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 .
Claims 6-10 are pending in the application, claims 1-5 were cancelled in the preliminary amendment filed August 17, 2023.
Amendments to claims, filed on August 17, 2023, have been entered in the above-identified application.
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 6-10 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.
The limitation “an outermost solid electrolyte layer disposed on both end sides of the laminate” in claim 6 is unclear and renders the claims vague and indefinite. It is unclear how many outermost layers are being claimed, since “an” only needs to be one (1) layer. It is further unclear what the “end sides” of the laminate are with respect to the electrode layer and electrolytes layers. Would this be at the sides of the layer or is the claim attempting to define a top and bottom of stacked layers in the laminate.
The limitation “an outermost solid electrolyte layer (having a thickness of ta)” in claim 6 is unclear and renders the claims vague and indefinite. It is unclear if the text in the parathesis is positively being claimed or not.
The limitation “an inner solid electrolyte layer (having a thickness of tbn(1≤ n) > ta)” in claim 6 is unclear and renders the claims vague and indefinite. It is unclear if the text in the parathesis is positively being claimed or not. Furthermore, the thickness of tbn(1≤ n) > ta is confusing. It the thickness of the inner solid electrolyte layer inner solid electrolyte layer, where in n is greater or equal to 1, and the thickness of the layer satisfy the expression tbn > ta. Alternatively, is tbn(1≤ n) > ta the symbol that represents the thickness, for example x is the thickness.
Claims 8 recites the limitation "the plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers" in lines 2 and 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 depends from claim 6 which claim “an inner solid electrolyte layer.” It is unclear if these are the layer in claim 6 or different layers.
Claims 9 recites the limitation "the inner solid electrolyte layers" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 8 depends from claim 6 which claim “an inner solid electrolyte layer.” It is unclear if these are the layer in claim 6 or different layers.
The limitation “a NaSICON type, a garnet type, or a perovskite type” in claim 10 is unclear and renders the claims vague and indefinite. He addition of he word “type” to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as o render it indefinite.
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.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano (US PG Pub. 2008/0241665) in view of Nakamura (US PG Pub. 2009/0017371).
Regarding Applicant’s claims 6 and 10, Sano discloses an all-solid-state secondary battery (title) comprising a laminate (para. [0078] and figure 2) The laminate includes a plurality of positive electrode layers (ref. #2), a plurality of negative electrode layers (ref. #3), and a plurality of solid electrolyte layers (ref. #4). The positive electrode layers and the negative electrode layers are alternately laminated with the solid electrolyte layers interposed therebetween (figure 2).
The plurality of positive electrode layers each include a positive electrode active material layer (para. [0035]). The plurality of negative electrode layers each include a negative electrode active material layer (para. [0045]). The plurality of solid electrolyte layers each contain a solid electrolyte, such as, a NaSICON crystal structure (para. [0050]).
Sano fails to disclose the claimed thickness of the plurality of solid electrolyte layers.
Nakamura discloses a secondary battery (para. [0060]) includes a plurality of positive electrode layers (ref. #12), a plurality of negative electrode layers (ref. #13), and a plurality of solid electrolyte layers (ref. #14). The positive electrode layers and the negative electrode layers are alternately laminated with the solid electrolyte layers interposed therebetween (figure 2).
Nakamura further discloses that the outermost solid electrolyte layers have a thickness of ta and are deemed to be disposed on the ends of the laminate in a lamination direction (para. [0062]). The inner solid electrolyte layer has a thickness of tbn, where 1≤n, and is disposed inward relative to the outermost solid electrolyte layer (para. [0062]). The outermost solid electrolyte layers have the smallest thickness and the inner solid electrolyte layer (central layer) has the largest thickness (para. [0062]). Thus, stratifying the equation tbn > ta.
The solid electrolyte layers have different thicknesses depending on the position of the solid electrolyte layer in the stacking direction. When the thickness of the solid electrolyte layer is increased, the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer can be increased. When the thickness of the solid electrolyte layer is reduced, the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer can be reduced (para. [0065]). This can repress variations in output among the unit cells at different positions in the stacking direction even when an uneven temperature distribution occurs in the stacking direction due to charge and discharge of the power storage device (para. [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make outermost solid electrolyte layers have the smallest thickness and the inner solid electrolyte layer have the largest thickness in Sano as taught Nakamura in order to increase or decrease the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to increase or decrease the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer in order to repress variations in output among the unit cells at different positions in the stacking direction even when an uneven temperature distribution occurs in the stacking direction due to charge and discharge of the power storage device.
Regarding Applicant’s claim 7, Sano further discloses a plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers (figure 2).
Sano fails to disclose the claimed thickness of the plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers.
Nakamura further discloses that the solid electrolyte layers comprise additional layers located between a central layer (i.e. central portion) and the outer most layer, such that the thickness thereof is reduced from the central layer to outer layer. In other words, the central layer has the largest thickness and the outer layers have the smallest thickness (para. [0062]-[0063]).
Nakamura discloses a secondary battery (para. [0060]) includes a plurality of positive electrode layers (ref. #12), a plurality of negative electrode layers (ref. #13), and a plurality of solid electrolyte layers (ref. #14). The positive electrode layers and the negative electrode layers are alternately laminated with the solid electrolyte layers interposed therebetween (figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make outermost solid electrolyte layers have the smallest thickness and the inner solid electrolyte layer closest to a central portion have the largest thickness in Sano as taught Nakamura in order to increase or decrease the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to increase or decrease the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer in order to repress variations in output among the unit cells at different positions in the stacking direction even when an uneven temperature distribution occurs in the stacking direction due to charge and discharge of the power storage device.
Regarding Applicant’s claim 8, as discussed above the combination of Sano and Nakamura the plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers being thicker than the outermost solid electrolyte layer. The plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers are deemed to have a thickness of tbn. The n-th inner solid electrolyte layer is deemed to be a n-th layer counted from the inner solid electrolyte layer disposed at the central portion in the lamination direction
The combination of Sano and Nakamura fails to disclose that the thickness of the inner solid electrolyte layers stratify the claimed expression.
As discussed above Nakamura discloses that the central most solid electrolyte layer has the largest thickness and the other inner layers become progressively thinner in the stacking directors towards the outer most layers (para. [0062]-[0063]).
Therefore, the exact thicknesses of the plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers to the central most solid electrolyte layer is deemed to be a result effective variable with regard to the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer. It would require routine experimentation to determine the optimum value of a result effective variable, such as thickness of the plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers, in the absence of a showing of criticality in the claimed thickness in the expression of claim 8. MPEP 2144.05 II B.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the thickness of the plurality of inner solid electrolyte layers to satisfy the expression of claim 8 in order to increase or decrease the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to increase or decrease the resistance value of the solid electrolyte layer in order to repress variations in output among the unit cells at different positions in the stacking direction even when an uneven temperature distribution occurs in the stacking direction due to charge and discharge of the power storage device.
Regarding Applicant’s claim 9, the combination of Sano and Nakamura fails to disclose the total number of solid electrolyte layers or that the number of layers stratifies express of claim 9.
The exact number of solid electrolyte layers is deemed to be a result effective variable with regard to the resistance value of the battery. It would require routine experimentation to determine the optimum value of a result effective variable, such as number of solid electrolyte layers, in the absence of a showing of criticality in the claimed thickness in the expression of claim 8. MPEP 2144.05 II B.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to optimize the number of solid electrolyte layers to satisfy the expression of claim 9 in order to increase or decrease the resistance value at different position within the battery. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to increase or decrease the resistance value at different position within the battery in order to repress variations in output among the unit cells at different positions in the stacking direction even when an uneven temperature distribution occurs in the stacking direction due to charge and discharge of the power storage device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ito (US PG Pub. 2021/0159538) and Nishida et al. (US PG Pub. 2021/0344042) which disclose similar all solid-state batteries with varying thickness for the solid electrolyte layers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alicia Chevalier whose telephone number is (571)272-1490. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30 - 5:00.
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, Srilakshmi Kumar can be reached at (571) 272-7769. 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.
/Alicia Chevalier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1788
03/21/2026