DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-12 are presented for examination.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (KR 2019/0125935) in view of Qi (Qi et al, L-Cysteine-Modified Acacia Gum as a Multifunctional Binder for Lithium–Sulfur Batteries, 11 (51) ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 47956-62 (2019)).
Regarding independent claim 1, Kim teaches a lithium-sulfur battery with high-capacity, resulting from a lack of sulfur capacity degradation, stable high-loading of sulfur; improved battery stability by eliminating problems such as short circuits and heat generation; and, improved lifespan characteristics with high charge and discharge efficiency,
said lithium-sulfur battery comprising a cathode with an improved cathode active material; an anode; a separator imposed between said cathode and anode; and, an electrolyte,
said cathode comprising:
(i) a current collector composed of e.g. stainless steel, aluminum, copper, or titanium; and,
(ii) a positive electrode applied to said current collector as a slurry and then dried, said positive electrode comprising said improved cathode active material (also “positive electrode active material”), a binder, and a conductive material,
wherein said cathode active material may be one or more of elemental sulfur (S8), Li2Sn (n ≥ 1), organic sulfur compounds, and carbon-sulfur polymers [(C2Sx)n, x=2.5 to 50, n ≥ 2], that includes a coating layer containing a carbon material on a surface of positive electrode active material, thereby resolving problems caused by lithium polysulfide generated in a positive electrode of a lithium-sulfur battery, suppressing adverse reactions with an electrolyte, and improving electrical conductivity;
wherein said binder may be two or more known binders, specifically, fluoropolymer-based binders including polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); rubber-based binders including styrene-butadiene rubber; cellulose-based binders including carboxymethylcellulose (CMC), starch, hydroxypropylcellulose, and regenerated cellulose; polyolefin-based binders including polyethylene and polypropylene; one or more mixtures or copolymers selected from the group consisting of these, but are not limited thereto; and,
wherein an example of said positive electrode includes a proportion of components in an amount of 88 parts by weight of said cathode active material, 5 parts by weight of said conductive material, and 7 parts by weight of said binder composition
(e.g. ¶¶ 0000, 20-28 25, 28, 44-46, 71, 74, 78-81, 85-87, 89, 95-96, 109-113, and 132-134), reading on “binder composition for manufacturing a positive electrode of a lithium secondary battery;” alternatively, the preamble limitation “for manufacturing a positive electrode of a lithium secondary battery” is interpreted as merely intended use and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see also e.g. MPEP § 2111.02, said binder comprising:
(1)-(2) said known binder, such as two or more selected from e.g. said fluoropolymer-based binder including polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); said rubber-based binder including styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); said cellulose-based binder including carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC), starch, hydroxypropyl cellulose, or regenerated cellulose; a polyalcohol-based binder; and, said polyolefin-based binder including polyethylene or polypropylene (e.g. supra),
wherein said two or more known binders may include polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) plus at least one more from e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene (e.g. supra),
said taught at least one more from e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene corresponding with the claimed “binder,”
reading on “a binder,” see also e.g. claim 5; plus,
wherein said two or more known binders may include at least one selected from said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose (e.g. supra), said taught cellulose-based binder reads on the limitation “thickener,” since Lee teaches identical/substantially identical compositions (see supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0037 plus e.g. claim 6), see further MPEP § 2112.01,
said taught at least one selected from said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose corresponding with the claimed “thickener,”
reading on “a thickener,” see also e.g. claim 6.”
Kim teaches said two or more known binders may include polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitation “binder composition comprising…a cysteine-modified gum arabic.”
However, Qi teaches a binder for lithium–sulfur batteries, said binder comprising L-cysteine-modified acacia gum (hereinafter “L-AG”) is a water soluble binder prepared by simple and facile reaction between L-cysteine (hereinafter “L-Cys”) and acacia gum (hereinafter “AG”), which introduce amino (−NH2) and carboxyl (−COOH) branches on said AG chains,
wherein said amino and carboxyl branches of said substituted L-cysteine in said L-AG increases adsorption sites and electrostatic force between L-AG and soluble polysulfides (also “LiPSs”), resulting in enhanced polysulfide trapping ability and effectively restraining shuttling of polysulfides, such that the interaction between said Li-AG binder and said soluble polysulfides can be effectively tuned by electron density of said substituted L-cysteine;
wherein said L-AG binder also improves cathode materials adhesion and shows large electrolyte uptake, contributing to the even distribution of active materials and fast Li-ion diffusion, thus enhancing the reaction kinetics; plus,
wherein said L-AG can build a highly flexible network to accommodate the volume change of sulfur during cycling and maintain electrode integrity, preventing an electrode structure from collapsing, so an Li−S battery with said L-AG binder shows improved rate performance and cyclic stability than those with PVDF and AG binders
(e.g. pp. 47956-58 and 60).
As a result, it would have been obvious to substitute a binder of Kim—such as the PVDF binder—with the L-AG binder of Qi, since Qi teaches said L-AG binder results in enhanced polysulfide trapping ability and effectively restraining shuttling of polysulfides; improves cathode materials adhesion and shows large electrolyte uptake, contributing to the even distribution of active materials and fast Li-ion diffusion, thus enhancing the reaction kinetics; and/or, builds a highly flexible network to accommodate the volume change of sulfur during cycling and maintain electrode integrity, preventing an electrode structure from collapsing, so an Li−S battery with said L-AG binder shows improved rate performance and cyclic stability than those with PVDF and AG binders, noting that “acacia gum” is a synonym/used interchangeably with “acacia gum,” reading on said limitation.
Regarding claim 2, Kim as modified teaches the binder composition of claim 1, wherein Qi teaches said amino and carboxyl branches of said substituted L-cysteine in said L-AG increases adsorption sites and electrostatic force between L-AG and soluble polysulfides (also “LiPSs”), resulting in enhanced polysulfide trapping ability and effectively restraining shuttling of polysulfides, such that the interaction between said Li-AG binder and said soluble polysulfides can be effectively tuned by electron density of said substituted L-cysteine (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitation “the cysteine-modified gum arabic comprises 95 to 99.9% by weight of gum arabic and 0.1 to 5% by weight of cysteine, based on the total weight of the cysteine-modified gum arabic.”
However, Qi indicates that the electron density of substituted L-cysteine is result-effective on the adsorption sites and electrostatic force between L-AG and soluble polysulfides, polysulfide trapping ability, and effectively restraining shuttling of polysulfides (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0044), so it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the amount of L-cysteine substitution in the L-AG to within the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(II), reading on said limitation.
Regarding claim 3, Kim as modified teaches the binder composition of claim 1, wherein Kim teaches said known binder, such as two or more selected from e.g. said fluoropolymer-based binder including polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); said rubber-based binder including styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); said cellulose-based binder including carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC), starch, hydroxypropyl cellulose, or regenerated cellulose; a polyalcohol-based binder; and, said polyolefin-based binder including polyethylene or polypropylene (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitation “the binder composition includes 20 to 60% by weight of the binder, 15 to 35% by weight of the thickener, and 10 to 65% by weight of the cysteine-modified gum arabic, based on the total weight of the composition.”
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use equal amounts of said known binders (i.e. 33% each), since they are equivalently used as binders.
Further, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to L-GA for said binder of Kim being substituted—such as e.g. PVDF—in an equal amount since they are both binders.
said taught at least one more from e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene corresponding with the claimed “binder;”
said taught at least one selected from said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose corresponding with the claimed “thickener;” and,
said taught L-AG of Qi is substituted for a binder of Kim—such as the PVDF binder, corresponding with the claimed “cysteine-modified gum arabic,”
i.e. 33% each, severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the binder composition includes 20 to 60% by weight of the binder, 15 to 35% by weight of the thickener, and 10 to 65% by weight of the cysteine-modified gum arabic, based on the total weight of the composition.”
Regarding claims 4 and 6, Kim as modified teaches the binder composition of claim 1, wherein Kim teaches said two or more known binders may include at least one selected from said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose (e.g. supra), said taught cellulose-based binder reads on the limitation “thickener,” since Kim teaches an identical/substantially identical composition (see supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0037 plus e.g. claim 6), see further MPEP § 2112.01; further, said taught cellulose-based binders are capable of being lithiated, since Kim teaches an identical/substantially identical composition (see supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶0037 and 107, see further MPEP § 2112.01, so are in a “form” capable of being “lithiated,” reading on “the thickener has a lithiated form” (claim 4), as claimed; plus, “the thickener is one or more selected from the group consisting of carboxymethyl cellulose, methyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, methyl hydroxypropyl cellulose, ethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose, methyl ethyl hydroxyethyl cellulose, and cellulose gum” (claim 6).
Regarding claim 5, Kim as modified teaches the binder composition of claim 1, wherein Kim teaches said two or more known binders may include polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene (e.g. supra), reading on “the binder is selected from the group consisting of poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF), vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer (PVDF-co-HFP), polyvinyl alcohol, polyacrylonitrile, starch, hydroxypropyl cellulose, regenerated cellulose, polyvinyl pyrrolidone, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyethylene, polypropylene, polybutyl acrylate, polypropyl acrylate, polyethyl acrylate, polyethylhexyl acrylate, polystyrene, ethylene-propylene-diene polymer (EPDM), sulfonated-EPDM, styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR), fluorine rubber, a mixture containing two or more thereof, and a copolymer of two or more thereof.”
Regarding claims 7-12, Kim and Qi are applied as provided supra, with the following modifications.
Still regarding independent claim 7, Kim as modified teaches said cathode in said lithium-sulfur secondary battery (e.g. supra), reading on “positive electrode for a lithium secondary battery;” alternatively, the limitation “for a lithium secondary battery” is interpreted a merely intended use and does not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art, see e.g. MPEP § 2111.02, said cathode comprising:
(1) said current collector composed of e.g. stainless steel, aluminum, copper, or titanium (e.g. supra), reading on “a current collector;” and,
(2) said positive electrode applied to said current collector as said slurry and then dried said positive electrode comprising said improved cathode active material (also “positive electrode active material”), said binder, and said conductive material (e.g. supra), reading on “a positive electrode active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the current collector,” and “wherein the positive electrode active material layer comprises the binder composition according to claim 1, a positive electrode active material, and a conductive material.”
Still regarding claim 8, Kim as modified teaches said cathode of claim 7, wherein Kim teaches said example of said positive electrode includes 7 parts by weight of said binder composition (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the binder composition is contained in an amount of 3 to 20% by weight, based on the total weight of base solids contained in the positive electrode active material layer.”
Still regarding claim 9, Kim as modified teaches said cathode of claim 7, wherein Kim teaches said example of said positive electrode includes 7 parts by weight of said binder composition; and, further said L-AG may be 33% of said binder composition (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the cysteine-modified gum arabic is contained in an amount of 0.5% by weight or more and less than 10% by weight, based on the total weight of base solids contained in the positive electrode active material layer.”
Still regarding claim 10, Kim as modified teaches said cathode of claim 7, wherein Kim teaches said cathode active material may be one or more of elemental sulfur (S8), Li2Sn (n ≥ 1), organic sulfur compounds, and carbon-sulfur polymers [(C2Sx)n, x=2.5 to 50, n ≥ 2], and includes a coating layer containing a carbon material on a surface of positive electrode active material, thereby resolving problems caused by lithium polysulfide generated in a positive electrode of a lithium-sulfur battery, suppressing adverse reactions with an electrolyte, and improving electrical conductivity (e.g. supra), reading on “the positive electrode active material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of elemental sulfur (S8), Li2Sn (n ≥ 1, n is an integer), organic sulfur compound and carbon-sulfur polymer ((C2Sx)n, 2.5 ≤ x ≤ 50, n ≥ 2, x and n are integers) and sulfur-carbon composite.”
Still regarding independent claim 11, Kim as modified teaches said lithium-sulfur secondary battery comprising said cathode with said improved cathode active material; said anode; said separator imposed between said cathode and anode, and said electrolyte (e.g. supra), reading on “lithium secondary battery comprising the positive electrode according to claim 7; a negative electrode; a separator between the positive electrode and the negative electrode; and an electrolyte.”
Still regarding claim 12, Kim as modified teaches said lithium-sulfur secondary battery of claim 11 (e.g. supra), reading on “the lithium secondary battery is a lithium-sulfur battery.”
In the alternative, claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (KR 2019/0125935) in view of Qi (Qi et al, L-Cysteine-Modified Acacia Gum as a Multifunctional Binder for Lithium–Sulfur Batteries, 11 (51) ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 47956-62 (2019)), as provided supra, and further in view of Shaibani et al (WO 2020/097672, with citations to US 2021/0399277).
Regarding claim 4, in the event Kim as modified is interpreted to not teach the limitation “the thickener has a lithiated form,” Kim as modified teaches the binder composition of claim 1, wherein said two or more known binders may include said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) (e.g. supra).
Shibani teaches a cathode for a Li—S battery, wherein said cathode may include a binder, wherein said binder is selected from the group of: Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), Gum Binders such as Gum Arabic, Xanthan gum, and Guar gum, Natural Cellulose based binders, Polysaccharides such as Na-CMC, Li-CMC, Na-Alginate, Polyacrylates, Aliphatic Polymers such as Polyvinyl butyral (PVB), Aromatic Polymers such as Styrene-Butadiene Rubber (e.g. ¶¶ 0001 and 14-38).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the Li-CMC of Shaibani for the CMC of Kim as modified, since Shaibani teaches Li-CMC and CMC are equivalent binders for use in a Li-S battery cathode, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.06, said taught Li-CMC binder reads on the limitation “thickener,” since Shaibani teaches an identical/substantially identical composition (see supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0037 plus e.g. claim 6), see further MPEP § 2112.01, reading on said limitation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 26, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, the applicant alleges the following.
Kim and Qi fail to teach “a binder composition comprising a binder, a thickener, and a cysteine-modified gum arabic” as set forth in claim 1.
The Examiner asserts that it would have been obvious to substitute the PVDF binder of Kim with the L-cysteine-modified acacia gum (L-AG) binder of Qi.
However, this rejection fails to establish a proper prima facie case of obviousness because the proposed combination does not arrive at the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites “a binder composition for manufacturing a positive electrode of a lithium secondary battery, the binder composition comprising a binder, a thickener, and a cysteine-modified gum arabic.” This claim requires three distinct components: (1) a binder, (2) a thickener, and (3) a cysteine-modified gum arabic.
Qi teaches preparing a multifunctional binder for Li-S batteries by modifying acacia gum (AG) with L-cysteine, where the modified AG shows enhanced polysulfide trapping ability and can effectively restrain the shuttling of polysulfides, and the L-cysteine-modified AG binder effectively enhanced the rate capability and cycling stability of the Li-S batteries. See Qi, Abstract.
Critically, Qi teaches that the sulfur cathode was prepared using sulfur powder (56 wt%) as the active material, BP2000 (24 wt%) and graphene (10 wt%) as the conductive additives, and 10 wt% binders in NMP (for PVDF) or water (for AG and L-AG binders). Qi uses L-AG as the sole binder component, not as one component of a multi-part binder composition that also includes a separate binder and a separate thickener.
Qi concludes that a water-soluble L-AG binder was prepared by simple and facile reaction between L-Cys and AG which introduced the -NH2 and -COOH branches on the AG chains, largely enhancing the adsorption ability toward LiPSs and endowing the ability to build the cross-linked and flexible binder network in the electrode. The L-AG binder also improves cathode materials adhesion and shows large electrolyte uptake, and as a result, the Li-S battery with the L-AG binder shows improved rate performance and cyclic stability than those with PVDF and AG binders. See Qi, Conclusions.
The Examiner’s proposed modification-substituting PVDF with L-AG-would result in a binder composition containing L-AG and a cellulose-based material (which the Examiner characterizes as a “thickener”). However, this combination would lack the three distinct components required by claim 1: a binder, a thickener, AND a cysteine- modified gum arabic. The Examiner’s substitution approach treats L-AG as a replacement for the binder, not as an additional third component alongside a binder and thickener.
Furthermore, there is no motivation to combine L-AG with other binders when Qi explicitly teaches that L-AG alone provides superior performance. Qi teaches that compared with the normally used polyvinylidene fluoride binder and the unmodified AG binder, the L-cysteine-modified AG binder effectively enhanced the rate capability and cycling stability of the Li-S batteries. See Qi, Abstract. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have no reason to add L-AG as a third component to a composition already containing a binder and thickener when Qi teaches L-AG functions as a complete binder solution on its own.
(Remarks, at 5:8-6:5, emphasis in the original.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that the argument is not commensurate with the scope of the art and that of the prior and instant Office actions.
A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. See MPEP § 2123(I). Further, “It is well established that a reference is good for all it fairly teaches a person having ordinary skill in the art, even when the teaching is a cursory mention.” In re Mills, 470 F.2d 649, 651 (CCPA 1972).
Here, the secondary reference, Qi, teaches a binder for use ion lithium-sulfur batteries with improved characteristics over PVDF and further does not limit itself to being used as a sole binder, see entire disclosure.
Further, the primary reference, Kim, expressly teaches the use of two or more binders, the teachings include a combination of:
(1) at least one more from e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene;
(2) carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose; plus,
(3) PVDF
(As cited in the March 31, 2026 non-final Office action, at pp. 4-6.) Respectfully, as noted in said Office action, Kim teaches the following:
(1) said two or more known binders may include polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) plus at least one more from e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene (e.g. supra),
said taught at least one more from e.g. polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); styrene butadiene rubber (SBR); starch; hydroxypropyl cellulose; regenerated cellulose; polyethylene; and, polypropylene corresponding with the claimed “binder,”
reading on “a binder,” see also e.g. claim 5;
(2) said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose (e.g. supra), said taught cellulose-based binder reads on the limitation “thickener,” since Lee teaches identical/substantially identical compositions (see supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0037 plus e.g. claim 6), see further MPEP § 2112.01,
said taught at least one selected from said cellulose-based binder of e.g. carboxyl methyl cellulose (CMC) and hydroxypropyl cellulose corresponding with the claimed “thickener,”
reading on “a thickener,” see also e.g. claim 6; and,
(3) PVDF.
Here, the Office action further provides that it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the PVDF binder of Kim with the L-AG binder of Qi due to specific improvements of the Qi binder.
However, Qi teaches a binder for lithium–sulfur batteries, said binder comprising L-cysteine-modified acacia gum (hereinafter “L-AG”) is a water soluble binder prepared by simple and facile reaction between L-cysteine (hereinafter “L-Cys”) and acacia gum (hereinafter “AG”), which introduce amino (−NH2) and carboxyl (−COOH) branches on said AG chains,
wherein said amino and carboxyl branches of said substituted L-cysteine in said L-AG increases adsorption sites and electrostatic force between L-AG and soluble polysulfides (also “LiPSs”), resulting in enhanced polysulfide trapping ability and effectively restraining shuttling of polysulfides, such that the interaction between said Li-AG binder and said soluble polysulfides can be effectively tuned by electron density of said substituted L-cysteine;
wherein said L-AG binder also improves cathode materials adhesion and shows large electrolyte uptake, contributing to the even distribution of active materials and fast Li-ion diffusion, thus enhancing the reaction kinetics; plus,
wherein said L-AG can build a highly flexible network to accommodate the volume change of sulfur during cycling and maintain electrode integrity, preventing an electrode structure from collapsing, so an Li−S battery with said L-AG binder shows improved rate performance and cyclic stability than those with PVDF and AG binders
(e.g. pp. 47956-58 and 60).
As a result, it would have been obvious to substitute a binder of Kim—such as the PVDF binder—with the L-AG binder of Qi, since Qi teaches said L-AG binder results in enhanced polysulfide trapping ability and effectively restraining shuttling of polysulfides; improves cathode materials adhesion and shows large electrolyte uptake, contributing to the even distribution of active materials and fast Li-ion diffusion, thus enhancing the reaction kinetics; and/or, builds a highly flexible network to accommodate the volume change of sulfur during cycling and maintain electrode integrity, preventing an electrode structure from collapsing, so an Li−S battery with said L-AG binder shows improved rate performance and cyclic stability than those with PVDF and AG binders, noting that “acacia gum” is a synonym/used interchangeably with “acacia gum,” reading on said limitation.
(March 31, 2026 non-final Office action, at pp. 6-7.)
Finally, as noted, Qi is not limited so that its binder must be used solely by itself; and, Kim expressly teaches using a plurality of binders (further, while not used in the Office actions, it can be appreciated that binders with different compositions will have different properties, so a combination of binders may result in a combination of such properties).
Second, the applicant alleges the following.
The instant specification explains that if the cysteine-modified gum arabic is used as a binder in the binder composition, since the adhesive force is very low, it is impossible to form a positive electrode active material layer comprising the binder composition on the current collector, thereby making it impossible to manufacture a positive electrode. See the published specification, [0033]. This teaching in the present application distinguishes the claimed three-component composition from Qi’s use of L-AG as the sole binder.
Accordingly, Kim and Qi fail to disclose “a binder composition comprising a
binder, a thickener, and a cysteine-modified gum arabic” as recited by claim 1, because Qi teaches using L-AG as a standalone binder replacement, not as a third component to be added alongside a separate binder and a separate thickener.
Because Kim and Qi fail to teach or suggest each and every feature of claim 1, Kim and Qi cannot render claim 1 and dependent claims 2-12 obvious.
(Remarks, at 7:2-7:4, emphasis in the original.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that the argument is not commensurate with the scope of the art.
As noted supra, Qi is not limited so that its binder must be used solely by itself; and, Kim expressly teaches using a plurality of binders (further, while not used in the Office actions, it can be appreciated that binders with different compositions will have different properties, so a combination of binders may result in a combination of such properties).
Third, the applicant alleges the following.
Claim 4 depends from claim 1 and therefore incorporates every substance of claim 1.
As discussed above, Kim and Qi fail to disclose the above-identified features of claim 1.
Shaibani does not cure the deficiencies in Kim and Qi, because Shaibani also fails to teach or suggest “a binder composition comprising a binder, a thickener, and a cysteine- modified gum arabic” as set forth in claim 1.
Accordingly, Kim, Qi, and Shaibani cannot render claim 1, and dependent claim 4 obvious.
(Remarks, at 7:7-8:3, emphasis in the original.)
In response, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sun et al (US 2020/0152965); and,
Chu et al (US 2015/0243995).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights