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 .
This is the initial office action for US Patent Application No. 18/337428 by Kim et al.
Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hu et al. (US 2023/0123455 A1), herein referred to as Hu.
Regarding claim 1, Hu teaches [0008] a negative electrode plate (anode), the negative electrode plate includes a negative electrode current collector, a first negative electrode active material layer (first anode mixture layer) and a second negative electrode active material layer (second anode mixture layer). The first negative electrode active material layer is disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector, and the second negative electrode active material layer is disposed on a surface of the first negative electrode active material layer.
Hu further teaches [0009-0010 and 0013] the first negative electrode active material layer includes a first graphite (first carbon-based active material) and a first silicon material (silicon-based active material) and the second negative electrode active material layer includes a second graphite (second carbon-based active material) and a second silicon material (silicon-based active material).
With further regard to the claimed orientation index (OI value) relationship of the first and second carbon-based active materials, Hu teaches [0011-0012] an OI value of the first graphite in the first negative electrode active material layer is greater than an OI value of the second graphite in the second negative electrode active material layer. The second graphite with a smaller OI value than the first graphite can effectively enhance the diffusion ability of lithium ions and improve charging performance of the negative electrode. The first graphite with a greater OI value than the second graphite can increase the compacted density of the negative electrode plate, thereby increasing the energy density properties of battery comprising the aforementioned negative electrode plate.
Regarding claim 7, Hu teaches [0022] the first silicon material may include silicon oxide and the second silicon material may include silicon carbon composite.
Regarding claim 8, Hu teaches [0032] the first negative electrode active material layer may include a first conductive agent, the second negative electrode active material layer may include a second conductive agent and the first and second conductive agents may have a different composition from each other.
Regarding claim 11, Hu teaches (Example 1, [0064-0068]) the first conductive agent may be added to the first negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 1 weight percent and the second conductive agent may be added to the second negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 0.5 weight percent, thereby satisfying the claim limitation of the content of the first conductive agent being present in a greater amount that the content of the second conductive agent.
Regarding claim 13, Hu teaches [0035-0039] the first and second negative electrode active material layers include respective first and second adhesive agents (first and second binders). The amount of first adhesive agent in the first negative electrode active material layer is 0.5 weight percent to 5 weight percent and the amount of second adhesive agent in the second negative electrode active material layer is 0.5 weight percent to 5 weight percent. Therefore, a ratio of the content of first adhesive agent to the second adhesive agent would be 1:1 and falls within the claimed binder content ratio range of 9:1 to 5:5.
Regarding claim 14, Hu teaches (Example 1, [0064-0068]) a ratio of the loading weight (considered to be the amount of active material and conductive agent used in the electrode layer) of the first negative electrode active material layer (addition of 88 weight percent first graphite, 8 weight percent first silicon material and 1 weight percent first conductive agent for a total of 97 percent loading weight) to the loading weight of the second negative electrode active material layer (addition of 95 weight percent second graphite, 2 weight percent second silicon material and 0.5 weight percent second conductive agent for a total of 97.5 percent loading weight) is 97/97.5 which equals 0.994. The ratio taught by Hu falls within the claimed loading weight ratio range of 2:8 (0.25) to 8:2 (4) recited in claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, Hu teaches [0051] a lithium-ion battery comprising the negative electrode plate described above.
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.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (US 2023/0123455 A1), herein referred to as Hu, in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0207823 A1), herein referred to as Wang.
The Hu reference teaches the claimed anode recited in claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach the limitations of claims 2 and 12. However, from the same field of technology, Wang discloses [0008] a negative electrode plate for a secondary battery.
In view of claim 2, Wang teaches [0008] a negative electrode plate comprising a negative electrode current collector, a first negative electrode film comprising a first negative electrode active material disposed on the negative electrode current collector and a second negative electrode film comprising a second negative electrode active material disposed on the first negative electrode film. Wang further teaches [0043-0045 and 0057] the OI value of the first negative electrode active material is configured to be greater than the OI value of the second negative electrode active material. The OI value of the first negative electrode active material may be from 4 to 20 and the OI value of the second negative electrode active material may be from 0.5 to 10. The OI values taught by Wang overlap the values recited in claim 2 and therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP Chapter 2144.05).
In view of claim 12, Wang teaches [0030-0033] the first negative electrode film comprises a first conductive polymer (first conductive material) in an amount of 1 to 5 weight percent and the second negative electrode film comprises a second conductive polymer (second conductive material) in an amount of 0.2 to 3 weight percent. Wang indicates the first and second negative electrode films are configured such that the amount of first conductive polymer is greater than the amount of the second conductive polymer. The weight percentages of the conductive polymers taught by Wang overlap the values recited in claim 12 and therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP Chapter 2144.05, Section I).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (US 2023/0123455 A1), herein referred to as Hu, in view of Kim et al. (US 2021/0257606 A1), herein referred to as Kim.
The Hu reference teaches the claimed anode recited in claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach the limitations of claims 3 and 4. However, from the same field of technology, Kim discloses [0011-0015] the formation of an anode layer for a secondary battery.
In view of claim 3, Kim teaches [0011-0016] an anode comprising an anode current collector, a first anode active material layer and a second anode active material layer. Kim further teaches [0071] a Raman spectrum value of a carbonaceous anode active material in the first anode active material layer is about 0.1 to 0.95 and a Raman spectrum value of a carbonaceous anode active material in the second anode active material layer is from about 1.0 to about 10. The Raman spectrum values taught by Kim satisfy the limitations in claim 3 where the first carbon-based active material has a Raman value less than the Raman value of the second carbon-based active material.
At the time of the filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the negative electrode plate taught by Hu to include the carbonaceous anode active materials with the specified Raman spectrum values taught by Kim in order to optimize lithium deposition on the negative electrode plate.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (US 2023/0123455 A1), herein referred to as Hu, in view of Mizukoshi et al. (US 2022/0416245 A1), herein referred to as Mizukoshi.
The Hu reference teaches the claimed anode recited in claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach the limitations of claims 5 and 6. However, from the same field of technology, Mizukoshi discloses [00008] the formation of a negative electrode for a secondary battery wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode current collector, a first negative electrode mixture layer disposed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector and a second negative electrode mixture layer disposed on a surface of the first negative electrode mixture layer.
In view of claims 5 and 6, Mizukoshi teaches [0042] a first negative electrode active material and a second negative electrode active material included in the first and second negative electrode mixture layers respectively. The first and second negative electrode active materials comprise a silicon material which may be included in the first and second negative electrode mixture layers in an amount of 0.5 to 10 mass percent. In view of the disclosure of Mizukoshi, the amount of silicon included in the first and second negative electrode mixture layers is considered to be a result-effective variable (See MPEP Chapter 2144.05, Section II) because the amounts of silicon can be adjusted through routine experimentation and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so.
At the time of the filing date of the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, to modify the negative electrode plate and secondary battery taught by Hu to include the mass percentages of silicon material in the first and second negative electrode mixture layers taught by Mizukoshi, in order to optimize the capacity of the negative electrode and to suppress deterioration of the charge-discharge cycling characteristics of the secondary battery.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 9 and 10 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.
Claims 4, 9 and 10 contain allowable subject matter because the prior art of record does not teach or suggest the specified Raman spectrum values in the aforementioned claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEWART A FRASER whose telephone number is (571)270-5126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7am-4pm, 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, 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.
/STEWART A FRASER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724