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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 6/30/26 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 1/16/26 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document (WO 2014/092330 A1); each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, and 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Daigle et al. (US 2019/0396310 A1, hereinafter Daigle, cited by applicant).
Re Claim 1. Daigle teaches a composition (para. 155) for use as an electrode on a current collector within an energy storage device containing a non-aqueous electrolyte (intended use), the composition comprising:
a) at least one particulate electrode-forming material (LFP, Denka, VGCF-H);
b) a polymeric binder, comprising, as polymerized monomers:
i) 80 % by weight of the polymeric binder of at least one non-ionic monoethylenically unsaturated monomer (para. 151, 2.8g nBA & 5.2 g styrene);
ii) 20 % by weight of the polymeric binder of at least one oxyalkylated monomer (PEGMA 300, para. 151) with ethylenic unsaturation and terminated by hydrogen or an aryl or alkyl chain, having the following formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
92
246
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein: m, n and p represent a number of alkylene oxide units of between 0 and 150, wherein m+n+p≥1,
q represents a whole number at least equal to 1, R1, R2, and R3 represent either H, CH3 or CH2CH3, and R1, R2, and R3 can be the same or different, R.sub.4 represents a terminal group, which can be a hydrogen, alkyl chain with 1-60 carbon atoms or aryl chain with 5-60 carbon atoms, R represents a group including at least one polymerizable olefinic unsaturation, and mixtures thereof;
iii) -vi) 0% by weight of the polymeric binder (para. 151);
wherein the polymeric binder b) has a Tg of 55° C or less (para. 117); and
wherein the total of components b) i) through b) vi) add up to 100% by weight of polymeric binder b) (para. 151);
c) -h) from 0% by weight of polymeric binder (para. 151).
"[W]hen, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is ‘anticipated’ if one of them is in the prior art." Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2131.03.
Re Claim 2. Daigle teaches wherein the monomer ii) comprises at least one of polyalkylene glycol mono(meth)acrylate (para. 151, PEGMA 300).
Re Claims 3. The at least one crosslinking agent c) is an optional element, which Daigle does not have in the composition. Therefore, specifying the crosslinking agent c) does not affect the patentability of the claimed composition.
Re Claim 5. Daigle teaches wherein the polymeric binder b) has a number average molecular weight of 1000 gm/mol or more (para. 118).
Re Claim 6. Daigle teaches wherein the monomer i) comprises at least styrene (para. 151).
Re Claims 7-10. The monomer iii)-vi) are optional elements, which Daigle does not have in the composition. Therefore, specifying the monomer iii)-vi) does not affect the patentability of the claimed composition.
Re Claim 11. Daigle teaches wherein the a) at least one particulate electrode-forming material comprises one or more materials selected from acetylene black, carbon nanotubes (CNTs) (para. 155).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daigle as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Makino et al. (US 2020/0235399 A1, hereinafter Makino, cited by applicant).
The teachings of Daigle have been discussed above.
Daigle fails to specifically teach that the polymeric binder b) has a volume average particle size of from 30-500 nm, or comprises a mix of various particle sizes from 30 to 500 nm.
The invention of Makino encompasses binder composition for battery. Makino teaches that the polymeric binder comprises a mix of various particle sizes from 10 to 1000 nm (Claim 2).
In view of Makino, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the invention of Daigle to employ the polymeric binder having a mix of various particle sizes from 10 to 1000 nm, since using a well-known size of the polymeric binder is within purview of one skill in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood from the texts. Only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out to emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, however, each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN E YOON whose telephone number is (571)270-5932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM- 5 PM.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN E YOON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
7/15/2026
Prosecution Insights