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 with traverse of Group I (drawn to a battery cell), Species B1 (wherein the silicon is silicon columns), and Species C2 (wherein the surface is roughened) in the reply filed on 05/01/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search and examination burden to examine all groups and species. This is not found persuasive because there are different classifications and also different search terms necessary when examining the different species and groups which is a search burden. It is noted that claim 8 is drawn to Species B2 (drawn to wherein the silicon is Si particles, Si wires, Si flakes and porous silicon) which is not elected and therefore claim 8 is also withdrawn. It is noted that claim 2 is drawn to Species C1 (wherein the first surface of the first current collector is flat) which is not elected and therefore claim 2 is also withdrawn. Claims 1, 3-7, 9 and 10 are drawn Group I, Species B1, and Species C2 and will be examined.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 2, 8 and 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group II (drawn to a method of manufacturing a battery cell), Species B2 (drawn to wherein the silicon is Si particles, Si wires, Si flakes and porous silicon) and Species C1 (wherein the first surface of the first current collector is flat), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 05/01/2026.
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.
Claims 3 and 4 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the first surface” which lacks antecedent basis. Further clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 appears to be drawn to claim 3 and not claim 2 since claim 3 appears to require a roughened surface. It is unclear how the surface of claim 4 can be flat as required by claim 2 since it has heights which differ. Further clarification and/or appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Symons (WO 2023239599 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Symons discloses a battery cell comprising (see Fig. 1 shows anode structure and pg. 3-4 and pg. 35 Battery Features section, note that a solid-electrolyte can be used and claim 56):
an anode electrode comprising (see Fig. 1 shows anode structure and pg. 3-4):
a first current collector (see 103 and 105 of Fig. 1);
anode active material (silicon lithium storage layer 107 of Fig. 1) arranged on a first surface of the first current collector and configured to exchange lithium ions, wherein the anode active material comprises silicon;
empty spaces formed in the anode active material in a predetermined
pattern (nanostructures will have a predetermined planned and pg. 4 and empty spaces are between nanopillar structures);
a solid electrolyte layer (pg. 35 Battery Features section pgs. 36-39, see pg. 39, lines 9-17 and claim 56) arranged adjacent to the anode electrode; and
a cathode electrode comprising (pg. 35 Battery Features section, note that a solid-electrolyte can be used and claim 56 and pgs. 35-36):
a second current collector (current collector, pg. 36); and
a cathode active material (lithium metal oxides or compounds, pgs. 35-36) configured to exchange lithium ions and arranged adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer (pg. 35 Battery Features section pgs. 36-39, see pg. 39, lines 9-17 and claim 56).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Symons discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Symons discloses the first surface of the first current collector is roughened, and a highest point of the first current collector minus a lowest point of the first current collector is in a range from 0.1 µm to 20 µm and between 0.1 µm to 12 µm (measurement Rz is within the claimed range see pg. 8-9).
The maximum height of the profile indicates the absolute vertical distance between the maximum profile peak height and the maximum profile valley depth along the sampling length.
Regarding claim 5, Symons discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Symons discloses wherein the silicon of the anode active material includes silicon columns (see pg. 4 lines 15-30).
Regarding claim 6, Symons discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Symons discloses the silicon columns have a semi-major axis in a range from 0.5 to 80 µm (height in the range of 4 μm to 5 μm) and the silicon columns have a semi-minor axis in a range from 0.5 to 80 µm (width in the range 2 μm to 3 μm).
Regarding claim 9, Symons discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Symons discloses a hydride-based solid electrolyte (pg. 38 lines 5-25).
Claim(s) 1 and 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Brewer (US 20230142782 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Brewer discloses a battery cell comprising [0087]-[0103]:
an anode electrode comprising (see Fig. 1 100 [0027]):
a first current collector (101);
anode active material (see Fig. 1 104 [0027]-[0031]) arranged on a first surface of the first current collector (101) and configured to exchange lithium ions ([0027]-[0031]), wherein the anode active material comprises silicon[0027]-[0031]);
empty spaces formed in the anode active material in a predetermined pattern (columnar structures are spaced apart closes to bases and therefore empty spaces are provided in a pattern [0004]);
a solid electrolyte layer arranged adjacent to the anode electrode ([0101]); and
a cathode electrode comprising ([0091]):
a second current collector ([0091]); and cathode active material configured ([0091]) to exchange lithium ions and arranged adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer ([0088]).
Regarding claim 5, Brewer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Brewer discloses wherein the silicon of the anode active material includes silicon columns ([0027]-[0031]).
Regarding claim 6, Brewer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Brewer discloses the silicon columns have a semi-major axis in a range from 0.5 to 80 µm (height in the range of 9 μm to 15 μm) and the silicon columns have a semi-minor axis in a range from 0.5 to 80 µm (width in the range 8 μm to 10 μm) ([0030]).
Regarding claim 7, Brewer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Brewer discloses the silicon columns have a semi-major axis in a range from 4 to 12 µm (height in the range of 9 μm) and the silicon columns have a semi-minor axis in a range from 4 to12 µm (width in the range 4.5 μm) [0030].
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Symons (WO 2023239599 A1) as applied to claims 1, 3-6, and 9 above and in further view of Yeo (US 20190157648 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Symons discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Symons discloses a cathode active material (lithium metal oxides or compounds, pgs. 35-36) configured to exchange lithium ions and arranged adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer (pg. 35 Battery Features section pgs. 36-39, see pg. 39, lines 9-17 and claim 56).
However, Symons does not disclose wherein the cathode electrode comprises cathode active material in a range from 30 to 98 wt%, solid electrolyte in a range from 0.1 to 50wt% , a conductive additive in a range from 0.1 to 30 wt%, and a binder in a range from 0.1 to 20wt%.
Yeo discloses a cathode electrode that comprises cathode active material in a range from 30 to 98 wt%, solid electrolyte in a range from 0.1 to 50wt%, a conductive additive in a range from 0.1 to 30 wt%, and a binder in a range from 0.1 to 20wt% ([0065]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the cathode of Symons with the cathode of Yeo because Symons discloses a variety of cathode materials can be used and Yeo discloses a cathode which is an effective cathode in a lithium ion solid state battery.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brewer (US 20230142782 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 5-7 above and in further view of Yeo (US 20190157648 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Brewer discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Brewer discloses a cathode active material [0090], solid electrolyte[0101], and conductive additive [0102].
However, Brewer does not disclose wherein the cathode electrode comprises cathode active material in a range from 30 to 98 wt%, solid electrolyte in a range from 0.1 to 50wt% , a conductive additive in a range from 0.1 to 30 wt%, and a binder in a range from 0.1 to 20wt%.
Yeo discloses a cathode electrode that comprises cathode active material in a range from 30 to 98 wt%, solid electrolyte in a range from 0.1 to 50wt%, a conductive additive in a range from 0.1 to 30 wt%, and a binder in a range from 0.1 to 20wt% ([0065]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the cathode of Brewer with the cathode of Yeo because Brewer discloses a variety of cathode materials can be used and Yeo discloses a cathode which is an effective cathode in a lithium ion solid state battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights