Zhao et al., as such an anode material produced by the method would provide improved conductivity and reduced contact resistance between electrode material and current collector material such that it is more conducive to rapid transport of ions and electrons during electrochemical reaction, and exhibits excellent electrochemical performance (Para. [0026]).
Claims 5, 11 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (WO2019/215407A) in view of Harada et al. (US 2017/0077495) as applied to claim 2, 3 and 10 above, and further in view of Um et al. (US 2015/0072236).
Regarding Claim 5, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. and Um et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 24 as explained below.
Gaben does not teach the organic salts as claimed.
However, Um et al. teaches a process to form a coating layer (Para. [0044]) comprising applying a solution comprising precursor compounds such as metal organic acid salts (i.e. precursor comprises organic salts containing one or more metal elements) to form a coating layer formed of tin oxide (Para. [0054]) (i.e. the one or more metal elements of the organic metal salt is tin).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of the method of depositing tin oxide as taught by Um et al., as such a coating method would enhance the specific surface area to react with lithium ion and improve the capacity (Para. [0059]).
Regarding Claim 11, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 10 as explained above.
Gaben does not teach the electronically conductive oxide material is selected from the compounds of claim 11.
However, Um et al. teaches a process to form a coating layer (Para. [0044]) comprising forming a metal oxide layer of SnO2 (i.e. wherein the coating layer comprises electronically conductive oxide material, and wherein the electronically conductive oxide is tin oxide (Para. [0059]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of tin oxide, as such a coating would enhance the specific surface area to react with lithium ion and improve the capacity (Para. [0059]).
Regarding Claim 23, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 2 as explained above.
Gaben does not teach the electronically conductive oxide material is selected from the compounds of claim 23.
However, Um et al. teaches a process to form a coating layer (Para. [0044]) comprising forming a metal oxide layer of SnO2 (i.e. wherein the coating layer comprises electronically conductive oxide material, and wherein the electronically conductive oxide is tin oxide (Para. [0059]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of tin oxide, as such a coating would enhance the specific surface area to react with lithium ion and improve the capacity (Para. [0059]).
Claim 24, Gaben as modified by Harada et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 3 as explained above.
Um et al. teaches a process to form a coating layer (Para. [0044]) comprising applying a solution comprising precursor compounds such as metal organic acid salts (i.e. precursor comprises organic salts containing one or more metal elements) to form a coating layer formed of tin oxide (Para. [0054]), performed by immersing the metal foam into the solution (i.e. depositing the coating of the electrically conductive material is performed by immersion in the liquid phase) and includes a process of heat-treating under inert atmosphere (Para. [0058], [0059]) at 500 degrees Celsius (Para. [0078]) (i.e. heat treatment, and wherein transformation of the precursor into the electronically conductive material is done by heat treatment) forming a metal oxide layer of SnO2 (i.e. the precursor capable of forming an electronically conductive oxide) (Para. [0059]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Gaben to incorporate the teaching of the method of depositing tin oxide as taught by Um et al., as such a coating method would enhance the specific surface area to react with lithium ion and improve the capacity (Para. [0059]).
Claims 9 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaben (WO2019/215407A) in view of Harada et al. (US 2017/0077495) as applied to claim 1 and 17 above, in view of Lin et al. (US 2017/0263939) .
Regarding Claim 9, Gaben as modified by Harada teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Gaben does not teach wherein the substrate is an intermediate substrate of which said layer in step (c) after drying to form a porous anode plate.
However, Lin et al. teaches a method of fabricating a porous material for use as electrode (Para. [0048] and claim 1) wherein a colloidal particle template is dried on a substrate (Para. [0050]) and subsequently removed from the fine-array porous film (Para. [0053]) and is an anode (claim 17) (i.e. the substrate is an intermediate substrate of which said layer is separated after drying to form a porous anode plate).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaben to incorporate the teaching of the template method (i.e. an intermediate substrate which is separated after drying to form a porous anode plate) as taught by Lin et al., as such a method allows for the porous film obtained to be cut to obtain films or specified shapes and sizes for various applications (Para. [0054]) and provide a large specific surface area providing large capacity to store electrical energy (Para. [0032])
Regarding Claim 19, Gaben as modified by Harada teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 17 as explained above.
Gaben further teaches aluminum current collectors are used at the cathode (Para. [0074]) (i.e. a cathode current collector is made from aluminum), the cathode material may be LiNi1/xCo1/yMn1/zO2 with x+y+z=10 (i.e. the cathode is made of NMC) (Para. [0110])., a porosity greater than 30% by volume (Para. [0021]) and not exceeding 50% by volume (Para. [0028]) (i.e. comprising a porous layer with a porosity overlapping with a porous volume between 30% and 40% by volume), a mesoporous separator of Li3PO4 (Para. [0107], [0108]), the anode material P is TiNb2O7 -(Para. [0118] and claim 14) (i.e. the anode is a layer of TiNb2O7-δ wherein δ = 0), the electrode being impregnated by an electrolyte having an ionic liquid containing lithium salts (Para. [0045]) (i.e. a liquid electrolyte containing lithium salts impregnating the at least one porous anode), and copper as a current collector material (Para. [0075]) (i.e. an anode current collector made from copper). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Gaben does not teach a conductive layer of carbon deposited in the pores.
However, Lin et al. teaches a fine-array porous material for use in electrodes may further comprise additional smaller-scale electrode materials in the void space of the pores such as graphene (Para. [0008]) (i.e. a conductive layer of carbon deposited in the pores).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gaben to incorporate the teaching of a conductive layer of carbon deposited inside the pores as taught by Lin et al., as this would further increase the relative surface areas of electrodes (Para. [0008]) which further increases the capacity of the electrical energy stored therein (Para. [0004]).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaben (WO2019/215407A) in view of Harada et al. (US 2017/0077495) as applied to claim 13 above, in view of Teranishi et al. (US 2017/0373338) .
Regarding Claim 30, Gaben as modified by Harada teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 13 as explained above.
Gaben does not teach after step (b) and prior to step (c), separating the anode layer from the first substrate and separating the cathode layer from the second substrate; and after step (d) and prior to step (e), pressing the porous anode onto a first metal sheet and pressing the porous cathode into a second metal sheet, the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet configured to act as a collector of electric current.
However, Teranishi et al. teaches a method of forming a positive or negative electrode (Para. [0069]) in a secondary battery (Para. [0021]) by forming an electrode active material layer on a release sheet, wherein the release sheet may be removed after forming the electrode active material layer (Para. [0070]) (i.e. separating an anode layer form a first substrate and separate a cathode from a second substrate) and the resultant laminate placed on a desired current collector (Para. [0070]) wherein the negative electrode active material may be roll pressed to form an anode active material on a copper foil (i.e. pressing the porous anode onto a first metal sheet) (Para. [0126]) and the positive electrode active material be roll pressed onto an aluminum foil (Para. [0129]) (i.e. pressing the porous cathode into a second metal sheet, the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet configured to act as a collector of electric current).
The combination of the steps of separating the anode layer from the first substrate and separating the cathode layer from the second substrate and pressing the porous anode onto a first metal sheet and pressing the porous cathode into a second metal sheet, the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet configured to act as a collector of electric current as taught by Teranishi et al. with the method of forming the battery as taught by Gaben would yield the predictable result of a method providing a porous anode layer and a porous cathode layer on metal sheets acting as collectors of electric current in a secondary battery (see Teranishi et al. – Para. [0021] and Gaben – Para. [0047], Table 1 and Fig. 1). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to combine the steps of separating the anode layer from the first substrate and separating the cathode layer from the second substrate and pressing the porous anode onto a first metal sheet and pressing the porous cathode into a second metal sheet, the first metal sheet and the second metal sheet configured to act as a collector of electric current as taught by Teranishi et al. with the method of forming the battery as taught by Gaben as the combination would yield the predictable result of providing a porous anode layer and a porous cathode layer on metal sheets acting as collectors of electric current in a secondary battery (see Teranishi et al. – Para. [0021] and Gaben – Para. [0047], Table 1 and Fig. 1). The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, A.). Regarding the limitations of after step (b) and prior to step (c) and after step (d) and prior to step (e), it would be obvious as selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. See Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. App. 1959) (Prior art reference disclosing a process of making a laminated sheet wherein a base sheet is first coated with a metallic film and thereafter impregnated with a thermosetting material was held to render prima facie obvious claims directed to a process of making a laminated sheet by reversing the order of the prior art process steps.). See also In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results). See MPEP §2144.04(IV)C.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-24 and 28-30 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-24 and 28-30 of copending Application No. 18/269,804 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Claim 1-27 of copending Application 18/269,804 teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claims 1-24 and 28-30 wherein the claimed formulas are overlapping in ranges. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed April 6, 2026 regarding the prior art rejection and statutory double patenting have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection in light of the amendment nor the nonstatutory double patenting rejection made in light of the amendment.
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 ARMINDO CARVALHO JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-5292. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a.m.-5p.m..
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571 272-1481. 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.
/ARMINDO CARVALHO JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights