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 Application
Claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 10-11 are new. Claims 1,5 are currently amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claim(s) 1 have been considered but are not found persuasive 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 11 currently recites “The composition of claim 1, which does not contain a polymer including a nitrile group-containing monomer unit and an alkylene structural unit as the dispersant”, where such exclusion is not explained or described in the instant specification or in the Applicant’s remarks/argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirabayashi (JP2020021629A, translation attached), in view of Ito (WO2022045267A1, US-equivalent US20230299298A1 was used for citation, previously cited).
Regarding claims 1, 5-6, 10, Hirabayashi discloses a carbon black dispersion composition for a battery comprising:
carbon black (granular carbon black [0071])
a dispersant (methyl cellulose or “MC-1” [0071]) {claim 5}
N-methyl-2-pyrrolidione [0071]
However, Hirabayashi does not disclose wherein the carbon black dispersion composition further comprises:
from 0.0001 to 5 parts by weight of a hindered phenolic compound per 100 parts by weight of the carbon black
In this regard, Ito also teaches a conductive material dispersion liquid comprising conductive material (e.g., CNT, carbon black [0098, 0108, 0224], a dispersant (i.e., polymer [0044-0094, 0224]) comprising a substituted phenol compound such as dibutylhydroxytoluene (e.g., 0.01 mass% BHT) [0081 Ito], and a solvent (e.g., NMP [0096]).
Ito in Example 1 further teaches wherein the conductive material dispersion liquid comprises 5 parts of conductive material, 12.5 parts of the polymer including 0.01 mass% of BHT [0223-0224] (i.e., 0.00125 part of BHT; i.e., 0.00125/5 = 0.025 part by weight of BHT per 100 parts by weight of the conductive material {claim 10}).
Ito further teaches that BHT is an antioxidant and when the amount of the substituted phenol compound in the conductive material dispersion liquid is 0.01 mass% or more and 0.2 mass % or less [0082 Ito], it enhances the dispersion state stability of the conductive material dispersion liquid and rate characteristics and high-temperature storage characteristics [0082 Ito].
As such, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added a hindered phenolic compound in the dispersant, such as the BHT in the overlapping range, as an antioxidant of the dispersion composition to improve dispersion, and rate and high-temperature characteristics [0082 Ito] {claim 6}.
Regarding claim 2, modified Hirayashi discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the carbon black content is 1.0 part [0071] which is not “from 5 to 20 wt %” as claimed. Hirayashi further does not disclose a range of the carbon black content.
In this regard, Ito teaches wherein the conductive material dispersion liquid comprises 5 parts of CNTs as the conductive material [0224 Ito], which is within the claimed range of “from 5 to 20 wt%”, wherein the conductive material may be carbon black [0098 Ito]. It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have selected such amount of conductive material in the dispersion composition, with a reasonable expectation to provide good electrical contact when used with active materials [Ito 0098].
Regarding claim 3, modified Hirayashi discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein the carbon black has a BET specific surface area of 130 m2/g [Hirayashi 0066], which falls within the claimed range of “from 30 to 1,500 m2/g.”
Regarding claim 4, modified Hirayashi discloses the composition of claim 1, wherein 0.05 parts of the dispersant (i.e., MC-1) and 1.0 part of carbon black is added [0071] (i.e., 5 parts per 100 part of carbon black), which falls within the claimed range of “1 to 20 parts by weight per 100 parts by weight of the carbon black.”
Regarding claim 7, modified Hirabayashi discloses a mixture paste for a positive electrode [0071, 0081], comprising the carbon black dispersion composition of claim 1, a positive electrode active material (i.e., and a binder.
Regarding claim 8, modified Hirabayashi discloses a positive electrode for a lithium-ion secondary battery, comprising a current collector (aluminum foil [0081, 0084 Hirabayashi]) and a positive electrode mixture layer that is a dry coating of the mixture paste of claim 7 formed on the current collector [0081, 0084 Hirabayashi].
Regarding claim 9, modified Hirabayashi discloses a lithium-ion secondary battery comprising the positive electrode of claim 8, a negative electrode (i.e., metallic lithium foil [0084] Hirabayashi), an electrolyte (i.e., a nonaqueous electrolyte [0084] Hirabayashi)and a separator (i.e., porous polypropylene film [0084] Hirabayashi).
Regarding claim 11, modified Hirabayashi discloses the composition of claim 1, comprising a polymer such as methyl cellulose as the dispersant [Hirabayashi 0071], which “does not contain a polymer including a nitrile group-containing monomer unit and an alkylene structural unit as the dispersant” as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAEYOUNG SON whose telephone number is (703)756-1427. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/T.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 7/23/2026
Prosecution Insights