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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9 are pending and under consideration on the merits.
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s Specification are to the published application US 2024/0120493 A1, unless stated otherwise. Further, it is noted that italicized text in parentheses recited in any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 indicates the element of the claimed invention to which the preceding prior art element corresponds. Additionally, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Remarks filed on 17 June 2026 in response to the Non-Final Rejection dated 18 March 2026 have been fully considered. As such, claims 1-9 remain pending and under consideration on the merits.
a. Applicant's arguments are persuasive, and therefore, the 35 U.S.C.103 rejection over Iida and the 35 U.S.C.103 rejection over Kim in view of Iida previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection are overcome and hereby withdrawn.
b. New grounds of rejection are set forth below, made in view of newly cited prior art identified as a result of additional search and consideration completed by the undersigned Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gadkaree et al. (US 2015/0062778 A1; “Gadkaree”).
Regarding claim 1, Gadkaree discloses an ultracapacitor that is capable of charging and discharging many times [0025-0026, 0028] comprising an organic electrolyte [0005, 0024, 0039] and a positive electrode [0009-0011, 0027-0030], wherein the positive electrode further comprises a first activated carbon material (an additive comprising a carbonaceous material) [0009-0013, 0030]. The activated carbon material is suitable for incorporation into positive or negative electrodes of an energy storage device [0013, 0016]. The first activated carbon material comprises pores having a size of ≤1 nm, which provide a combined DFT pore volume of >0.3 cm3/g [0030, 0032, 0047-0048, 0072], and pores having a size of >1 nm to ≤2 nm, which provide a combined pore volume of ≥0.05 cm3/g [0030, 0032, 0047-0048], wherein microscale pores have a size of 2 nm or less [0032], therefore, the two aforementioned pore volume ranges correspond and overlap with the claimed micropore volume range, less than 0.60 cm3/g, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Furthermore, the first activated carbon material has a BET specific surface area greater than about 300 m2/g and less than 2500 m2/g [0031, Table 1], of which overlaps with the claimed range, from 1,000 m2/g to 2,000 m2/g, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)). Moreover, the first activated carbon material includes at most 1.5 wt. % oxygen as measured by an elemental analyzer, e.g. 1000 ppm to 1.5 wt. % [0009, 0011, 0030, 0052-0056, 0069], of which overlaps with the claimed range, 0.5% by mass or more and less than 1.3% by mass, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
The recitation of “for nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery positive electrodes” in the preamble of claim 1 constitutes a recitation of the intended use of the invention, and does not structurally or materially limit or define the additive set forth in the body of the claim. Therefore, the recitation is not considered a limitation of the additive, and is of no significance to the construction of the claim. Applicant is respectfully directed to MPEP 2111.02(II).
Regarding claim 2, Gadkaree discloses the additive set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Gadkaree further discloses that the first activated carbon material comprises <0.15 cm3/g combined DFT pore volume of any pores having a size of >2 nm [0030, 0048, 0072], wherein mesoscale pores have a pore size of 2 to 50 nm [0032]. The first activated carbon material may have a particle size (D50) of 10 micrometers or less [0060]. The activated carbon material may be derived from plant-based materials/biomass, e.g. wheat flour [0021, 0059].
Gadkaree remains silent regarding a percentage of the oxygen content in quinone groups as measured by Boehm titration of surface functional groups with respect to the oxygen content as measured by the elemental analysis is from 30% to 70%.
However, the first activated carbon material of Gadkaree is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed carbonaceous material in Applicant's specification in terms of comprising:
pores having a size of ≤1 nm with a combined DFT pore volume of >0.3 cm3/g, and pores having a size of >1 nm to ≤2 nm with a combined pore volume of ≥0.05 cm3/g, wherein microscale pores have a size of 2 nm or less, of which correspond and overlap with the claimed and disclosed micropore volume range [Claim 1, Applicant’s Specification ¶0033],
<0.15 cm3/g combined DFT pore volume of any pores having a size of >2 nm, wherein mesoscale pores have a pore size of 2 to 50 nm, of which corresponds and overlaps with the claimed and disclosed mesopore volume range [Claim 4, Applicant’s Specification ¶0034],
a BET specific surface area greater than about 300 m2/g and less than 2500 m2/g, of which overlaps with the claimed specific surface area range [Claim 1, Applicant’s Specification ¶0032],
a particle size (D50) of 10 micrometers or less, of which overlaps with the claimed and disclosed average particle size range, [Claim 3, Applicant’s Specification ¶0038],
derived from, e.g. wheat flour, of which corresponds with the disclosed carbonaceous precursors including plant materials [Applicant’s Specification ¶0039-0040],
at most 1.5 wt. % oxygen as measured by an elemental analyzer, e.g. 1000 ppm to 1.5 wt. %, of which overlaps with the claimed oxygen content range [Claim 1, Applicant’s Specification ¶0035], wherein
Gadkaree discloses that the presence of oxygen in the material can adversely affect the properties of energy storage devices, such as, giving rise to pseudocapacitance, increase the self-discharge or leakage rate, cause decomposition of the electrolyte, and/or cause a long term increase in resistance and deterioration of capacitance [Gadkaree, 0052-0054, 0056],
especially with the presence of oxygen-containing surface functionalities, for example, hydroxyl and quinone functional groups, of which may be introduced during carbonization and activation steps [Gadkaree, 0007-0008, 0015, 0052-0054, FIG. 1], therefore,
it is advantageous to control and preferably minimize the oxygen content in activated carbon [Gadkaree, 0054-0056].
Gadkaree discloses a method for preparing the activated carbon material, whereby, the plant-based starting material is heated in a furnace to undergo carbonization, at a rate of 150°C/hr from room temperature to 800°C and maintained for 2 hrs under an N2 atmosphere [Gadkaree, 0059-0060], of which corresponds to the disclosed carbonization step [Applicant’s Specification ¶0043], then
the resulting material is pulverized to a particle size (D50) of 10 micrometers or less and mixed with KOH powder and heated to 750°C and maintained for 2 hrs under an N2 atmosphere to undergo activation [Gadkaree, 0060-0062], of which corresponds to the disclosed activation step [Applicant’s Specification ¶0047], then after activation,
the resulting material is first washed with water and acid to remove excess potassium, potassium compounds, and other impurities, wherein the first washing includes stirring and heating of the mixture to 90-100°C for 30 minutes [Gadkaree, 0063], and further washing includes rising the solid material with water [Gadkaree, 0063-0064], of which corresponds to the disclosed washing step [Applicant’s Specification ¶0048-0055], then
in order to remove surface functional groups and decrease the oxygen content in the activated carbon, the activated carbon is treated with an additional treatment to 600-1000°C in an inert or reducing atmosphere [Gadkaree, 0065-0066], of which corresponds to the disclosed post-activation heat treatment [Applicant’s Specification ¶0059-0061], see MPEP 2144.05(II)(B).
Gadkaree discloses use of Boehm titration to measure the content of oxygen-containing surface functional groups in the activated carbon material [Gadkaree, 0069], and that,
activated carbon material is suitable for incorporation into positive electrodes of, generally, an energy storage device [Gadkaree, 0009, 0016, 0021], see MPEP 2144.07.
Given that the first activated carbon material of Gadkaree is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed carbonaceous material in terms of the foregoing elements (a)-(o), with emphasis on element m, it stands to reason, and there is a strong expectation, that the first activated carbon material of Gadkaree would have necessarily exhibited a percentage of the oxygen content in quinone groups as measured by Boehm titration of surface functional groups with respect to the oxygen content as measured by the elemental analysis is from 30% to 70%, as claimed, absent a showing of factually supported objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2144.05(II)(B), MPEP 2112(V); MPEP 2112.01(I) and (II); MPEP 2145; and MPEP 2145(I). "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”. The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 3, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Gadkaree further discloses that the first activated carbon material has a particle size (D50) of 10 micrometers or less, of which overlaps with the claimed and disclosed average particle size range, from 2 μm to 20 μm, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 4, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Gadkaree further discloses that the first activated carbon material comprises <0.15 cm3/g combined DFT pore volume of any pores having a size of >2 nm [0030, 0048, 0072], wherein mesoscale pores have a pore size of 2 to 50 nm [0032], therefore, the aforementioned pore volume corresponds and overlaps with the claimed mesopore volume range, 0.35 cm3/g or less, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Claims 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0044186 A1, cited to in previous action; “Kim”) in view of Gadkaree.
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses a lithium metal battery [0150] comprising a positive electrode [0150], of which includes a current collector [0151-0152] and a positive active material composition (a positive electrode active material composition for nonaqueous electrolyte secondary batteries) [0151], of which further comprises a positive active material (a positive electrode active material) [0151], a binder (a binder) [0151-0152], and a conducting agent [0151, 0153], of which is, inter alia a carbonaceous material that does not cause chemical change in the battery and has conductivity [0153], and is in an amount of 1-10 parts by weight relative to 100 parts by weight of the total weight of the positive active material [0154].
Additionally, Kim discloses that the lithium metal battery [0150] is suitable for use in small and medium/large-size devices including, inter alia plug-in hybrid electric vehicles [0167-0168], and is capable of charging/discharging [0166, 0221-0228]. The lithium metal battery comprises a non-aqueous liquid electrolyte [0161, 0164-0165]. The lithium metal battery of Kim reads on the claimed nonaqueous electrolyte secondary batteries.
Kim remains silent regarding the conducting agent is an additive according to claim 1.
Gadkaree is directed towards an activated carbon material [0009-0011]. Gadkaree discloses the claimed additive set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, of which is incorporated herein by reference (not repeated for sake of brevity), with emphasis on the teaching that the activated carbon material is suitable for incorporation into positive electrodes of, generally, an energy storage device [Gadkaree, 0009, 0016, 0021].
Kim and Gadkaree each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------a carbonaceous material additive. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lithium metal battery of Kim by having utilized the activated carbon material of Gadkaree as the carbonaceous material conducting agent of the positive active material composition, in order to improve the current output of the positive electrode [Gadkaree, 0023], and/or because the activated carbon material of Gadkaree would have been readily recognized as suitable for use as a conducting agent in electrochemical devices/batteries [Gadkaree, 0009, 0016, 0021]. See MPEP 2144.07.
In accordance with the aforesaid modification, the positive active material composition of modified Kim, would have comprised the positive active material, the binder, and the plant-derived activated carbon material taught by Gadkaree, and set forth above, as the carbonaceous material conducting agent, thereby reading on the composition defined by claim 5, wherein the activated carbon material of Gadkaree reads on the additive defined by claim 1. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 above is incorporated herein by reference. Modified Kim discloses the positive active material composition set for above in the rejection of claim 5. Kim further discloses that the conducting agent is in an amount of 1-10 parts by weight [Kim, 0154], the binder is in an amount of 1-50 parts by weight [Kim, 0152], and the solvent is in an amount 100-2,000 parts by weight [Kim, 0156], all relative to 100 parts of the positive active material in the positive active material composition [Kim, 0150-0157], therefore, through calculation, the conducting agent amount range overlaps with the claimed additive amount range, 10% by mass or less, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 5 above is incorporated herein by reference. The positive electrode of the lithium metal battery of modified Kim – in addition to the positive active material layer formed from the positive active material composition – includes the current collector (collector) [Kim, 0150-0152], wherein the positive active material composition is coated on the current collector to form said layer [Kim, 0151]. The positive electrode inclusive of the positive electrode active material layer formed from the corresponding composition, and the current collector, reads on the positive electrode of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, the rejection of claim 7 above is incorporated herein by reference. Modified Kim discloses that the lithium metal battery (nonaqueous secondary battery) [Kim, 0150] comprises the positive electrode (the positive electrode) [Kim, 0150] set forth above in the rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 9, in view of the rejection of claim 8 above, Kim further discloses that the lithium metal battery is capable of operating at 3-4.1 V [Kim, 0222-0223]. In view thereof, and given that the lithium metal battery of modified Kim is substantially identical to the claimed and disclosed nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, it stands to reason and there is a strong and reasonable expectation, that the lithium metal battery of modified Kim would have necessarily been capable of operating at 3-4.1 V, of which is within the claimed range, 2-5 V, absent a showing of factually supported objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP2144.05(I); MPEP 2112(V); MPEP 2112.01(I) and (II); MPEP 2145; and MPEP 2145(I). "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”. The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Pertinent Prior Art
The following constitutes a list of prior art which are not relied upon herein, but are considered pertinent to the claimed invention and/or written description thereof. The prior art are purposely made of record hereinafter to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, and consideration thereof is respectfully suggested.
Kato et al., US 2004/0023115 A1 – is directed towards a lithium rechargeable battery [0043] comprising a graphite active material [0043, 0111], and teaches a method of preparation [0051], including a wash step with an aqueous solution of hydrofluoric acid to remove impurities (ash content) [0095, 0111].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA X. COLTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571)272-8935. 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.
/JENNA X. COLTON/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights