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 and Other Notes
Claims 1–20 are pending.
Claims 1–18 are being treated on their merits.
Claims 19 and 20 are withdrawn from consideration.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The paragraph numbers cited in this Office Action in reference to the instant application are referring to the paragraph numbering of the PG-Pub of the instant application. See US 2024/0088358 A1.
Election/Restrictions
Withdrawn process claims 19 and 20 do not include all the limitations of the claims being treated on their merits. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable claim will not be rejoined . See MPEP § 821.04. Applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the claims being treated on their merits. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 27 September 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Applicants' amendments have overcome the objections to the drawings.
Specification
Applicants' amendments have overcome the objections to the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites a plurality of steps without each step being separated by a line indentation. Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 (i).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1–18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the carbonized part" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2–18 are directly or indirectly dependent from claim 1 and include all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claims 2–18 are also 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1–18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art of record is Zhang et al. (CN 113644231 A, hereinafter Zhang).
Zhang discloses a method of manufacturing an electrode for a lithium secondary battery, comprising mixing active materials (see graphite, [0099]), polymeric binders (see CMC and SBR, [0099]), carbon-based additives (see carbon black, [0099]) and a solvent (see slurry, [0099]); encapsulating the active materials by the polymeric binders (FIG. 1, [0100]); and carbonizing part of the polymeric binders (see laser ablation, [0101]) and generating nanopores in the polymeric binders via energy application to the polymeric binders (FIG. 1, [0101]).
Zhang does not disclose, teach, or suggest the following distinguishing feature:
A method of manufacturing an electrode for a lithium secondary battery, comprising carbonizing part of polymeric binders and generating nanopores in the polymeric binders, wherein a remaining part of the polymeric binders between the carbonized part and active materials is not carbonized.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sakshaug (US 2017/0170477 A1) discloses a method of manufacturing an electrode for a lithium secondary battery, comprising mixing active materials and polymeric binders; encapsulating the active materials by the polymeric binders; and applying energy to the polymeric binders, thereby carbonizing part of the polymeric binders, wherein a remaining part of the polymeric binders is not carbonized (see partially pyrolyzed, [0506]).
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 Sean P Cullen, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:00 am to 4:00 pm CT, Friday 6:00 am to 12:00 pm CT.
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, Basia A Ridley can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/Sean P Cullen, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
