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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of 1-18 in the reply filed on 4/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 19-21 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected lithium battery and a method of preparing a lithium battery, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/10/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 4, 15 & 16 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites, “maximum roughness depth (Rmax) of a surface… is greater than a maximum roughness of a surface…” The latter “maximum roughness” should recite “maximum roughness depth.”
Claim 4 should recites, “surfaces of the second positive current collector.”
Claim 15/16: These should be objected to for using the (SAICAS) trademark which is not allowed in claims unless its use is necessary to define the metes and bounds of the claims, which it does not.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 3, it recites, “wherein a maximum roughness depth (Rmax) of a surface of the first and second surfaces of the first positive current collector is greater than a maximum roughness of a surface of the first and second surfaces of the second positive current collector”. It should recite, “wherein a maximum roughness depth (Rmax) of a surface of the first and second surfaces of the first positive current collector is greater than a maximum roughness depth of a surface of the first and second surfaces of the second positive current collector”.
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.
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 & 2, 5-14, & 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SONG JOOYONG (EP3605714A1) with LI ZHENHUA (US20190140328A1).
Regarding claim 1: SONG discloses a lithium battery (Abstract) comprising: an electrode group stack ([0008]) comprising a plurality of positive electrodes ([0008]) and one or more negative electrodes ([0008]) that are alternately stacked in a thickness direction of the electrode group stack (Fig. 3), the plurality of positive electrodes (Fig. 3, Element 110) comprising a first positive electrode (Fig. 3, Element 110 of the inner section of the electrode assembly) and a second positive electrode (Fig. 3, Element 110 of the outer section of the electrode assembly), the first positive electrode being an inner layer of the electrode group stack (Fig. 3, Element 110 of the inner section of the electrode assembly), the second positive electrode being an outermost layer of the electrode group stack (Fig. 3, Element 110 of the inner section of the electrode assembly), and the first positive electrode comprising a first positive current collector (Fig. 3, Element 111 of the inner section of the electrode assembly) and a first positive active material layer(Fig. 3, Element 112 of the inner section of the electrode assembly), the first positive current collector comprising a first surface and a second surface facing oppositely away from the first surface of the first positive current collector (Fig. 3, Element 111 of the inner section of the electrode assembly), the first positive active material layer being on the first and second surfaces of the first positive current collector (Fig. 3, Element 112 of the inner section of the electrode assembly), the second positive electrode comprising a second positive current collector (Fig. 3, Element 111 of the outer section of the electrode assembly), a second positive active material layer (Fig. 3, Element 112 of the outer section of the electrode assembly), wherein the second positive active material layer is on the first surface of the second positive current collector (Fig. 3, Element 112 of the outer section of the electrode assembly), and not on the second surface of the second positive current collector(Fig. 3, Element 110 of the outer section of the electrode assembly), and a thickness of the second positive current collector is less than or equal to a thickness of the first positive current collector ([0037]).
SONG does not disclose an interlayer between the second positive current collector and the second positive active material layer and therefore does not disclose that the second positive current collector comprising a first surface facing the inner layer and a second surface facing oppositely away from the first surface of the second positive current collector. SONG does teach that the binder for the positive active material can include fluorinated polyolefin like poly vinylidene fluoride ([0040]).
LI discloses a similar positive electrode (Fig. 1) for a lithium battery ([0040]). LI further discloses the positive electrode (Fig. 1) comprising a positive current collector (Fig. 1, Element 10), a second positive active material layer (Fig. 1, Element 14), and an interlayer (Fig. 1, Element 12), between the second positive current collector and the second positive active material layer (Fig. 1), wherein the second positive active material layer is on the first surface of the second positive current collector (Fig. 1), and not on the second surface of the second positive current collector (Fig. 1).
LI teaches that the interlayer, known as the safety coating, can improve safety or electrical performances ([0008]-[0010]). [0029] teaches that at a normal temperature, the safety coating relies on a good conductive network formed between the conductive materials to conduct electron conduction. When the temperature rises, the volume of the polymer matrix material begins to expand, the spacing between the particles of the conductive materials increases, and thus the conductive network is partially blocked, so that the resistance of the safety coating increases gradually. LI further teaches that the safety coating can comprise of fluorinated polyolefin.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify, the outermost positive electrode of Song to include the safety coating of Li in between the positive active material layer and the positive current collector to provide a good conductive network formed between the conductive materials to conduct electron conduction .
Regarding claim 2: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above, wherein a ratio of a thickness of the first positive current collector (Fig. 3, Element 111 of the inner section of the electrode assembly) to a thickness of the second positive current collector(Fig. 3, Element 111 of the outer section of the electrode assembly) is 1:0.2 to 1:1 ([0060]).
Regarding claim 5 - 7: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, wherein the interlayer (Li: Fig. 1, Element 12) comprises a binder (Li: [0022]), the binder comprises at least one of a conductive binder or a non-conductive binder (Li: [0023]), and the binder comprises a fluorine-based binder (Li: [0023]); wherein the interlayer comprises a carbon-based conductive material (Li: [0028]); wherein the carbon-based conductive material comprises a fibrous conductive material, and the fibrous conductive material comprises carbon nanotubes, carbon fibers, or a mixture thereof (Li: [0028]).
Regarding claim 8: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, but does not directly disclose the limitation, “wherein a thickness of the interlayer is about 0.1 % to about 30 % of the thickness of the second positive current collector.”
Li does teach in [0044] that the thickness of the safety coating can be greater than or equal to 1 µm and can less than or equal to 40 µm and uses a thickness of 8 µm in multiple examples (Table 2-1 & 3-1) but also has an example where the thickness of the safety coating is 3 µm (Table 1-1)
Song teaches in [0037] that the positive electrode current collector may be formed to a thickness of 3 to 500 µm and uses an example where the positive electrode current collector has a thickness of 20 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of before the effective filing date the claimed invention, to further modify, the safety coating of Li to have a thickness of 8 µm or less and still use the positive current collector of Song to have a 20 µm. This can ensure that the safety coating can improve the safety performance of the battery and will not affect the internal resistance of the battery.
Regarding claim 13 & 14: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, wherein a thickness of the second positive active material layer is greater than or equal to a thickness of the first positive active material layer ([0050]), and a ratio of the thickness of the first positive active material layer to the thickness of the second positive active material layer is 1:1 to 1:3 ([0050]); wherein a mixture density of the second positive active material layer is less than or equal to a mixture density of the first positive active material layer ([0050]), and a ratio of the mixture density of the first positive active material layer to the mixture density of the second positive active material layer is 1:0.5 to 1:1 ([0050]).
While modified Song does not distinguish a first positive active material layer and a second positive active material layer, Figure 3 shows multiple positive active material layer (Element 112). Thus the examiner will recognize the first positive active material layer and a second positive active material layer to be equal.
Regarding claim 15: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, but does not directly disclose, “wherein, in the second positive active material layer, a rate of change of vertical relative force (FVR) according to a depth measured by a surface and interfacial cutting analysis system (SAICAS), from a first point to a second point is about 300 % or less, wherein the first point is separated about 5 % from a surface of the second positive active material layer in a direction toward the second positive current collector, and the second point is separated about 5 % from the first surface of the second positive current collector, with respect to a total thickness of the second positive active material layer.”.
Examiner notes the SAICAS is measured to evaluate the adhesion of coatings and can be affected by the binder, adhesion between the active material layer and the current collector. In the instant application, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) were mostly used as binders for the interlayer and the positive electrode.
Modified Song uses polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) as the interlayer and the positive electrode. While the material used for the positive active material from the instant application is different than the positive active material from Song, they are only different from slightly as the instant application uses aluminum while Song uses manganese. The conductive material and binder are similar used in both.
As the instant application and modified Song are similar composition of the electrode. This can allow a certain level of similar results. MPEP 2183 states that a showing of at least one of three factors by the examiner should be sufficient to support a conclusion that the prior art element is an equivalent. Factor B which states a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the interchangeability of the element shown in the prior art for the corresponding element disclosed in the specification. This is satisfied by the Al and Mn can be interchange while also still providing energy to the battery.
Since modified Song has an equivalent positive electrode when compared to the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of before the effective filing date the claimed invention, to recognize that if SAICAS is used to measure the rate of change of vertical relative force (FVR) by separating the first point about 5 % from a surface of the second positive active material layer in a direction toward the second positive current collector, and separating the second point about 5 % from the first surface of the second positive current collector, with respect to a total thickness of the second positive active material layer to obtain a rate of change of 300% or less.
Regarding claim 16: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, but does not directly disclose, “wherein, in the second positive active material layer, a ratio of a second horizontal force (FH2) at a second point to a first horizontal force (FH1) at a first point, measured by a surface and interfacial cutting analysis system (SAICAS), is about 50 % or more, wherein the first point is separated about 10 % from a surface of the second positive active material layer, in a direction toward the second positive current collector, and the second point is separated about 10 % from the first surface of the second positive current collector in a direction toward the second positive active material layer, with respect to a total depth from the surface of the second positive active material layer to the first surface of the second positive current collector.”.
Examiner notes the SAICAS is measured to evaluate the adhesion of coatings and can be affected by the binder, adhesion between the active material layer and the current collector. In the instant application, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) were mostly used as binders for the interlayer and the positive electrode.
Modified Song uses polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) as the interlayer and the positive electrode. While the material used for the positive active material from the instant application is different than the positive active material from Song, they are only different from slightly as the instant application uses aluminum while Song uses manganese. The conductive material and binder are similar used in both.
As the instant application and modified Song are similar composition of the electrode. This can allow a certain level of similar results. MPEP 2183 states that a showing of at least one of three factors by the examiner should be sufficient to support a conclusion that the prior art element is an equivalent. Factor B which states a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the interchangeability of the element shown in the prior art for the corresponding element disclosed in the specification. This is satisfied by the Al and Mn can be interchange while also still providing energy to the battery.
Since modified Song has an equivalent positive electrode when compared to the instant application, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of before the effective filing date the claimed invention, to recognize that if SAICAS is used to measure the ratio of a second horizontal force (FH2) at a second point to a first horizontal force (FH1) at a first point by separating the first point about 10 % from a surface of the second positive active material layer in a direction toward the second positive current collector, and separating the second point about 10 % from the first surface of the second positive current collector, with respect to a total depth from the surface of the second positive active material layer to the first surface of the second positive current collector to obtain a ratio of 50% or more.
Regarding claim 17 & 18: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, further comprising an electrolyte (Figure 3, Element 130) between at least one of the plurality of positive electrodes and at least one of the one or more negative electrodes ([0048]); wherein the electrolyte is a liquid electrolyte or a solid electrolyte([0048]-[0055]).
Claim(s) 3 & 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SONG (EP3605714A1) with LI (US20190140328A1), and further in view of SANO (JP2011216297A; See Machine Translations for citations)
Regarding claim 3: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, but does not discloses the limitation, “wherein a maximum roughness depth (Rmax) of a surface of the first and second surfaces of the first positive current collector is greater than a maximum roughness of a surface of the first and second surfaces of the second positive current collector, a mean roughness (Ra) of the surface of the first positive current collector is greater than a mean roughness of the surface of the second positive current collector, or a root mean square (RMS) roughness (Rq) of the surface of the first positive current collector is greater than a root mean square roughness of the surface of the second positive current collector”.
Song has the purpose of manufacturing a secondary battery is for it to have high energy. A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that proper adhesion between surfaces of the current collector with active material layer and/or interlayer is require for functionality of a battery.
Sano discloses a similar battery containing an electrode group wherein the positive electrode is disposed on the outermost periphery of the electrode group ([0033] and Figure 1, Element 16) and the negative electrode disposed inside the wound electrode group (Figure 1, Element 15). [0053] discloses the positive current collector to be an arithmetic average roughness or a mean roughness (Ra) of 0.1 to 5μm. [0072] discloses the negative electrode current collector to be an arithmetic average roughness or a mean roughness (Ra) of 0.5 to 10 μm. The positive current collector should have a smooth surface which is 0.2 μm or less is for the electrode group stack to be inserted more easily into the battery case, the contact state between the surface of the current collector-exposed portion and the inner surface of the battery case is further improved, and the contact resistance can be significantly reduced ([0027]). The negative current collector should be more than 0.5 μm for the adhesion between the negative electrode active material layer and the negative electrode current collector to be unaffected ([0036]).
While it does not disclose a second positive electrode, a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize adding more electrode can increase the energy performance of the battery.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of before the effective filing date the claimed invention, to further modify, the electrode group stack of Song to have the mean roughness of the innermost positive current collector (Ra of 0.5 to 10 μm) on both surfaces to be greater than the outermost positive current collector (Ra of 0.5 to 10 μm) for the surface contacting the active material layer and a mean roughness (Ra) of 0.1 to 0.2 μm for the surfaced contacting the battery case to allow the electrode group stack to be inserted more easily into the battery case along with proper adhesion between active material layer and the current collector.
Regarding claim 4: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, a mean roughness (Ra) of the surface of the second positive current collector is less than about 2 μm (SANO: [0073]). While modified Song does not disclose the limitation, “wherein a maximum roughness depth (Rmax) of a surface of the first and second surfaces the second positive current collector is about 3 μm or less or a root mean square roughness (Rq) of the surface of the second positive current collector is about 2 μm or less, due to the claim language of “or”, only one limitation needs to be satisfied to reject this claim.
Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SONG JOOYONG (EP3605714A1) with LI ZHENHUA (US20190140328A1), and further in view of Koo (US20200044257A1).
Regarding claim 9-11: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1, wherein the second positive active material layer ([0033]) comprises a second positive active material ([0033]) and a binder ([0033]), wherein the binder comprises a fibrillized binder([0041]), and the binder comprises a fluorine-based binder([0040]); wherein the second positive active material layer further comprises a conductive material ([0033]), the conductive material is a conductive material ([0034]), and the conductive material comprises a carbon-based conductive material([0039]).
Song does not disclose the positive active material layer, binder, and conductive material to be manufactured while dry. But [0034] teaches that the positive electrode is mixed together first then dried.
Koo discloses a similar positive electrode for a secondary battery ([0002]), wherein the positive active material layer ([0021]) comprises a positive active material ([0021]) and a binder ([0021]), the second positive active material is a dry positive active material ([0021]), and the binder is a dry binder ([0021]), the binder comprises a fluorine-based binder ([0034]); wherein the second positive active material layer further comprises a conductive material ([0033]), the conductive material is a dry conductive material ([0021]), and the dry conductive material comprises a carbon-based conductive material([0025]).
Koo does not directly disclose the dry binder to comprise a fibrillized binder. Koo does disclose that applying high shear force improves the adhesion of the positive electrode ([0034]).
Examiner notes that high shear force applied to a binder can cause it to form fine strands.
Koo teaches that the method of dry mixing can increase the content of a conductive material in the positive electrode, minimize thickness deviation, capacity variation of a battery may be reduced and improve the lifespan of the battery ([0014] &[0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of before the effective filing date the claimed invention, to further modify, the outermost positive active material layer of Song with the dry mixing method of Koo to manufacture a positive active material layer to increase the content of a conductive material in the positive electrode, minimize thickness deviation, capacity variation of a battery may be reduced and improve the lifespan of the battery.
Regarding claim 12: Modified SONG discloses the lithium battery of the limitations set forth above in claim 1 and claims 9-11, wherein the second positive active material layer is free of a residual processing solvent (Koo: [0014]).
While Koo doesn’t directly disclose that the positive active material layer is a self-standing film. The instant application defines a self-standing film as a film shape without a support. Examiner notes that a self-standing film must be flexible. [0036] of Koo discloses that a positive electrode is disposed on the current collector and then rolled.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art as of before the effective filing date the claimed invention, to further modify, the outermost positive active material layer of Song with the dry mixing method of Koo to manufacture a positive active material layer that can be rolled and free of residual solvents. Thus renders the limitation, “wherein the second positive active material layer is a self-standing film”, obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIK L TILLMAN-SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-8848. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 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, 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.
/ELTS/Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights