Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/271,757

NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 11, 2023
Examiner
VO, JIMMY
Art Unit
1723
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Panasonic Energy Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
468 granted / 645 resolved
+7.6% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
64 currently pending
Career history
709
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
55.1%
+15.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 645 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 7/11/23 and 9/11/25 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings were received on 7/11/23. These drawings are acceptable. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. 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. Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/175361 A1 (hereinafter “WO’361”) in view of US 9,627,722 B1 (hereinafter “US’722”). As to Claim 1:WO’361 discloses: a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte ([0012]–[0017]); the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode mixture layer formed on a surface of the current collector ([0017]); the negative electrode mixture layer is divided in a thickness direction into a first region on the current-collector side and a second region on the surface side, corresponding to a first negative electrode mixture layer opposing the current collector and a second negative electrode mixture layer layered over the first ([0027]–[0029]); the negative electrode active material includes graphite particles ([0019], [0022]); and the graphite particles in the second (surface-side) region have higher porosity than the graphite particles in the first (collector-side) region, such that the porosity between graphite particles in the second negative electrode mixture layer is higher than that in the first negative electrode mixture layer ([0008]–[0010], [0027]–[0029]). However, WO’361 does not disclose that the negative electrode mixture layer includes a highly dielectric material having a dielectric constant higher than that of graphite particles, nor does WO’361 disclose that a percentage content of such a highly dielectric material in the first negative electrode mixture layer is higher than a percentage content of the highly dielectric material in the second negative electrode mixture layer. US’722 discloses battery electrodes including a current collector and an electrode layer incorporating high-dielectric ceramic materials, such as titanates and other ceramic oxides, which have dielectric constants higher than that of graphite (Col. 5, lines 3–20; Col. 12, lines 1–15). US’722 further teaches providing a ceramic or high-dielectric layer or region adjacent to the current collector, such that the dielectric material content is greater near the current collector than toward the outer surface of the electrode (Col. 19, lines 20–35; Col. 20, lines 1–15; Fig. 1). WO’361 and US’722 are analogous arts because both references are directed to non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries and, more particularly, to the structure and material composition of negative electrodes formed on current collectors to improve electrochemical performance, durability, and interfacial stability. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the negative electrode of WO’361 to further include a highly dielectric material, as taught by US’722, and to arrange the electrode such that a higher percentage content of the highly dielectric material is present in the first (collector-side) negative electrode mixture layer than in the second (surface-side) negative electrode mixture layer, while maintaining the porosity gradient taught by WO’361, in order to improve interfacial stability at the current collector and suppress degradation, with predictable results. As to Claim 4: WO’361 discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte ([0012]–[0017]). WO’361 further discloses that the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode mixture layer formed on a surface of the current collector, the negative electrode mixture layer being divided in a thickness direction into a first (collector-side) negative electrode mixture layer and a second (surface-side) negative electrode mixture layer ([0017], [0027]–[0029]). WO’361 also discloses that the negative electrode mixture layer includes graphite particles as a negative electrode active material and that the porosity of graphite particles in the second negative electrode mixture layer is higher than that in the first negative electrode mixture layer ([0019], [0022], [0027]–[0029]). WO’361 additionally discloses that the negative electrode active material may further include a Si-based material, such as silicon or silicon oxide, serving as a negative electrode active material together with graphite ([0020]–[0024]). However, WO’361 does not disclose that the negative electrode mixture layer further includes a highly dielectric material having a higher dielectric constant than graphite particles, nor does WO’361 disclose a layer-specific distribution of such a highly dielectric material as required by Claim 1 from which Claim 4 depends. US’722 discloses battery electrodes including a current collector and an electrode layer incorporating high-dielectric ceramic materials, such as titanates and other ceramic oxides, which have dielectric constants higher than that of graphite, and which are provided adjacent to the current collector to improve interfacial stability and durability (Col. 5, lines 3–20; Col. 12, lines 1–15; Col. 19, lines 20–35). It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the negative electrode of WO’361, which already discloses a graphite-based negative electrode optionally including a Si-based active material, to further include a highly dielectric material as taught by US’722, while maintaining the layered structure and porosity gradient taught by WO’361, in order to improve interfacial stability at the current collector and suppress degradation, with predictable results. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/175361 A1 (hereinafter “WO’361”) in view of US 9,627,722 B1 (hereinafter “US’722”) and further in view of NPL, “Atomic layer deposition-strengthened lithiophilicity of ultrathin TiO2 film” by Tan et al. As to Claim 2: WO’361 discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte, wherein the negative electrode includes a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode mixture layer formed on the current collector ([0012]–[0017]). WO’361 further discloses that the negative electrode mixture layer is divided in the thickness direction into a first negative electrode mixture layer on the current-collector side and a second negative electrode mixture layer on the surface side ([0027]–[0029]). WO’361 also discloses that the negative electrode active material includes graphite particles and that the porosity of graphite particles in the second layer is higher than the porosity of graphite particles in the first layer ([0019], [0022], [0027]–[0029]). WO’361 therefore discloses all limitations of Claim 1 from which Claim 2 depends, except for the specific species of the highly dielectric material. However, WO’361 does not disclose that the highly dielectric material includes at least one of titanium oxide or lithium titanate. US’722 discloses battery electrodes including a current collector and an electrode region incorporating high-dielectric ceramic materials adjacent the current collector to improve electrical insulation and interfacial stability (Col. 5, lines 3–20; Col. 12, lines 1–15). US’722 thus teaches the general use of ceramic dielectric materials at the collector interface but does not expressly identify titanium oxide or lithium titanate as the dielectric species. Tan et al. expressly discloses titanium oxide (TiO₂) deposited as an ultrathin ceramic film directly on a copper current collector by atomic layer deposition, forming an interfacial coating that is electronically insulating and has a dielectric constant higher than that of graphite (Tan et al., Abstract; Experimental section; Figs. 1–2). Tan et al. therefore teaches the use of titanium oxide as a dielectric/ceramic coating at the current-collector interface, rather than as an electroactive anode material. WO’361, US’722, and Tan et al. are analogous arts because all are directed to non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries and, more particularly, to the structure and material composition of negative electrodes formed on current collectors to improve interfacial stability and electrochemical performance. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the negative electrode of WO’361 to include titanium oxide as the highly dielectric material, as taught by Tan et al., and motivated by the general teaching of US’722 to employ ceramic dielectric materials at the current-collector interface, while maintaining the layered graphite-based negative electrode structure and porosity gradient disclosed in WO’361, in order to improve electrical insulation and interfacial stability with predictable results. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/175361 A1 (hereinafter “WO’361”) in view of US 9,627,722 B1 (hereinafter “US’722”), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2013/0224593 A1 (hereinafter “US’593”). As to Claim 3: WO’361 discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte, wherein the negative electrode includes a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode mixture layer formed on the current collector ([0012]–[0017]). WO’361 further discloses that the negative electrode mixture layer is divided in the thickness direction into a first negative electrode mixture layer on the current-collector side and a second negative electrode mixture layer on the surface side ([0027]–[0029]). WO’361 also discloses that the negative electrode active material includes graphite particles, that a highly dielectric material having a higher dielectric constant than graphite is included in the negative electrode mixture layer, that the porosity between graphite particles in the second layer is higher than that in the first layer, and that the percentage content of the highly dielectric material in the first layer is higher than that in the second layer ([0018]–[0022], [0027]–[0029]). Thus, WO’361 discloses all limitations of Claim 1 from which Claim 3 depends. However, WO’361 does not disclose that the percentage content of the highly dielectric material in the first negative electrode mixture layer is specifically 1 mass%–10 mass% with respect to the mass of the negative electrode active material. US’593 discloses electrode structures in which a ceramic or dielectric material is incorporated into an electrode-associated layer in minor amounts relative to the active material in order to improve interfacial stability and mechanical integrity while suppressing capacity loss ([0170]–[0172]). US’593 further discloses embodiments in which such ceramic or dielectric material is included in single-digit to about ten-percent weight ranges relative to other electrode components ([0179]–[0183]), which overlaps the claimed 1 mass%–10 mass% range. WO’361 and US’593 are analogous arts because both are directed to non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries and, more particularly, to the material composition and structural configuration of negative electrodes formed on current collectors to achieve stable electrochemical performance. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the negative electrode of WO’361 such that the highly dielectric material included in the first (current-collector-side) negative electrode mixture layer is present in an amount of 1 mass%–10 mass% relative to the negative electrode active material, as taught by US’593, in order to balance the interfacial insulating or reinforcing effect of the dielectric material with maintenance of battery capacity, with a reasonable expectation of success. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 6 pm 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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. /JIMMY VO/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 1723 /JIMMY VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 11, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603348
SECONDARY BATTERY HAVING AN INSULATION MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597670
AUTOMOBILE WITH BATTERY PACK INSTALLED OVER UNDERBODY FRAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592422
BATTERY FIRE DETECTION DEVICE AND ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM DETERMINING A RISK OF FIRE OR A FIRE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592385
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING POSITIVE-ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL PRECURSOR AND POSITIVE-ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580283
BUSSED ELECTRICAL CENTER WITH DIRECT CONTACTOR MOUNTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
73%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+23.1%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 645 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