DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claim 16 is amended. Claims 1-15 & 17-19 are canceled. Claims 16 & 20-24 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 16 & 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Shin (US 2023/0114069 A1) and Cho (US 2020/0343550 A1).
Regarding claims 16 & 21-24, Shin teaches an electrode for a secondary battery, the electrode comprising a current collector and a dry electrode sheet, having a thickness of 50 microns to 300 microns, disposed on the current collector ([0030]-[0031] & [0102]). Shin teaches a method of manufacturing a dry electrode sheet for a secondary battery, the method comprising: providing a dry electrode composition comprising about 90-98 wt% of an electrode active material, about 1-5 wt% of a conductive material and about 1-5 wt% of a binder such as polytetrafluoroethylene ([0070] & [0119]); mixing the dry electrode composition through a kneading process of the dry electrode for 3 to 7 minutes by applying heating at a temperature of 90°C to 200°C and shear pressure with a rotational speed of 40 to 70 rpm, with a specific embodiment using 50 rpm, thereby fibrillizing the binder ([0074]-[0077] & [0119]); and directly calendering the dry electrode composition to form a first dry electrode sheet ([0081] & [0119]); repeatedly calendering the first dry electrode sheet at least twice while maintaining a sheet shape to provide the dry electrode sheet ([0103]). Shin is silent as to (1) the electrode sheet having a tensile strength of 0.5 N/m2 or more and having an electrode density of 2.0 g/cc or more; and (2) the repeatedly calendering being performed while maintaining a sheet shape including a thickness within a tolerance range of 5 microns to 13 microns of the dry electrode sheet. Cho teaches a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode comprising a current collector and a positive electrode sheet including a positive electrode active material, a binder and a conductive agent disposed on the current collector, wherein the positive electrode sheet has a density above 2 g/cc ([0083] & [0123]-[0128]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to provide an electrode density of 2 g/cc or more in order to improve the energy density (capacity per volume) of the battery ([0083]).
While modified Shin does not explicitly teach the electrode sheet having a tensile strength of 0.5 N/m2 or more, it is noted that modified Shin teaches a method of forming an electrode sheet which is substantially identical to the method of forming the claimed electrode sheet of the present invention as noted above. Accordingly, modified Shin’s electrode sheet would be expected to possess the claimed properties (i.e tensile strength of 0.5 N/m2 or more). “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977)”. See MPEP 2112.01 I. As to (2), one of ordinary skill in the art readily understands that the repeatedly calendering maintains a sheet shape but Shin is silent as to the sheet including a thickness within a tolerance range of 5 microns to 13 microns of the dry electrode sheet. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform the calendaring step until a desired thickness is obtained as taught by Shin and noted above. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform the calendaring until the target thickness is reached. Notwithstanding, so long as Shin discloses a dry electrode sheet having a thickness overlapping with or reading on the presently claimed range, the claimed tolerance range for the thickness of the sheet during the calendaring step with respect to thickness of the dry electrode sheet (i.e final/target thickness) is not found to impart any structurally distinguishing features to the final product which is already disclosed in Shin.
Regarding claim 20, Shin teaches a secondary battery comprising an electrode current collector including a positive electrode, a separator, and a negative electrode, and an electrolyte solution are accommodated in a battery case and sealed, wherein at least one of the positive electrode and the negative electrode is the electrode of claim 16 ([0109]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 16 & 20-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument
As noted in the above updated rejection of claim 16, Shin discloses calendering a kneaded dry electrode composition once, twice or more to provide a dry electrode sheet with a desired thickness ([0101]-[0104]). While the examiner acknowledges the increased tensile strength obtained for the electrode sheet when the calendaring step is repeated, it is noted that Shin, as cited herein, discloses performing the calendaring step twice or more until a desired thickness is obtained. Accordingly, when the calendaring step of Shin is repeated at least twice, the claimed tensile strength would be expected to be obtained. Moreover, the number calendaring steps is known result effective variable which affects the density as well as the thickness of the electrode as taught by Kwak which is cited below as pertinent art. With regards to the newly claimed limitation of a sheet shape including a thickness within a tolerance range of 5 microns to 13 microns of the dry electrode sheet being maintained during the repeated calendaring, one of ordinary skill in the art readily understands that Shin’s repeatedly calendering maintains a sheet shape but is silent as to the sheet including a thickness within a tolerance range of 5 microns to 13 microns of the dry electrode sheet. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform the calendaring step until a desired thickness is obtained as taught by Shin and noted above. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform the calendaring until the target thickness is reached. Since the claimed tolerance range constitutes a limitation of intermediate products (i.e thickness of the sheets resulting from each of the repeated calendaring steps with respect to the thickness of the dry electrode sheet obtained after calendaring), the claimed tolerance range does not impart any structurally distinguishing features to the final product.
Thus, in view of the foregoing, claims 16 & 20-24 stand rejected.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kwak (US 2023/0099713 A1) discloses a method of preparing a dry electrode sheet including kneading a composition including a fibrillizable binder and performing a calendaring step twice or more to control the density and the thickness of the dry electrode sheet ([0089]-[0090] & [0101]) .
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (EST).
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, BARBARA GILLIAM can be reached on (571)272-1330. 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.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727