CTNF 18/363,737 CTNF 101821 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification The disclosure is objected to for the following informality: In paragraph [0024], “CTNs” should be “CNTs” Appropriate correction is required. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed 08/02/2023, 12/18/2023, 08/10/2024, and 01/09/2025 have been considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (U.S. Publication number: 2024/0290984 A1), hereinafter Moon . Regarding claim 1, Moon teaches: a negative electrode (Abstract, Figure, paragraph [0065]) comprising a negative electrode current collector; (current collector 100, Figure, paragraph [0065]) a negative electrode active material layer supported on the negative electrode current collector, (active material layer 200, Figure, paragraph [0065]) wherein the negative electrode active material layer includes a negative electrode active material and single-wall carbon nanotubes, (paragraph [0022]) the negative electrode active material consists essentially of graphite, (only graphite may be used as the negative electrode material, paragraph[0028]) Regarding claim 1, Moon fails to disclose specifically: a mass proportion of the single-wall carbon nanotubes to the negative electrode active material is 0.02 mass% or more and 0.08 mass% or less. Moon teaches in paragraph [0042]: The carbon nanotube structure may be included in an amount of, for example, 0.005 wt % to 0.2 wt % in the negative electrode active material layer. The carbon nanotube wt% range disclosed in Moon overlaps the claimed carbon nanotube mass% range. Absent any additional and more specific information, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP § 2144.05 I) Regarding claim 4, Moon teaches: The negative electrode according to claim 1, wherein the negative electrode is a negative electrode of a lithium ion secondary battery Moon teaches that the negative electrode of claim 1 as discussed above is part of a lithium ion secondary battery (paragraphs [0009], [0012], [0097]-[0111], which teach all of the components that a skilled artisan would recognize to inherently form a lithium ion battery). Regarding claim 5, Moon teaches: A secondary battery (paragraphs [0097]-[0098]) comprising: a positive electrode (paragraph [0099]); the negative electrode according to claim 1 (see above); and an electrolyte (paragraph [0107]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (U.S. Publication number: 2024/0290984 A1), hereinafter Moon , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Onuma et al. (U.S. Publication Number: US 2022/02469797 A1), hereinafter Onuma . The teachings of Moon as discussed in claim 1 are incorporated herein. Regarding Claim 2, Moon fails to disclose: The negative electrode according to claim 1, wherein an average diameter of the single-wall carbon nanotubes is 0.5 nm or more and 3.0 nm or less. Onuma teaches: A negative electrode (12) comprising a negative electrode current collector (12A), with a negative active material layer (32A) supported on the current collector and comprising active material (121) and single-walled carbon nanotubes (123) (Figures 2 and 4-6, paragraph [0087]) the single-walled carbon nanotubes each have an outer diameter of approximately 1 nm to approximately 2 nm (paragraph [0064]) The range of single-wall carbon nanotube diameters disclosed in Onuma falls within the range in the claimed invention. Onuma further teaches that the smaller diameter enhances the dispersibility of the single-wall carbon nanotubes, which increases the electron conductivity of the negative electrode active material layer (paragraph [0065]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the narrower diameter range of single-wall carbon nanotube diameters disclosed in Onuma into the negative electrode in Moon in order to enhance dispersibility of the nanotubes in the active material layer. The diameter range of single-wall carbon nanotubes in Onuma falls completely within the claimed range. Absent any additional and more specific information, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP § 2144.05) 07-22-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (U.S. Publication number: 2024/0290984 A1), hereinafter Moon , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamakawa (U.S. Publication Number: US 2024/0234708 A1), hereinafter Yamakawa . The teachings of Moon as discussed above in claim 1 are incorporated herein. Regarding claim 3, Moon fails to disclose: The negative electrode according to claim 1, wherein a proportion of graphite in the negative electrode active material is 99 mass% or more. Yamakawa teaches: The graphite content in all negative active materials contained in negative active material layer is more preferably 99% by mass or more (paragraph [0062]) The mass% disclosed in Yamakawa falls within the range in the claimed invention. Yamakawa teaches that by mainly using graphite as the negative active material, the capacity retention ratio after a charge-discharge cycle can be further increased. (paragraph [0062]) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the mass% range of graphite disclosed in Yamakawa into the negative electrode active materials in Moon in order to increase the capacity retention ratio. The mass% range overlaps the claimed graphite mass% range. Absent any additional and more specific information, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. (MPEP § 2144.05 I) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mario Gamboa whose telephone number is (571) 272-9213. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:00 -5:00, Fri 8:00-12:00 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at (571) 272-1481. 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. /MARIO R GAMBOA/Examiner, Art Unit 1729 /ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729 Application/Control Number: 18/363,737 Page 2 Art Unit: 1729 Application/Control Number: 18/363,737 Page 3 Art Unit: 1729 Application/Control Number: 18/363,737 Page 4 Art Unit: 1729 Application/Control Number: 18/363,737 Page 5 Art Unit: 1729 Application/Control Number: 18/363,737 Page 6 Art Unit: 1729 Application/Control Number: 18/363,737 Page 7 Art Unit: 1729