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 .
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-7 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakazawa (US 2016/0013517).
As to claim 1, Nakazawa discloses an electrochemical apparatus ([0015], secondary battery, discussed throughout), comprising: a positive electrode ([0017], discussed throughout); a negative electrode ([0017], discussed throughout); and an electrolyte ([0017], discussed throughout), wherein the electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate ([0118]-[0122], discussed throughout) and a non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate ([0167]-[0171], discussed throughout), the fluoroethylene carbonate accounts for a % of the electrolyte by mass ([0118]-[0122]), and the non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate accounts for b % of the electrolyte by mass ([0167]-[0171], discussed throughout), wherein 0.05≤a/b≤2.5 ([0118]-[0122] and [0166]-[0213], NOTE: the range of citation is because the non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate is part of the solvent as discussed in [0166], this can be either ethylene carbonate (1.32 g/cm3) or propylene carbonate (1.2 g/cm3), the solvent is made of five components (1) a cyclic carbonate having no fluorine atom ([0167]-[0171]) , (2) a linear carbonate ([0172]-[0183], which can be dimethyl carbonate (1.07 g/cm3)), (3) a cyclic or linear carboxylate ([0184]-[0193], which can be gamma-butyrolactone (1.13 g/cm3)), (4) an ether compound ([0195]-[0201], which can be ethyl methoxy methande (1.07g/cm3)), and (5) a sulfone compound ([0202]-[0213], which can be trimethylene sulfone (1.21 g/cm3); thus the weight percentages can be calculated for the solvent as the solvent fives them in volume percentages; given the closest of the density the weight percent is also close to the volume precent and can be calculated with the information provided within the prior art). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 2, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 3≤a≤25 ([0118]-[0122], discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 3, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 11≤b≤34 ([0167]-[0171], see above and discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 4, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 0.09≤a/b≤2.27 ([0118]-[0122] for a; [0167]-[0171] for b, discussed throughout and discussed above). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 5, Nakazawa discloses wherein, the electrolyte further comprises a non-fluorinated linear ester ([0172]-[0183], discussed throughout), and the non-fluorinated linear ester accounts for c % of the electrolyte by mass, wherein 0.1≤b/c≤1 ([0167]-[0171] for b; [0172]-[0183] for c; discussed throughout and see above). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 6, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 0.25≤b/c≤0.81 ([0167]-[0171] for b; [0172]-[0183] for c; discussed throughout and see above). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 7, Nakazawa discloses wherein, the non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of ethylene carbonate and propylene carbonate ([0169], discussed throughout).
As to claim 17, Nakazawa discloses an electronic apparatus, comprising an electrochemical apparatus ([0015], secondary battery, discussed throughout), wherein the electrochemical apparatus comprises: a positive electrode ([0017], discussed throughout); a negative electrode ([0017], discussed throughout); and an electrolyte ([0017], discussed throughout), wherein the electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate ([0118]-[0122], discussed throughout) and a non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate ([0167]-[0171], discussed throughout), the fluoroethylene carbonate accounts for a % of the electrolyte by mass ([0118]-[0122], discussed throughout), and the non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate accounts for b % of the electrolyte by mass ([0166]-[0171], discussed throughout), wherein 0.05≤a/b≤2.5 ([0118]-[0122] and [0166]-[0213], NOTE: the range of citation is because the non-fluorinated cyclic carbonate is part of the solvent as discussed in [0166], this can be either ethylene carbonate (1.32 g/cm3) or propylene carbonate (1.2 g/cm3), the solvent is made of five components (1) a cyclic carbonate having no fluorine atom ([0167]-[0171]) , (2) a linear carbonate ([0172]-[0183], which can be dimethyl carbonate (1.07 g/cm3)), (3) a cyclic or linear carboxylate ([0184]-[0193], which can be gamma-butyrolactone (1.13 g/cm3)), (4) an ether compound ([0195]-[0201], which can be ethyl methoxy methande (1.07g/cm3)), and (5) a sulfone compound ([0202]-[0213], which can be trimethylene sulfone (1.21 g/cm3); thus the weight percentages can be calculated for the solvent as the solvent fives them in volume percentages; given the closest of the density the weight percent is also close to the volume precent and can be calculated with the information provided within the prior art). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 18, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 3≤a≤25 ([0118]-[0122], discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 19, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 11≤b≤34 ([0167]-[0171], see above and discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 20, Nakazawa discloses wherein, 0.09≤a/b≤2.27 ([0118]-[0122] for a; [0167]-[0171] for b, discussed throughout and discussed above). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Claims 8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakazawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Croy (US 2022/0029149).
As to claim 8, Nakazawa discloses wherein, the negative electrode ([0291]-[0292], discussed throughout) comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer disposed on the negative electrode current collector ([0376]-[0380], discussed throughout), wherein the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode material ([0293]-[0308], discussed throughout), the negative electrode material comprises a silicon-containing material ([0308], discussed throughout). Nakazawa is silent to wherein, a mass of silicon element per unit coating area on the negative electrode current collector is X mg/cm2, wherein 0.1≤X≤1.3.
Croy discloses a battery ([0037], discussed throughout) wherein, the negative electrode ([0040], discussed throughout) comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer disposed on the negative electrode current collector ([0042], discussed throughout), wherein the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode material ([0043]-[0044], discussed throughout), the negative electrode material comprises a silicon-containing material ([0043]-[0044], discussed throughout), a mass of silicon element per unit coating area on the negative electrode current collector is X mg/cm2, wherein 0.1≤X≤1.3 ([0044]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the anode active material and loading from Croy within Nakazawa as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 10, modified Nakazawa discloses wherein, 0.2≤X≤1.3 ([0044], Croy). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 11, modified Nakazawa discloses wherein, a/b=Z and 0.76≤Z/X≤2.5 (([0118]-[0122] for a; [0167]-[0171] for b, discussed throughout and discussed above; Nakazawa; [0044], Croy). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 12, modified Nakazawa discloses wherein, a mass ratio of the silicon-containing material to the negative electrode active material layer is r2, wherein 0.5%≤r2≤85% ([0042]-[0044], Croy). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Nakazawa as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ogota (US 2023/0044589).
As to claim 9, modified Nakazawa is silent to wherein, the negative electrode further comprises a conductive layer disposed between the negative electrode current collector and the negative electrode active material layer; and a thickness d of the conductive layer satisfies 0.3 μm≤d≤1.5 μm. Ogita discloses a secondary battery (abstract, figure 3A) wherein the negative electrode (figure 3A #212, discussed throughout) further comprises a conductive layer (figure 3A #214, base film, discussed throughout) disposed between the negative electrode current collector (figure 3A #205, discussed throughout) and the negative electrode active material layer (figure 3A #204, discussed throughout); and a thickness d of the conductive layer satisfies 0.3 μm≤d≤1.5 μm ([0016], discussed throughout). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the base film from Ogita within modified Nakazawa as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I) and because the base film increase conductivity between the current collector and the active material and inhibits side reactions ([0046], discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Nakazawa as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Yamashita (US 2020/0203731).
As to claim 13, modified Nakazawa is silent to wherein, the negative electrode active material layer has a porosity in a range of 20% to 30%. Yamashita discloses a battery ([0021]) wherein the negative electrode active material layer has a porosity in a range of 20% to 30% ([0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the porosity from Yamashita within modified Nakazawa because a negative electrode having excellent affinity between the negative electrode and the electrolyte and high density can be obtained ([0084], discussed throughout).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The structural limitations of claim 1 and 8 which claim 14 depends does not make it obvious to have the claimed protective layer as claimed within claim 14. Thus, claim 14 is being objected to as depending on a rejected claim.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724