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 1-12 in the reply filed on 2/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 6/20/2023 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1 of paragraph [0041] of the filed specification "[f]orming the electrolyte 140 may comprise ... ". However, reference number 130 has previously been used in the specification to refer to the electrolyte [0040], and reference numbers 140a-d are used to refer to the anode current collectors [0042].
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouillon et al. (US 2011/0076567, hereinafter "Bouillon") in view of Kubota et al. (US 2014/0370365, hereinafter "Kubota").
Regarding claim 1, Bouillon teaches a lithium-ion type battery, wherein the lithium-ion type battery has a solid electrolyte (“solid-state”) battery [Abstract, 0005, “Lithium-ion type batteries have the advantage of comprising a solid non-flammable electrolyte”]. Bouillon teaches that the lithium-ion type battery comprises an elementary cell [0027, “It should be noted that, in FIG. 1 and in the following drawings, a single elementary cell forming a lithium-ion type battery is shown”]. Bouillon teaches that the lithium-ion type battery comprises a cathode collector 18 (“cathode current collector”), a cathode 20 on the cathode collector, a battery electrolyte 22 (“solid-state electrolyte”) on the cathode, and an anode 24 on the battery electrolyte [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0029]. Bouillon further teaches an anode collector 28 (“anode current collector”) on the anode [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0036]. Bouillon further teaches an insulating protection layer (“insulation film”) formed of a stack of two layers 30 and 32 [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0039], wherein the insulating protection layer has an opening 34 which exposes the anode collector [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0040]. Bouillon teaches that a metallization 36 (“conductive redistribution layer”) is formed in the opening on the insulating protection layer [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0041]. Bouillon teaches that the lithium-ion type battery also comprises a first contact 38 and a second contact 42 (“first and second terminal”) on opposite sides of the battery [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0042, 0043]. As seen in Fig. 7 of Bouillon, the first contact is electrically connected to the metallization, which is connected to the anode collector on a first sidewall of the lithium-ion type battery, and the second contact is electrically connected to the cathode on a second sidewall opposite to the first sidewall. However, is silent regarding the lithium-ion type battery comprising a plurality of cells.
Kubota teaches analogous art of a battery comprising a plurality of cells [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon]. Kubota teaches that the cells comprise a solid electrolyte [0037, “ The electrolyte layer 20 may be a solid, a semi-solid, or a combination of a porous solid permeable to ions and liquid”]. Kubota also teaches that the cells are covered with a protective layer comprising openings that expose an anode current collector layer and a cathode current collector layer [0029].
Kubota teaches that by providing a plurality of cells in a battery, the battery may provide increased capacity and voltage, as opposed to a single cell [0006, “However, thin cells … may not always provide sufficient capacity and voltage”, 0010, “With the disclosed battery and method of manufacturing it, it is possible to provide a battery having a sufficient capacity and voltage”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lithium-ion type battery taught by Bouillon to include a plurality of cells as taught by Kubota, in order to increase the capacity and voltage of the lithium-ion type battery.
Further regarding claim 2, Bouillon teaches that the cathode collector may comprise titanium, tungsten, molybdenum, tantalum, platinum, or an alloy of these materials, which are metals (“metal foil, sheet or film”) [0018, “the cathode collector layer is made of titanium, tungsten, molybdenum, tantalum, platinum, or of an alloy or a stack of these materials”].
Further regarding claim 4, Bouillon teaches that the cathode may comprise cobalt lithium oxide, or LiCoO2 (“lithium metal oxide”) [0018].
Further regarding claim 5, Bouillon teaches that the electrolyte may comprise a lithium phosphorus oxynitride (LiPON) [0018].
Further regarding claim 6, Bouillon teaches that the anode collector may comprise copper (“conductive metal”) [0018].
Further regarding claim 8, Bouillon teaches that the metallization may comprise aluminum (“air- and/or water-stable metal”) [0041, “Metallization 36 may be formed of a stack of aluminum and tantalum, of aluminum and titanium, or yet of aluminum and tantalum nitride”]. Aluminum may constitute the air- and/or water-stable metal, being the same material taught in the instant specification [see 0021 of the filed specification]. A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present [see MPEP 2112.01(II)].
Further regarding claim 9, Bouillon teaches that the metallization completely fills the opening in the insulating protection layer [Bouillon Fig. 7].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouillon (US 2011/0076567) in view of Kubota (US 2014/0370365) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2021/0313579, hereinafter "Takahashi").
Regarding claim 3, modified Bouillon teaches the solid-state battery of claim 2, as described in the rejection of instant claim 2. Bouillon is silent regarding the cathode collector comprising first and second barriers on opposite major surfaces of the metal foil having a thickness effective to prevent migration of atoms or ions from the metal foil into overlaying layers.
Takahashi teaches analogous art of a positive electrode (“cathode”) for a secondary battery comprising a collector (“cathode current collector”) and a protective layer (“barrier”) formed on at least one surface of the collector [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon]. Takahashi teaches that the protective layer is preferably formed on both sides (“opposite major surfaces”) of the positive electrode current collector [0019]. Takahashi teaches that the protective layer may have a thickness of 1 µm to 5 µm [0026].
Takahashi teaches that the protective layer may suppress a redox reaction related to the current collector, therefore suppressing heat generation when an internal short-circuit occurs [Abstract].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lithium-ion type battery taught by Bouillon to include a protective layer on the cathode collector as taught by Takahashi, in order to prevent redox reactions and heat generation in the cathode collector.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouillon (US 2011/0076567) in view of Kubota (US 2014/0370365) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Keates et al. (US 2017/0271626, hereinafter "Keates").
Regarding claim 7, modified Bouillon teaches the solid-state battery of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Bouillon does not specifically teach the insulating protection layer comprising a polyolefin.
Keates teaches analogous art of an apparatus comprising a cathode current collector, anode current collector, and active material layers coupled to the current collectors [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon], as well as a solid electrolyte [0023]. Keates further teaches a layer of non-conducting material (“barrier and/or insulation film”) coated on the cathode current collector and anode current collector, the non-conducting material comprising polypropylene, which is a polyolefin [0047]. Keates teaches that the non-conducting material is coated in such a way that portions of the anode and cathode current collector are exposed [0047].
Both the non-conducting material taught by Keates and the insulating protection layer taught by Bouillon have the effect of keeping a current collector insulated while still allowing for electrical connection to a terminal or contact.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the material in the insulating protection layer taught by modified Bouillon with the polypropylene taught by Keates to yield the predictable result of insulating the anode current collector [see MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouillon (US 2011/0076567) in view of Kubota (US 2014/0370365) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (KR 20130022342, referring to examiner-provided translation thereof, hereinafter "Kim").
Regarding claim 10, modified Bouillon teaches the solid-state battery of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Bouillon does not specifically teach the contacts, or terminals, comprising a conductive epoxy.
Kim teaches analogous art of a thin-film battery comprising a battery structure comprising a positive current collector (“cathode current collector”), a positive electrode (“cathode”) an electrolyte layer (“solid-state electrolyte”), a negative current collector (“anode current collector”), a negative electrode, and a protective film covering the battery structure and exposing a portion of the current collectors (“barrier and/or insulation film”) [pg. 9, paragraph 1]. Kim also teaches a positive terminal reinforcement pattern and a negative terminal reinforcement pattern on the protective film and connected to the positive current collector and negative current collector respectively through the exposed portion [pg. 9, paragraph 1]. Kim teaches that the positive and negative terminal reinforcement patterns comprise a conductive metal in an epoxy resin (“conductive epoxy”) [pg. 9, paragraph 2].
Kim teaches that the positive and negative terminal reinforcement patterns are external connections [pg. 7, paragraph 1, “the terminal portion exposed to the outside of the thin-film battery”]. Bouillon teaches that the contacts, or terminals, are external connections [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0042-0043]. Bouillon also teaches that the contacts may be formed by any known method [0042].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the contacts taught by modified Bouillon with the conductive metal epoxy taught by Kim to yield the predictable result of an external connection on the battery [see MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Regarding claim 11, modified Bouillon teaches the solid-state battery of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Bouillon does not specifically teach the contacts, or terminals, comprising a noble metal.
Kim teaches analogous art of a thin-film battery comprising a battery structure comprising a positive current collector (“cathode current collector”), a positive electrode (“cathode”) an electrolyte layer (“solid-state electrolyte”), a negative current collector (“anode current collector”), a negative electrode, and a protective film covering the battery structure and exposing a portion of the current collectors (“barrier and/or insulation film”) [pg. 9, paragraph 1]. Kim also teaches a positive terminal reinforcement pattern and a negative terminal reinforcement pattern on the protective film and connected to the positive current collector and negative current collector respectively through the exposed portion [pg. 9, paragraph 1]. Kim teaches that the positive and negative terminal reinforcement patterns may comprise a noble metal such as Au, Pt, or Cu [pg. 9, paragraph 2].
Kim teaches that the positive and negative terminal reinforcement patterns are external connections [pg. 7, paragraph 1, “the terminal portion exposed to the outside of the thin-film battery”]. Bouillon teaches that the contacts, or terminals, are external connections [Bouillon Fig. 7, 0042-0043]. Bouillon also teaches that the contacts may be formed by any known method [0042].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the contacts taught by modified Bouillon with the noble metal taught by Kim to yield the predictable result of an external connection on the battery [see MPEP 2143(I)(B)].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bouillon (US 2011/0076567) in view of Kubota (US 2014/0370365) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 2024/0047792, hereinafter "Ishikawa").
Regarding claim 12, modified Bouillon teaches the solid-state battery of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Bouillon does not specifically teach a dummy cell.
Ishikawa teaches analogous art of a solid-state battery comprising a substrate and a solid-state battery on the substrate [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon]. Ishikawa teaches that the solid-state battery comprises a plurality of stacked positive electrode layers, negative electrode layers, and solid electrolyte layers [Ishikawa Fig. 1, 0039]. Ishikawa further teaches that the substrate may comprise a dummy substrate electrode layer (“dummy cell”) on a main surface opposite to the surface facing the solid-state battery [0110].
Ishikawa teaches that the dummy substrate electrode layer is a metal layer that prevents water vapor from infiltrating the solid-state battery [0110]. While Fig. 9 of Ishikawa shows the substrate and dummy substrate electrode layer on the bottom of the solid-state battery stack, when the battery is rotated 180°, the dummy substrate electrode layer would be disposed on the uppermost surface of the stack [Bouillon Fig. 9].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery taught by modified Bouillon to include a dummy substrate electrode layer on the uppermost surface of a stack of the plurality of cells as taught by Ishikawa, in order to prevent water vapor from infiltrating the solid-state battery.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of copending Application No. 18/468,606 in view of Kubota (US 2014/0370365). Instant claim 1 and claim 9 of ‘606 both recite a solid-state battery comprising a cathode current collector (CCC), a cathode on the cathode current collector, a solid-state electrolyte on the cathode, an anode current collector (ACC) on the electrolyte, an insulation film on the ACC with a via or opening therein exposing the ACC, and a conductive redistribution layer in the via or opening and on the insulation film, wherein the insulation film and the redistribution layer are also on a first sidewall of the cell; first and second terminals on opposite sides or ends of the battery, wherein one of the first and second terminals is electrically connected to the ACC through the redistribution layer on the first sidewall, and the other of the first and second terminals is electrically connected to the cathode or CCC on the opposite side or end of the battery. Claim 9 of ‘606 is silent regarding the solid-state battery comprising a plurality of cells.
Kubota teaches analogous art of a battery comprising a plurality of cells [Abstract; entire disclosure relied upon]. Kubota teaches that the cells comprise a solid electrolyte [0037, “ The electrolyte layer 20 may be a solid, a semi-solid, or a combination of a porous solid permeable to ions and liquid”]. Kubota also teaches that the cells are covered with a protective layer comprising openings that expose an anode current collector layer and a cathode current collector layer [0029].
Kubota teaches that by providing a plurality of cells in a battery, the battery may provide increased capacity and voltage, as opposed to a single cell [0006, “However, thin cells … may not always provide sufficient capacity and voltage”, 0010, “With the disclosed battery and method of manufacturing it, it is possible to provide a battery having a sufficient capacity and voltage”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the solid-state battery taught by claim 9 of ‘606 to include a plurality of cells as taught by Kubota, in order to increase the capacity and voltage of the solid-state battery.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1-8 and 9-12 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 and 8-12 of copending Application No. 18/319,532 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claims 1-6 and 8-12 recite all the limitations of instant claims 1-8 and 9-12.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA F OROZCO whose telephone number is (571)272-0172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571)272-1481. 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.
/M.F.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights