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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 23, 2026 has been entered.
Summary
The Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments received on June 29, 2026 have been entered into the file. Currently, claims 1 and 14 are amended; and claim 15 is cancelled; resulting in claims 1-14 and 16-21 pending for examination.
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 11, 14, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2016003358 A) in view of Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A).
Regarding claims 1-4, Yoshiki ‘358 teaches a secondary battery comprising a negative electrode current collector, a negative electrode provided on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector and including a negative electrode active material, a positive electrode, a separator, and a container that houses the negative electrode, positive electrode, and separator, and into which an electrolyte is poured (¶ [0009], Ln. 1-11). Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that the electrolytic solution included in the battery is produced by dissolving an electrolyte in an organic solvent (¶ [0038], Ln. 1-2). As examples of electrolytes, Yoshiki ‘358 teaches the use of LiPF6, LiBF4, LiClO4, LiAsF6, LiSO3CF3, LiC(SO3CF3)3, LiN(SO2CF)2, LiN(SO2C2F5)2, and LiN(SO2CF3)(SO2C4F9) (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-3). Yoshiki ‘358 does not expressly teach a specific embodiment in which the electrolyte includes a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte of Yoshiki based on the example electrolytes provided in the reference. Given that Yoshiki ‘358 teaches a limited number of electrolytes, and LiSO3CF3, LiC(SO3CF3)3, LiN(SO2CF)2, LiN(SO2C2F5)2, or LiN(SO2CF3)(SO2C4F9) (compound containing a sulfur-oxygen double bond) are included in the limited list, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte.
Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that the negative electrode current collector is formed of a copper alloy foil containing at least one of tin or silver (¶ [0009], Ln. 2-5). Specifically, Yoshiki ‘358 teaches copper current collectors in Samples 21-25, 30, 33, 36, and 39 including both tin and silver (Table 1). Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that the content of tin included in the copper alloy foil is 0.04-0.20% by mass, within the claimed range of 0.01-0.2% (¶ [0015], Ln. 1-3) and the content of silver included in the copper alloy foil is 0.01-0.10% by mass, within the claimed range of 0.01-0.2% (¶ [0019], Ln. 1-3). Yoshiki ‘358 further teaches that when both tin and silver are included, the total content is 0.20% by mass or less (¶ [0023], Ln. 1-3). Thus, Yoshiki ‘358 does not expressly teach that the total weight percentage of tin and silver is greater than or equal to 0.35%.
Yoshiki ‘682 teaches a lithium ion secondary battery including a negative electrode, positive electrode, separator, and electrolyte (¶ [0020], Ln. 1-5). The negative electrode includes a copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material formed on at least one side of the copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector (¶ [0019], Ln. 1-5). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the copper alloy foil contains 0.20-0.40% by mass chromium, 0.01-0.10% by mass silver, and 0.10-0.20% by mass tin (¶ [0021], Ln. 1-4). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver and tin enhance the functions of maintaining and improving tensile strength and heat resistance of the copper alloy foil (¶ [0039], Ln. 1-2). Specifically, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and due to its cost is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-5), and that tin improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass in order to maintain high conductivity (¶ [0041], Ln. 1-4). In Examples 14-15, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches copper alloy foils with 0.20% tin and 0.10% silver, resulting in a total tin and silver content of 0.30% by mass.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the copper alloy foil of Yoshiki ‘358 to include higher amounts of tin and silver, based on the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682 and routine experimentation. As both references teach including tin at a content of 0.20% by mass and silver at a content of 0.10% by mass, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts, such as combination of 0.25% by mass tin and 0.10% by mass silver, or 0.20% by mass tin and 0.15% by mass silver, resulting in total mass percentages of tin and silver of 0.35%. Although Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that conductivity may be lowered when the total content of tin and silver exceeds 0.20%, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts in order to improve the tensile strength. Further, as Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the upper limit of silver is set due to cost, one of ordinary skill the art would find it obvious to increase the content of silver slightly without expected negative effects to the current collector. The trade-offs between reduced conductivity due to higher tin content, higher cost due to higher silver content, and higher tensile strength and heat resistance due to higher tin and silver content are considerations one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try contents of both tin and silver within the ranges taught and slightly outside the ranges taught using routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the content of tin and silver to 0.35% total in order to improve tensile strength and heat resistance.
Regarding claim 5, Yoshiki ‘358 in view of Yoshiki ‘682 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and Yoshiki ‘358 further teaches that the current collector has a tensile strength of 450 N/mm2 or more (¶ [0008], Ln. 6). Yoshiki ‘358 additionally teaches that the current collector thickness may be 20 µm or less (¶ [0077], Ln. 5-6), teaching examples ranging from 8.0 µm to 12.0 µm (Table 1), within the claimed range of 1 µm to 100 µm.
Regarding claim 11, Yoshiki ‘358 in view of Yoshiki ‘682 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and Yoshiki ‘358 further teaches that the electrolyte solution used in the examples includes 20 vol% methyl propionate (¶ [0103], Ln. 12-15), meeting the limitations of formula 2, wherein R1 is an ethyl group and R2 is a C1 alkyl group, and resulting in a weight percent of methyl propionate within the claimed range of 10% to 60%.
Regarding claims 14 and 16-17, Yoshiki ‘358 teaches a secondary battery comprising a negative electrode current collector, a negative electrode provided on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector and including a negative electrode active material, a positive electrode, a separator, and a container that houses the negative electrode, positive electrode, and separator, and into which an electrolyte is poured (¶ [0009], Ln. 1-11). Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that the electrolytic solution included in the battery is produced by dissolving an electrolyte in an organic solvent (¶ [0038], Ln. 1-2). As examples of electrolytes, Yoshiki ‘358 teaches the use of LiPF6, LiBF4, LiClO4, LiAsF6, LiSO3CF3, LiC(SO3CF3)3, LiN(SO2CF)2, LiN(SO2C2F5)2, and LiN(SO2CF3)(SO2C4F9) (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-3). Yoshiki ‘358 does not expressly teach a specific embodiment in which the electrolyte includes a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte of Yoshiki based on the example electrolytes provided in the reference. Given that Yoshiki ‘358 teaches a limited number of electrolytes, and LiSO3CF3, LiC(SO3CF3)3, LiN(SO2CF)2, LiN(SO2C2F5)2, or LiN(SO2CF3)(SO2C4F9) (compound containing a sulfur-oxygen double bond) are included in the limited list, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte.
Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that the negative electrode current collector is formed of a copper alloy foil containing at least one of tin or silver (¶ [0009], Ln. 2-5). Specifically, Yoshiki ‘358 teaches copper current collectors in Samples 21-25, 30, 33, 36, and 39 including both tin and silver (Table 1). Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that the content of tin included in the copper alloy foil is 0.04-0.20% by mass, within the claimed range of 0.01-0.2% (¶ [0015], Ln. 1-3) and the content of silver included in the copper alloy foil is 0.01-0.10% by mass, within the claimed range of 0.01-0.2% (¶ [0019], Ln. 1-3). Yoshiki ‘358 further teaches that when both tin and silver are included, the total content is 0.20% by mass or less (¶ [0023], Ln. 1-3). Thus, Yoshiki ‘358 does not expressly teach that the total weight percentage of tin and silver is greater than or equal to 0.35%.
Yoshiki ‘682 teaches a lithium ion secondary battery including a negative electrode, positive electrode, separator, and electrolyte (¶ [0020], Ln. 1-5). The negative electrode includes a copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material formed on at least one side of the copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector (¶ [0019], Ln. 1-5). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the copper alloy foil contains 0.20-0.40% by mass chromium, 0.01-0.10% by mass silver, and 0.10-0.20% by mass tin (¶ [0021], Ln. 1-4). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver and tin enhance the functions of maintaining and improving tensile strength and heat resistance of the copper alloy foil (¶ [0039], Ln. 1-2). Specifically, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and due to its cost is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-5), and that tin improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass in order to maintain high conductivity (¶ [0041], Ln. 1-4). In Examples 14-15, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches copper alloy foils with 0.20% tin and 0.10% silver, resulting in a total tin and silver content of 0.30% by mass.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the copper alloy foil of Yoshiki ‘358 to include higher amounts of tin and silver, based on the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682 and routine experimentation. As both references teach including tin at a content of 0.20% by mass and silver at a content of 0.10% by mass, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts, such as combination of 0.25% by mass tin and 0.10% by mass silver, or 0.20% by mass tin and 0.15% by mass silver, resulting in total mass percentages of tin and silver of 0.35%. Although Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that conductivity may be lowered when the total content of tin and silver exceeds 0.20%, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts in order to improve the tensile strength. Further, as Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the upper limit of silver is set due to cost, one of ordinary skill the art would find it obvious to increase the content of silver slightly without expected negative effects to the current collector. The trade-offs between reduced conductivity due to higher tin content, higher cost due to higher silver content, and higher tensile strength and heat resistance due to higher tin and silver content are considerations one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try contents of both tin and silver within the ranges taught and slightly outside the ranges taught using routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the content of tin and silver to 0.35% total in order to improve tensile strength and heat resistance.
Yoshiki ‘358 does not expressly teach an electronic apparatus including the lithium secondary battery meeting the limitations of claim 14, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that the purpose of the lithium secondary battery is to be used in an electronic apparatus. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the intention of producing a lithium secondary battery is to use the battery to power devices and would find it obvious to use the battery in an electronic apparatus.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2016003358 A) in view of Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Otsuki, et al. (US 2019/0280297 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Yoshiki ‘358 in view of Yoshiki ‘682 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. The negative electrode active material of Yoshiki ‘358 is formed by mixing graphite, silicon monoxide, SBR, CMC, and water to produce a slurry to be applied to the current collector (¶ [0101], Ln. 1-11). The combination of references does not expressly teach a negative electrode mixture with at least one of the characteristics in claim 6.
Otsuki teaches a negative electrode for a lithium ion secondary battery including a negative electrode active material provided on a negative electrode current collector (¶ [0006], Ln. 1-4). Otsuki teaches that the negative electrode active material includes a carbon material and a surface of the negative electrode active material has a reflectance in the range of 7.0% to 14% at a wavelength of 550 nm (¶ [0006], Ln. 4-7). Otsuki teaches that adjusting the reflectance to be within this range suppresses side reactions on the surface of the negative electrode active material, improving the rapid charging characteristic (¶ [0016], Ln. 1-8). Additionally, Otsuki teaches that the preferred density of the negative electrode active material layer is within the range of 1.35 g/cm3 to 1.62 g/cm3 (¶ [0052], Ln. 1-4) and that the porosity of the negative electrode active material is within 26.5% to 31.3% (¶ [0054], Ln. 1-4), teaching that when the density and porosity of the negative electrode active material is within these ranges, the excessive impregnation with electrolyte solution, high reactivity, and side reactions are suppressed, and the effect of diffusing the electrolyte solution in the negative electrode active material layer is increased (¶ [0056], Ln. 1-8). Otsuki also teaches that the supporting quantity La of the negative electrode active material layer per unit area is within 4.5 mg/cm2 to 12.5 mg/cm2 (¶ [0053], Ln. 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the negative electrode active layer of Yoshiki ‘358 to include a reflectance in the range of 7.0% to 14% at a wavelength of 550 nm, within the claimed range of 7% to 15%, a density within the range of 1.35 g/cm3 to 1.62 g/cm3, within the claimed range of 1.3 g/cm3 to 1.9 g/cm3, a porosity of 26.5% to 31.3%, within the claimed range of 20% to 40%, and a weight per unit area La of 4.5 mg/cm2 to 12.5 mg/cm2, within the claimed range of 4.5 mg/cm2 to 12.5 mg/cm2, based on the teachings of Otsuki. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to apply the teachings of Otsuki to the negative electrode of Yoshiki ‘358 as both references teach carbon-based negative electrode to be used in lithium ion secondary batteries. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make these adjustments in order to improve the rapid charging characteristic of the battery, as well as to suppress the excessive impregnation with electrolyte solution, high reactivity, and side reactions, and increase the effect of diffusing the electrolyte solution in the negative electrode active material layer.
Claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A) in view of Kim, et al. (US 2016/0359196 A1).
Regarding claims 1-4, 7-8, 14, and 16-18, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches a lithium ion secondary battery including a negative electrode, positive electrode, separator, and electrolyte (¶ [0020], Ln. 1-5). The negative electrode includes a copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material formed on at least one side of the copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector (¶ [0019], Ln. 1-5). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the copper alloy foil contains 0.20-0.40% by mass chromium, 0.01-0.10% by mass silver, and 0.10-0.20% by mass tin (¶ [0021], Ln. 1-4). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver and tin enhance the functions of maintaining and improving tensile strength and heat resistance of the copper alloy foil (¶ [0039], Ln. 1-2). Specifically, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and due to its cost is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-5), and that tin improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass in order to maintain high conductivity (¶ [0041], Ln. 1-4). In Examples 14-15, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches copper alloy foils with 0.20% tin and 0.10% silver, resulting in a total tin and silver content of 0.30% by mass. Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach that the total weight percentage of tin and silver is greater than or equal to 0.35%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the copper alloy foil of Yoshiki ‘682 to include higher amounts of tin and silver, based on the teachings in the reference and routine experimentation. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches including tin at a content of 0.20% by mass and silver at a content of 0.10% by mass, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts, such as combination of 0.25% by mass tin and 0.10% by mass silver, or 0.20% by mass tin and 0.15% by mass silver, resulting in total mass percentages of tin and silver of 0.35%. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the upper limit of silver is set due to cost, one of ordinary skill the art would find it obvious to increase the content of silver slightly without expected negative effects to the current collector. The trade-offs between reduced conductivity due to higher tin content, higher cost due to higher silver content, and higher tensile strength and heat resistance due to higher tin and silver content are considerations one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try contents of both tin and silver within the ranges taught and slightly outside the ranges taught using routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the content of tin and silver to 0.35% total in order to improve tensile strength and heat resistance.
Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that any electrolyte commonly used in lithium-ion batteries may be used (¶ [0101], Ln. 1-2), but does not expressly teach the composition of electrolyte used in the specific examples. Thus, Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach an embodiment in which the electrolyte includes a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound.
Kim teaches a lithium secondary battery including an electrolyte, a cathode, and an anode (¶ [0088], Ln. 1-3, ¶ [0091], Ln. 1-2). Kim teaches that the anode and cathode are prepared by dispersing an electrode active material, a binder, and a conductive material in a solvent to prepare an electrode slurry composition, and applying the electrode slurry composition onto an electrode current collector, teaching that the anode current collector may be copper or a copper alloy (¶ [0096], Ln. 1-9). Kim teaches that the electrolyte includes a lithium salt, a non-aqueous organic solvent, and a cyclic sulfate represented by Chemical Formula 1, shown below.
PNG
media_image1.png
101
384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that in Chemical Formula 1 shown above: W is selected from the structures below, L is a single bond or methylene, m is an integer of 1 to 4, n is an integer of 0 to 2, and p is an integer of 0 to 6 (¶ [0018]-[0020]).
PNG
media_image2.png
191
362
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kim teaches that the electrolyte has excellent high-temperature storage characteristics and excellent low-temperature discharge characteristics by decreasing a swelling phenomenon of the battery, while properly maintaining basic performance such as high-rate charge and discharge characteristics and life cycle characteristics (¶ [0012], Ln. 1-10). Specifically, Kim teaches that the compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 may be decomposed at an anode to more effectively form an SEI film while lowering resistance of a battery, improving the high-temperature and low-temperature characteristics (¶ [0052], Ln. 1-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Yoshiki ‘682 to include a cyclic sulfate represented by Chemical Formula 1 as taught by Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the compound in order to more effectively form an SEI film while lowering resistance of a battery, improving the high-temperature and low-temperature characteristics.
Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach an electronic apparatus including the lithium secondary battery meeting the limitations of claim 1. Kim teaches that portable electronic devices have widely spread, and secondary batteries are used as a power source for these portable electronic devices as they can have a small size, light weight, and be charged and discharged for a long period of time (¶ [0003], Ln. 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the lithium secondary battery of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim, meeting the limitations of claim 1, in a portable electronic device as taught by Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the intention of producing a lithium secondary battery is to use the battery to power devices and would find it obvious to use the battery in portable electronic device because of its small size, light weight, and ability to be charged and discharged for a long period of time.
Regarding claim 5, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and Yoshiki ‘682 further teaches that the copper alloy foil has a thickness of 20 µm or less (¶ [0037], Ln. 1-2), teaching thickness of 15 µm and 10 µm in Examples 14-15 (Table 1), within the claimed range of 1-100 µm. Further, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the copper alloy foils of Examples 14-15 have tensile strengths of 428 N/mm² and 413 N/mm², respectively (Table 1), within the claimed range of greater than 100 N/mm².
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claims 8 and 14 above and Kim further teaches that the cyclic sulfate compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 may be represented by Chemical Formulas 2 to 5, shown below, meeting the limitations of claimed formulas 1-1 to 1-4 (¶ [0021], Ln. 1-3).
PNG
media_image3.png
346
349
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kim further teaches that the cyclic sulfates of Chemical Formula 3 and Chemical Formula 4 may be represented by the structures shown below, wherein the boxed structures meet the limitations of claimed formulas 1-5 to 1-7 (¶ [0023]-[0024]).
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect]
PNG
media_image4.png
274
322
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
154
186
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
154
186
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include one of the specific structures taught by Kim as a compound representing the cyclic sulfate of Chemical Formula 1 in the electrolyte of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use one of the specific structures provided by the reference as the cyclic sulfate in order to produce an electrolyte with excellent high-temperature storage characteristics and excellent low-temperature discharge characteristics.
Regarding claim 10, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and Kim further teaches that the cyclic sulfate represented by Chemical Formula 1 may be contained in a content of 0.1% to 5.0% based on a total weight of the electrolyte, within the claimed range of 0.01% to 10% (¶ [0034], Ln. 1-3). Kim teaches that including the cyclic sulfate in this amount provides effects such as suppression of swelling during high-temperature storage, improvement of capacity of retention rate, and improving discharge capacity and output, without forming a film that is excessively thick such that life cycle is deteriorated (¶ [0070], Ln. 8-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim to include the cyclic sulfate represented by Chemical Formula 1 in an amount between 0.1% to 5.0% based on a total weight of the electrolyte, within the claimed range of 0.01-10%, based on the teachings of Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the compound in the electrolyte in this amount in order to suppress swelling during high-temperature storage, improve capacity of retention rate, and improve discharge capacity and output, without forming a film that is excessively thick such that life cycle is deteriorated.
Regarding claim 11, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Yoshiki ‘682 further teaches that any electrolyte commonly used in lithium-ion batteries may be used (¶ [0101], Ln. 1-2), further teaching that a mixture of two or more of the solvents listed as examples may be used (¶ [0101], Ln. 18). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches examples of electrolyte solvents including organic acid esters, specifically listing methyl propionate and ethyl propionate (¶ [0101], Ln. 11-12). Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach the composition of electrolyte used in the specific examples and thus does not expressly teach an embodiment in which the electrolyte contains a propionate meeting the limitations of claimed formula 2 in a weight percentage of 10-60%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include methyl propionate or ethyl propionate in the solvent composition of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim based on the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that solvents commonly used in lithium ion batteries can be used in the electrolyte, and further teaches methyl propionate and ethyl propionate as specific examples of possible solvents, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include either propionate in the electrolyte. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that a mixture of two or more solvents may be used, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use a combination of solvents commonly used in lithium ion batteries, such as carbonates and methyl or ethyl propionate with the propionate included at a weight percentage within 10-60%.
Regarding claims 12 and 20, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claims 3 and 16 above and Kim further teaches that the cyclic sulfate represented by Chemical Formula 1 may be contained in a content of 0.1% to 5.0% based on a total weight of the electrolyte, within the claimed range of 0.01% to 10% (¶ [0034], Ln. 1-3). Kim teaches that including the cyclic sulfate in this amount provides effects such as suppression of swelling during high-temperature storage, improvement of capacity of retention rate, and improving discharge capacity and output, without forming a film that is excessively thick such that life cycle is deteriorated (¶ [0070], Ln. 8-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim to include the cyclic sulfate represented by Chemical Formula 1 in an amount between 0.1% to 5.0% based on a total weight of the electrolyte, based on the teachings of Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the compound in the electrolyte in this amount in order to suppress swelling during high-temperature storage, improve capacity of retention rate, and improve discharge capacity and output, without forming a film that is excessively thick such that life cycle is deteriorated. In including the cyclic sulfate in an amount between 0.1% to 5.0%, such that the claimed value of b is within 0.1 and 5.0, and based on the teaching of Yoshiki ‘682 that the mass percent of tin included in the negative electrode current collector is within 0.10% to 0.20%, such that the claimed value of a is within 0.10 and 0.20, the value of b/a ranges from 0.5 to 50, overlapping the claimed range of 1 to 100. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 13, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 10 above. Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that materials including tin, silicon, carbonaceous materials, metal composite oxides, and lithium nitride metal compounds may be used as the negative electrode active material (¶ [0098], Ln. 1-6). Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach the specific composition used as the negative electrode active material in the embodiments.
Kim teaches a negative electrode including graphite, SBR, and CMC (¶ [0118], Ln. 8-13), further teaching that the carbon and electrolyte react to form an SEI on the surface of the negative electrode (¶ [0006], Ln. 4-9). Kim additionally teaches that the cyclic sulfate may be contained in a content of 0.1% to 5.0% based on a total weight of the electrolyte (¶ [0034], Ln. 1-3), and that including the cyclic sulfate in this amount provides effects such as suppression of swelling during high-temperature storage, improvement of capacity of retention rate, and improving discharge capacity and output, without forming a film that is excessively thick such that life cycle is deteriorated (¶ [0070], Ln. 8-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the negative electrode active material of Yoshiki ‘682 to include graphite, SBR, and CMC, based on the teachings of Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use this composition as the negative electrode active material as Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that carbonaceous materials may be used as the negative electrode active material, and as the composition is commonly used in lithium ion batteries. Further, one would be motivated to use this composition in order to effectively form an SEI layer on the negative electrode.
Neither reference expressly teaches a reaction area of the negative electrode layer in m2, and therefore, neither reference expressly teaches a ratio of the reaction area to the weight percentage of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound of 0.5 to 30. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to adjust the reaction area of the negative electrode of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim. By adjusting the reaction area and the amount of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound, one of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably result in a ratio of d/b within the claimed range of 0.5 to 30. Although the specific surface area of the negative electrode mixtures of the references is not disclosed, the prior art teaches similar negative electrode compositions to the instant inventions, including graphite, SBR, and CMC combined to obtain the negative electrode slurry, and thus would have a similar specific surface area to that of the instant invention. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the amount of negative electrode mixture applied to the current collector to optimize the capacity of the battery. Additionally, it would be obvious to adjust the amount of sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte within the range of 0.1% to 5.0% based on the teachings of Kim, as enough compound needs to be included to suppress swelling, improve discharge capacity, and improve capacity of retention rate, without including too much as to form a film that is excessively thick. This range overlaps the range for b in the instant invention. Thus, as it’s obvious to adjust both d and b, the range for b overlaps that of the claimed invention, and the combination of references teaches a similar negative electrode composition, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the ratio of d/b within the claimed range.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A) in view of Kim, et al. (US 2016/0359196 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Otsuki, et al. (US 2019/0280297 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that materials including tin, silicon, carbonaceous materials, metal composite oxides, and lithium nitride metal compounds may be used as the negative electrode active material (¶ [0098], Ln. 1-6). Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach the specific composition used as the negative electrode active material in the embodiments.
Kim teaches a negative electrode including graphite, SBR, and CMC (¶ [0118], Ln. 8-13), further teaching that the carbon and electrolyte react to form an SEI on the surface of the negative electrode (¶ [0006], Ln. 4-9). Kim additionally teaches that the cyclic sulfate may be contained in a content of 0.1% to 5.0% based on a total weight of the electrolyte (¶ [0034], Ln. 1-3), and that including the cyclic sulfate in this amount provides effects such as suppression of swelling during high-temperature storage, improvement of capacity of retention rate, and improving discharge capacity and output, without forming a film that is excessively thick such that life cycle is deteriorated (¶ [0070], Ln. 8-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the negative electrode active material of Yoshiki ‘682 to include graphite, SBR, and CMC, based on the teachings of Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use this composition as the negative electrode active material as Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that carbonaceous materials may be used as the negative electrode active material, and as the composition is commonly used in lithium ion batteries. Further, one would be motivated to use this composition in order to effectively form an SEI layer on the negative electrode. Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim does not expressly teach a negative electrode mixture with at least one of the characteristics in claim 6.
Otsuki teaches a negative electrode for a lithium ion secondary battery including a negative electrode active material provided on a negative electrode current collector (¶ [0006], Ln. 1-4). Otsuki teaches that the negative electrode active material includes a carbon material and a surface of the negative electrode active material has a reflectance in the range of 7.0% to 14% at a wavelength of 550 nm (¶ [0006], Ln. 4-7). Otsuki teaches that adjusting the reflectance to be within this range suppresses side reactions on the surface of the negative electrode active material, improving the rapid charging characteristic (¶ [0016], Ln. 1-8). Additionally, Otsuki teaches that the preferred density of the negative electrode active material layer is within the range of 1.35 g/cm3 to 1.62 g/cm3 (¶ [0052], Ln. 1-4) and that the porosity of the negative electrode active material is within 26.5% to 31.3% (¶ [0054], Ln. 1-4), teaching that when the density and porosity of the negative electrode active material is within these ranges, the excessive impregnation with electrolyte solution, high reactivity, and side reactions are suppressed, and the effect of diffusing the electrolyte solution in the negative electrode active material layer is increased (¶ [0056], Ln. 1-8). Otsuki also teaches that the supporting quantity La of the negative electrode active material layer per unit area is within 4.5 mg/cm2 to 12.5 mg/cm2 (¶ [0053], Ln. 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the negative electrode active layer of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim to include a reflectance in the range of 7.0% to 14% at a wavelength of 550 nm, within the claimed range of 7% to 15%, a density within the range of 1.35 g/cm3 to 1.62 g/cm3, within the claimed range of 1.3 g/cm3 to 1.9 g/cm3, a porosity of 26.5% to 31.3%, within the claimed range of 20% to 40%, and a weight per unit area La of 4.5 mg/cm2 to 12.5 mg/cm2, within the claimed range of 4.5 mg/cm2 to 12.5 mg/cm2, based on the teachings of Otsuki. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to apply the teachings of Otsuki to the negative electrode of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim as both references teach carbon-based negative electrode to be used in lithium ion secondary batteries. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make these adjustments in order to improve the rapid charging characteristic of the battery, as well as to suppress the excessive impregnation with electrolyte solution, high reactivity, and side reactions, and increase the effect of diffusing the electrolyte solution in the negative electrode active material layer.
Claims 1-5, 7, 10-14, 16-18, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A) in view of Takashi, et al. (JP 2014170689 A).
Regarding claims 1-4, 7, 10, 14, and 16-18, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches a lithium ion secondary battery including a negative electrode, positive electrode, separator, and electrolyte (¶ [0020], Ln. 1-5). The negative electrode includes a copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector with a negative electrode active material formed on at least one side of the copper alloy foil negative electrode current collector (¶ [0019], Ln. 1-5). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the copper alloy foil contains 0.20-0.40% by mass chromium, 0.01-0.10% by mass silver, and 0.10-0.20% by mass tin (¶ [0021], Ln. 1-4). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver and tin enhance the functions of maintaining and improving tensile strength and heat resistance of the copper alloy foil (¶ [0039], Ln. 1-2). Specifically, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that silver improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and due to its cost is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-5), and that tin improves tensile strength and heat resistance, and is included at an upper limit of 0.10% by mass in order to maintain high conductivity (¶ [0041], Ln. 1-4). In Examples 14-15, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches copper alloy foils with 0.20% tin and 0.10% silver, resulting in a total tin and silver content of 0.30% by mass. Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach that the total weight percentage of tin and silver is greater than or equal to 0.35%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the copper alloy foil of Yoshiki ‘682 to include higher amounts of tin and silver, based on the teachings in the reference and routine experimentation. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches including tin at a content of 0.20% by mass and silver at a content of 0.10% by mass, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts, such as combination of 0.25% by mass tin and 0.10% by mass silver, or 0.20% by mass tin and 0.15% by mass silver, resulting in total mass percentages of tin and silver of 0.35%. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the upper limit of silver is set due to cost, one of ordinary skill the art would find it obvious to increase the content of silver slightly without expected negative effects to the current collector. The trade-offs between reduced conductivity due to higher tin content, higher cost due to higher silver content, and higher tensile strength and heat resistance due to higher tin and silver content are considerations one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try contents of both tin and silver within the ranges taught and slightly outside the ranges taught using routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the content of tin and silver to 0.35% total in order to improve tensile strength and heat resistance.
Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that any electrolyte commonly used in lithium-ion batteries may be used (¶ [0101], Ln. 1-2), but does not expressly teach the composition of electrolyte used in the specific examples. Thus, Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach an embodiment in which the electrolyte includes a sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound.
Takashi teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte used for a rechargeable lithium secondary battery (¶ [0001], Ln. 1-2). Takashi teaches that the non-aqueous electrolyte includes at least one of a cyclic sulfate ester compound and an unsaturated sultone compound (sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound) and at least one of a phosphazene compound and a halogenated phosphate ester compound (¶ [0008], Ln. 1-3). The total content of the cyclic sulfate ester compound and an unsaturated sultone compound is 0.01-10% by mass of the total amount of the non-aqueous electrolyte (¶ [0030], Ln. 1-3). Takashi teaches that when at least one of a cyclic sulfate ester compound and an unsaturated sultone compound and at least one of a phosphazene compound and a halogenated phosphate ester compound are included in the electrolyte, the low-temperature discharge characteristics and storage characteristics are significantly improved (¶ [0188], Ln. 1-6). Takashi further teaches that the ionic conductivity of the coatings on the negative and positive electrodes are stabilized (¶ [0188], Ln. 10-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Yoshiki ‘682 to include a cyclic sulfate ester compound (sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound) and at least one of a phosphazene compound and a halogenated phosphate ester compound, based on the teachings of Takashi. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include the cyclic sulfate ester compound in a content of 0.01-10% by mass of the total amount of the non-aqueous electrolyte, based on the teachings of Takashi, meeting the claimed range of 0.01-10%. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include these compounds in the electrolyte of Yoshiki ‘682 in order to improve the low-temperature discharge characteristics and storage characteristics, and to stabilize the ionic conductivity of the coatings on the negative and positive electrodes.
Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach an electronic apparatus including the lithium secondary battery meeting the limitations of claim 1. Takashi teaches that the rechargeable lithium secondary battery is to be used for power supply in portable electronic devices, in vehicles, and for power storage (¶ [0001], Ln. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the lithium secondary battery of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi, meeting the limitations of claim 1, in a portable electronic device as taught by Takashi. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the intention of producing a lithium secondary battery is to use the battery to power devices and would find it obvious to use the battery in portable electronic device because of its small size, light weight, and ability to be charged and discharged for a long period of time.
Regarding claim 5, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and Yoshiki ‘682 further teaches that the copper alloy foil has a thickness of 20 µm or less (¶ [0037], Ln. 1-2), teaching thickness of 15 µm and 10 µm in Examples 14-15 (Table 1), within the claimed range of 1-100 µm. Further, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the copper alloy foils of Examples 14-15 have tensile strengths of 428 N/mm² and 413 N/mm², respectively (Table 1), within the claimed range of greater than 100 N/mm².
Regarding claim 11, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Yoshiki ‘682 further teaches that any electrolyte commonly used in lithium-ion batteries may be used (¶ [0101], Ln. 1-2), further teaching that a mixture of two or more of the solvents listed as examples may be used (¶ [0101], Ln. 18). Yoshiki ‘682 teaches examples of electrolyte solvents including organic acid esters, specifically listing methyl propionate and ethyl propionate (¶ [0101], Ln. 11-12). Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach the composition of electrolyte used in the specific examples and thus does not expressly teach an embodiment in which the electrolyte contains a propionate meeting the limitations of claimed formula 2 in a weight percentage of 10-60%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include methyl propionate or ethyl propionate in the solvent composition of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi based on the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that solvents commonly used in lithium ion batteries can be used in the electrolyte, and further teaches methyl propionate and ethyl propionate as specific examples of possible solvents, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include either propionate in the electrolyte. As Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that a mixture of two or more solvents may be used, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use a combination of solvents commonly used in lithium ion batteries, such as carbonates and methyl or ethyl propionate with the propionate included at a weight percentage within 10-60%.
Regarding claims 12 and 20, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi teaches all of the limitations of claims 3 and 16 above, including a copper alloy foil with 0.10-0.20% by mass tin (a) and an electrolyte including 0.01-10% by mass of a cyclic sulfate ester (b). The ranges result in a range for the ratio of b/a of 0.05-100, overlapping the claimed range of 1-100. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 13, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 10 above. Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that materials including tin, silicon, carbonaceous materials, metal composite oxides, and lithium nitride metal compounds may be used as the negative electrode active material (¶ [0098], Ln. 1-6). Yoshiki ‘682 does not expressly teach the specific composition used as the negative electrode active material in the embodiments.
Takashi teaches a negative electrode including graphite, SBR, and CMC (¶ [0132], Ln. 1-5), further teaching that the carbon materials are preferred for the negative electrode active material (¶ [0123], Ln. 10-11). Takashi additionally teaches that the cyclic sulfate ester compound may be included in a content of 0.01% to 10% based on a total weight of the electrolyte to improve the low-temperature discharge characteristics and storage characteristics (¶ [0188], Ln. 1-6), and to stabilize the ionic conductivity of the coatings on the negative and positive electrodes (¶ [0188], Ln. 10-14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the negative electrode active material of Yoshiki ‘682 to include graphite, SBR, and CMC, based on the teachings of Takashi. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use this composition as the negative electrode active material as Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that carbonaceous materials may be used as the negative electrode active material, and as the composition is commonly used in lithium ion batteries. Further, one would be motivated to use this composition in order increase the energy density of the battery.
Neither reference expressly teaches a reaction area of the negative electrode layer in m2, and therefore, neither reference expressly teaches a ratio of the reaction area to the weight percentage of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound of 0.5 to 30. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to adjust the reaction area of the negative electrode of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi. By adjusting the reaction area and the amount of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound, one of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably result in a ratio of d/b within the claimed range of 0.5 to 30. Although the specific surface area of the negative electrode mixtures of the references is not disclosed, the prior art teaches similar negative electrode compositions to the instant inventions, including graphite, SBR, and CMC combined to obtain the negative electrode slurry, and thus would have a similar specific surface area to that of the instant invention. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the amount of negative electrode mixture applied to the current collector to optimize the capacity of the battery. Additionally, it would be obvious to adjust the amount of sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte within the range of 0.01% to 10% based on the teachings of Takashi, a range which is the same as the range of b in the instant invention. Thus, as it’s obvious to adjust both d and b, the range for b is the same as the instant invention, and the reference teaches a similar negative electrode composition, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the ratio of d/b within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 21, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above, including a cyclic sulfate ester compound included in the electrolyte in a content of 0.01-10% by mass of the total amount of the non-aqueous electrolyte, overlapping the claimed range of 6-10%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Response to Arguments
Response-Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 103
In light of the Applicant’s amendment to claims 1 and 14 to require that the total weight of tin and silver in the negative electrode current collector is greater than or equal to 0.35%, the previous rejections of those claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2016003358 A) in view of Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A), under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A) in view of Kim, et al. (US 2016/0359196 A1), and under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Yoshiki, et al. (JP 2013256682 A) in view of Takashi, et al. (JP 2014170689 A) have been modified above. Any arguments with respect to the reference that are still deemed valid will be addressed herein. The Applicant argues in the remarks filed June 29, 2026 that Yoshiki ‘358 teaches away from the claimed tin and silver content; that the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682 are not applicable to the system of Yoshiki ‘358; that Yoshiki ‘682 does not teach the claimed tin and silver content; that it would not have been obvious to modify the battery of Yoshiki ‘682 in view Kim or Takashi to arrive at the claimed d/b ratio; and that the claimed d/b ratio is a critical relationship.
With respect to the argument, see pages 11-12 of the remarks, that Yoshiki ‘358 teaches away from the claimed tin and silver content, this argument is not persuasive. As detailed in the office action above, the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682 and routine experimentation are relied upon to teach the combined tin and silver content. While it is acknowledged that Yoshiki ‘358 teaches that conductivity may be lowered when the total content of tin and silver exceeds 0.20%, this does not constitute a teaching away. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try slightly higher amounts in order to improve the tensile strength. Further, as Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the upper limit of silver is set due to cost, one of ordinary skill the art would find it obvious to increase the content of silver slightly without expected negative effects to the current collector. The trade-offs between reduced conductivity due to higher tin content, higher cost due to higher silver content, and higher tensile strength and heat resistance due to higher tin and silver content are considerations one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try contents of both tin and silver within the ranges taught and slightly outside the ranges taught using routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the content of tin and silver to 0.35% total in order to improve tensile strength and heat resistance.
With respect to the argument, see pages 12-13 of the remarks, that the teachings of Yoshiki ‘682 are not applicable to the system of Yoshiki ‘358, this argument is not persuasive. The Applicant argues that because Yoshiki ‘682 teaches a system that additionally includes Cr, the teachings of Yoshiki regarding adding tin and silver to the copper current collector are not applicable. This argument is not persuasive. Both Yoshiki ‘358 and Yoshiki ‘682 teach the addition of tin and silver to a copper current collector, and therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to apply the teachings of one to another. Yoshiki ‘682 specifically teaches advantages of adding tin and silver to enhance tensile strength and heat resistance. One of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to apply those teachings to another copper alloy current collector, such as the one of Yoshiki ‘358.
With respect to the argument, see page 13 of the remarks, that Yoshiki ‘682 does not teach the claimed tin and silver content, this argument is not persuasive. As stated above, Yoshiki ‘682 teaches that the upper limit of silver is set due to cost, and thus one of ordinary skill the art would find it obvious to increase the content of silver slightly without expected negative effects to the current collector. Further, the trade-offs between reduced conductivity due to higher tin content, higher cost due to higher silver content, and higher tensile strength and heat resistance due to higher tin and silver content are considerations one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to try contents of both tin and silver within the ranges taught and slightly outside the ranges taught using routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase the content of tin and silver to 0.35% total in order to improve tensile strength and heat resistance.
With respect to the argument, see page 15 of the remarks, that it would not have been obvious to modify the battery of Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim or Takashi to arrive at the claimed d/b ratio, this argument is not persuasive. As noted in the office action above, the applied references do not expressly teach a reaction area of the negative electrode layer in m2, and therefore, do not expressly teach a ratio of the reaction area to the weight percentage of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound of 0.5 to 30. However, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Kim teaches the amount of sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte is within the range of 0.1% to 5.0%, within the range taught in the reference, and further teaches a similar negative electrode active material composition including graphite, CMC, and SBR. Similarly, Yoshiki ‘682 in view of Takashi teaches the amount of sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte is within the range of 0.1% to 10%, within the range taught in the reference, and teaches a similar negative electrode active material composition including graphite, CMC, and SBR. Regarding the reaction area, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the amount of negative electrode mixture applied to the current collector to optimize the capacity of the battery. Thus, as it’s obvious to adjust both d and b, the range for b overlaps that of the claimed invention, and the combination of references teaches a similar negative electrode composition, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the ratio of d/b within the claimed range.
With respect to the argument, see pages 15-16 of the remarks, that that the claimed d/b ratio is a critical relationship, this argument is not persuasive. The Applicant points to Examples 7-1 to 7-4 (satisfying the claimed range) in comparison to Examples 1-1 and 7-5 (d/b = 0.3 and 50, respectively), noting that high-temperature cycling capacity retention rate, swelling, and overcharge deformation rates are significantly degraded for Examples 1-1 and 7-5. However, it is not clear from the data presented that the results are attributed to the combination of percentage of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte and reaction area of the negative electrode mixture layer. For instance, while it is acknowledged that Example 7-1 (including 0.1% of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte and a reaction area of 3) results in a high-temperature cycling capacity retention rate of 81% and Example 7-5 (including 0.1% of the sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in the electrolyte and a reaction area of 5) results in a high-temperature cycling capacity retention rate of 72%, this is the only example provided which includes a constant value of b to make a comparison. Thus, it is not clear if the reduced results are based on the ratio of d/b, or simply based on the increase of d to a point where degraded results are observed. Similarly, the other example of degraded results is shown in Example 1-1, which has a significantly lower reaction area (0.45 m2). In looking to the examples provided meeting the claimed d/b ratio, it is not clear how the ratio impacts the results provided. There does not appear to be a pattern based on the ratio of d/b and the results provided. Applicants have the burden of explaining the data in any declaration they proffer as evidence of non-obviousness (MPEP 716.02(b)(II)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Woo, et al. (US 2002/0192554 A1) teaches a lithium secondary battery including a positive electrode, a negative electrode formed by coating carbonaceous materials or SnO2 on a negative electrode current collector, a separator interposed between the positive and negative electrodes, and an electrolyte into which the positive and negative electrodes and separator are immersed (¶ [0009], Ln. 1-16). Woo teaches that the negative electrode current collector is a made of a Cu-based alloy with a thickness of 20 µm or less and includes at least one material selected from the group consisting of nickel, titanium, magnesium, tin, zinc, boron, chromium, manganese, silicone, cobalt, iron, vanadium, aluminum, zirconium, niobium, phosphorous, bismuth, lead, silver, and misch metal (¶ [0009], Ln. 6-12). Woo further teaches that the amount of tin in the Cu-based alloy foil is within 0.1-2.0 wt% and the amount of silver in the Cu-based alloy foil is within 0.0005-0.5 wt%, teaching that materials within in range produce a foil having desirable tensile strength (¶ [0011], Ln. 8, 21-23).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH J JACOBSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571) 272-1291.
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.
/SARAH J JACOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1785
/MARK RUTHKOSKY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1785
Prosecution Insights