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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. CN107069009 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Suzuki et al. JP2011198614.
With respect to claim 1, Mao et al. discloses a negative electrode plate, wherein the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode material layer, the negative electrode material layer comprises a silicon-based particle and a graphite particle [0011-0015; 0059-0061], and the silicon-based particle comprises silicon and carbon [0011-0017], wherein in the silicon-based particle of a diameter larger than 3 μm [0035-0055], a Si content in a superficial region (40% at the coating layer) is lower than a Si content in an inner region (90% at the core region) .[0036-0056]
Mao et al. discloses wherein, the superficial region (coating layer) extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle distant from the outer surface, a mass percent of Si in the superficial region is M1; the inner region (core region) is a region distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle, the mass percent of Si in the inner region is M2; and M2 is greater than M1. [0036-0056]
Mao et al. does not disclose the silicon-based particle comprises a superficial region and an inner region, wherein the superficial region extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle to a point that is less than 0.2 µm distant from the outer surface, and the inner region is a region more than 0.2 µm distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle; wherein the superficial region and the inner region meet at a particle interface; wherein a mass percent of Si in the superficial region is M1, a mass percent of Si in the inner region is M2, and M2 is greater than M1
Suzuki et al. discloses a negative electrode plate, wherein the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode material layer, the negative electrode material layer comprises a silicon-based particle and a graphite particle [Abstract; 0040-0042],
the silicon-based particle comprises a superficial region 22 and an inner region 10/21 [Figure 4],
wherein the superficial region 22 extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle to a point that is a 0.2 µm distant (slightly different non-overlapping less than 0.2µm) from the outer surface [0068-0069], and the inner region 10/21 is a region more than 0.2 µm (3µm + 0.2µm) distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle [Figure 4; 0068-0069; 0072-0075];
wherein the superficial region 22 and the inner region 10/21 meet at a particle interface;
wherein a mass percent of Si in the superficial region 22 is M1 (50%), a mass percent of Si in the inner region10/21 is M2 (silicon core: 100% silicon + first region 21- 20% silicon), and M2 is greater than M1 Si content in a superficial region 22 is lower than a Si content in an inner region. [0075-0078; Abstract]
Although Suzuki et al. discloses wherein the superficial region is 0.2 µm and does not specifically disclose wherein the superficial region is less than 0.2 µm
Claims that differ from the prior art only by slightly different (non-overlapping) ranges are prima facie obvious without a showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art. (MPEP 2144.05).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein the superficial region extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle to a point that is less than 0.2 μm distant from the outer surface, a mass percent of Si in the superficial region is M1; the inner region is a region more than 0.2 μm distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle, the mass percent of Si in the inner region is M2; and M2 is greater than M1, as disclosed in Suzuki et al., in order to allow for improved energy density.
With respect to claim 6, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein a content of the silicon-based particle in the negative electrode material layer is 3 wt% to 80 wt%.
Suzuki et al. discloses wherein a content of the silicon-based particle in the negative electrode material layer is 3 wt% to 80 wt%. [0066-0070]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein a content of the silicon-based particle in the negative electrode material layer is 3 wt% to 80 wt%., as disclosed in Suzuki et al., in order to allow for improved energy density.
With respect to claim 8, Mao et al. discloses wherein a carbon material exists on a surface of the silicon-based particle, and the carbon material comprises at least one of carbon nanotubes, carbon nanoparticles. [0055-0077]
With respect to claim 9, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein the negative electrode material layer comprises a plurality of silicon-based particles and an average particle diameter Dv50 of the plurality of silicon-based particles is less than 20 μm.
Suzuki et al. discloses wherein the negative electrode material layer comprises a plurality of silicon-based particles and an average particle diameter Dv50 of the plurality of silicon-based particles is less than 20 μm. [0061-0069; 0072-0075]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein the negative electrode material layer comprises a plurality of silicon-based particles and an average particle diameter Dv50 of the plurality of silicon-based particles is less than 20 μm, as disclosed in Suzuki et al., in order to allow for improved energy density.
With respect to claim 11, Mao et al. discloses an electrochemical device, comprising a negative electrode plate, wherein the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode material layer, the negative electrode material layer comprises a silicon-based particle and a graphite particle [0011-0015], and the silicon-based particle comprises silicon and carbon [0011-0017], wherein in a silicon-based particle of a diameter larger than 3 μm [0035-0055], a Si content in a superficial region (40% at the coating layer) is lower than a Si content in an inner region (90% at the core region) .[0036-0056]
Mao et al. does not disclose the silicon-based particle comprises a superficial region and an inner region, wherein the superficial region extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle to a point that is less than 0.2 µm distant from the outer surface, and the inner region is a region more than 0.2 µm distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle; wherein the superficial region and the inner region meet at a particle interface; wherein a mass percent of Si in the superficial region is M1, a mass percent of Si in the inner region is M2, and M2 is greater than M1
Suzuki et al. discloses a negative electrode plate, wherein the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode material layer, the negative electrode material layer comprises a silicon-based particle and a graphite particle [Abstract; 0040-0042],
the silicon-based particle comprises a superficial region 22 and an inner region 10/21 [Figure 4],
wherein the superficial region 22 extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle to a point that is a 0.2 µm distant (slightly different non-overlapping less than 0.2µm) from the outer surface [0068-0069], and the inner region 10/21 is a region more than 0.2 µm (3µm + 0.2µm) distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle [Figure 4; 0068-0069; 0072-0075];
wherein the superficial region 22 and the inner region 10/21 meet at a particle interface;
wherein a mass percent of Si in the superficial region 22 is M1 (50%), a mass percent of Si in the inner region10/21 is M2 (silicon core: 100% silicon + first region 21- 20% silicon), and M2 is greater than M1 Si content in a superficial region 22 is lower than a Si content in an inner region. [0075-0078; Abstract]
Although Suzuki et al. discloses wherein the superficial region is 0.2 µm and does not specifically disclose wherein the superficial region is less than 0.2 µm
Claims that differ from the prior art only by slightly different (non-overlapping) ranges are prima facie obvious without a showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art. (MPEP 2144.05).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein the superficial region extends from an outer surface of the silicon-based particle to a point that is less than 0.2 μm distant from the outer surface, a mass percent of Si in the superficial region is M1; the inner region is a region more than 0.2 μm distant from the outer surface of the silicon-based particle, the mass percent of Si in the inner region is M2; and M2 is greater than M1, as disclosed in Suzuki et al., in order to allow for improved energy density.
With respect to claim 12, Mao et al. discloses an electronic device, comprising the electrochemical device according to claim 11. [0080; 0004-0006]
Claim(s) 3, 4, 5, 10 & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. CN107069009 in view of Suzuki et al. JP2011198614 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Yoshikawa et al. (US 2016/0118655).
With respect to claim 3, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein a sum α of a porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle and a porosity α2 of the negative electrode plate satisfies: 40% <α< 90%. [0090-0094]
Yoshikawa et al. discloses a negative electrode plate, wherein the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode material layer, the negative electrode material layer comprises a silicon-based particle (silicon contained material) and a graphite particle, and the silicon-based particle comprises silicon and carbon (conductive agent such as carbon powder), [0114-0117; Example 1 & 2; 0147-0149] wherein in the silicon-based particle of a diameter larger than 3 μm [0147-0149] wherein a sum α of a porosity α1 (40%) of the silicon-based particle and a porosity α2 (25%) of the negative electrode plate satisfies: 40% <α< 90%. [0090-0094]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein a sum α of a porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle and a porosity α2 of the negative electrode plate satisfies: 40% <α< 90%, as disclosed in Yoshikawa et al., in order to allow for improved efficiency.
With respect to claim 4, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle is 15% to 60%, and the porosity α2 of the negative electrode plate is 15% to 42%.
Yoshikawa et al. discloses wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle is 15% to 60%, and the porosity α2 of the negative electrode plate is 15% to 42%. [0090-0094]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle is 15% to 60%, and the porosity α2 of the negative electrode plate is 15% to 42%, as disclosed in Yoshikawa et al., in order to allow for improved efficiency.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle is 15% to 60%, and the porosity α2 of the negative electrode plate is 15% to 42%, as disclosed in Yoshikawa et al., in order to allow for improved efficiency.
With respect to claim 5 & 13, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle and a silicon content B in the silicon-based particle satisfy: P = 0.5α1/(B –α1B), 0.2 ≤ P ≤ 1.6, wherein the silicon content B in the silicon-based particle is 20 wt% to 60 wt%.
Yoshikawa et al. discloses wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle and a silicon content B (40% or less) [0106] in the silicon-based particle satisfy: P = 0.5α1/(B –α1B), 0.2 ≤ P ≤ 1.6, wherein the silicon content B in the silicon-based particle is 20 wt% to 60 wt%. [0025; 0054]
the content of the silicon-contained material in the mixture of the silicon-contained material and the carbon material,
the silicon-contained material and the carbon material in [0106] can be considered as the claimed “silicon-based particle”
B=0.1% to 40% and α1 =15% to 60%
Therefore Yoshikawa et al. discloses P = 0.5α1/(B –α1B), 0.8 ≤ P ≤ 1.6
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle and a silicon content B in the silicon-based particle satisfy: P = 0.5α1/(B –α1B), 0.8 ≤ P ≤ 1.6, wherein the silicon content B in the silicon-based particle is 20 wt% to 60 wt%, as disclosed in Yoshikawa et al., in order to allow for improved efficiency.
With respect to claim 10, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein a specific surface area of the silicon-based particle is less than 50 m2/g.
Yoshikawa et al. discloses wherein a specific surface area of the silicon-based particle is less than 50 m2/g. [0056]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., wherein a specific surface area of the silicon-based particle is less than 50 m2/g, as disclosed in Yoshikawa et al., in order to allow for improved efficiency.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. CN107069009 in view of Suzuki et al. JP2011198614 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Kamo et al. (US 20160351947)
With respect to claim 7, Mao et al. does not disclose wherein a peak intensity ratio between a D peak and a G peak in a Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle is 0.2 to 2; and the D peak is a peak with a shift range of 1255 cm-1 to 1355 cm-1 in the Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle, and the G peak is a peak with a shift range of 1575 cm-1 to 1600 cm-1 in the Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle.
Kamo et al. discloses a negative electrode active material comprising silicon with a carbon coating and graphite wherein a peak intensity ratio between a D peak and a G peak in a Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle is 0.2 to 2; and the D peak is a peak with a shift range of 1255 cm-1 to 1355 cm-1 (1330 cm-1 ) in the Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle, and the G peak is a peak with a shift range of 1575 cm-1 to 1600 cm-1 (1580 cm-1) in the Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle [0020]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the electrode plate of Mao et al., to wherein a peak intensity ratio between a D peak and a G peak in a Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle is 0.2 to 2; and the D peak is a peak with a shift range of 1255 cm-1 to 1355 cm-1 in the Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle, and the G peak is a peak with a shift range of 1575 cm-1 to 1600 cm-1 in the Raman spectrum of the silicon-based particle, as disclosed in Kamo et al., in order to allow for increased capacity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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.
Applicant Argues
More importantly, such a mapping would also be inconsistent with Mao's teaching that the silicon content decreases from the inner region toward the outer region of the particle. However, Suzuki's outer region would instead contain a higher silicon content than the inner region. Accordingly, a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to adopt Suzuki's region definitions in Mao, because doing so would be contrary to the compositional gradient expressly taught by Mao.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood the disclosed thickness and compositional distribution as part of the same region structure, rather than independent teachings that may be selectively separated and recombined with hindsight. Accordingly, Suzuki does not provide a proper basis for modifying Mao in the manner proposed by the Office Action.
Examiner respectfully disagrees
If, in Suzuki et al., the superficial region is considered the second region 2 and if the inner region is considered the silicon core 10 and first region 21, the claimed limitations are met as outlined in the rejection above.
Applicant Argues
The Office Action appears to interpret the content of the silicon-contained material disclosed in paragraph [0025] of Yoshikawa as corresponding to the claimed silicon content B. However, Yoshikawa's disclosure relates to a different parameter.
Specifically, paragraph [0025] of Yoshikawa states:
"The content of the silicon-contained material of the inventive negative electrode active material in the mixture of the silicon-contained material and the carbon material is
preferably 40 mass % or less."
Thus, Yoshikawa discloses the proportion of silicon-containing material in a mixture of silicon-containing material and carbon material. In contrast, claim 5 requires B to represent the mass percentage of silicon element within the silicon-based particle itself. These are fundamentally different parameters. Accordingly, Yoshikawa does not disclose the claimed silicon content B, nor does Yoshikawa disclose the recited relationship among ai, B, and P.
Examiner respectfully disagrees
Yoshikawa et al. discloses wherein the porosity α1 of the silicon-based particle and a silicon content B (40% or less) [0106] in the silicon-based particle satisfy: P = 0.5α1/(B –α1B), 0.2 ≤ P ≤ 1.6, wherein the silicon content B in the silicon-based particle is 20 wt% to 60 wt%. [0025; 0054]
the content of the silicon-contained material in the mixture of the silicon-contained material and the carbon material,
the silicon-contained material and the carbon material in [0106] can be considered as the claimed “silicon-based particle”
B=0.1% to 40% and α1 =15% to 60%
Therefore the relationship of P = 0.5α1/(B –α1B), 0.8 ≤ P ≤ 1.6 is met
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Choi US 2020/0136130
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9AM-7PM.
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.
/KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights