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 .
2. The Applicant's amendments filed on July 6, 2026, were received. Claims 1, 4-7, 10 and 14-17 have been amended. None of the Claims have been cancelled, withdrawn from consideration, or added as new. Therefore, Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action.
3. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action issued on April 6, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. The rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugita et al. (US 2016/0254545 A1), has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 7-10 of the Remarks dated July 6, 2026.
5. Claims 1-6, 8, 10-16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He et al. (US 2022/0223926 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, He et al. disclose in Figures 2-3, a current collector for a rechargeable lithium battery, a substrate, such as an electrode layer; and a functional layer on the substrate, called an elastic polymer protective layer (paragraphs 0016-0018), wherein the functional layer, or elastic polymer protective layer, includes a flame retardant, called a flame retardant additive (paragraphs 0025-0028), a conductive material (paragraph 0035), and a binder, called an high-elasticity polymer (paragraphs 0033-0034), and wherein the flame retardant is included in an amount of 0.1% - 95% (paragraph 0025), which meets the claimed limitation of about 75 to about 90 wt%, based on a total amount of the functional layer.
With regard to Claim 2, He et al. disclose wherein: the flame retardant includes a nitrogen-based flame retardant, a phosphorus-based flame retardant, a halogen-based flame retardant, or a combination thereof (paragraph 0026).
With regard to Claim 3, He et al. disclose wherein: the nitrogen-based flame retardant includes melamine, a melamine-based copolymer, or a combination thereof (paragraph 0026).
With regard to Claim 4, He et al. disclose wherein: the flame retardant is included in an amount of 0.1% - 95% (paragraph 0025), which meets the claimed limitation of about 80 to about 90 wt% based on a total amount of the functional layer.
With regard to Claim 5, He et al. disclose wherein: the conductive material is included in an amount of 0.1% - 50% (paragraph 0035), which meets the claimed limitation of an amount of greater than about 0 wt% and less than or equal to about 25 wt%.
With regard to Claim 6, He et al. disclose wherein: the binder is inherently included in an amount of greater than about 0 wt% and less than or equal to about 25 wt% since the flame retardant is included in an amount of 0.1% - 95% (paragraph 0025) and the conductive material is included in an amount of 0.1% - 50% (paragraph 0035).
With regard to Claim 8, He et al. disclose wherein: the functional layer has a thickness of 2 nm – 100 µm (paragraph 0013), which meets the claimed limitation of about 1 µm to about 5 µm.
With regard to Claim 10, He et al. disclose an electrode comprising: a current collector, and an electrode active material layer on at least one surface of the current collector (paragraphs 0016-0018); and wherein: the current collector includes a substrate and a functional layer, called an elastic polymer protective layer, between the substrate and the electrode active material layer (paragraphs 0016-0018), wherein the functional layer, or elastic polymer protective layer, includes a flame retardant, called a flame retardant additive (paragraphs 0025-0028), a conductive material (paragraph 0035), and a binder, called an high-elasticity polymer (paragraphs 0033-0034), and wherein the flame retardant is included in an amount of 0.1% - 95% (paragraph 0025), which meets the claimed limitation of about 75 to about 90 wt%, based on a total amount of the functional layer.
With regard to Claim 11, He et al. disclose wherein: the electrode active material layer is a positive electrode active material layer, and the positive electrode active material layer includes a nickel-cobalt-manganese (NCM) based composite oxide, a nickel-cobalt-aluminum (NCA)-based composite oxide, a nickel manganese (Ni-Mn)-based composite oxide, or a combination thereof (paragraphs 0043-0048).
With regard to Claim 12, He et al. disclose wherein: the flame retardant includes a nitrogen-based flame retardant, a phosphorus-based flame retardant, a halogen-based flame retardant, or a combination thereof (paragraph 0026).
With regard to Claim 13, He et al. disclose wherein: the nitrogen-based flame retardant includes melamine, a melamine-based copolymer, or a combination thereof (paragraph 0026).
With regard to Claim 14, He et al. disclose wherein: the flame retardant is included in an amount of 0.1% - 95% (paragraph 0025), which meets the claimed limitation of about 80 to about 90 wt% based on a total amount of the functional layer.
With regard to Claim 15, He et al. disclose wherein: the conductive material is included in an amount of 0.1% - 50% (paragraph 0035), which meets the claimed limitation of an amount of greater than about 0 wt% and less than or equal to about 25 wt%.
With regard to Claim 16, He et al. disclose wherein: the binder is inherently included in an amount of greater than about 0 wt% and less than or equal to about 25 wt% since the flame retardant is included in an amount of 0.1% - 95% (paragraph 0025) and the conductive material is included in an amount of 0.1% - 50% (paragraph 0035).
With regard to Claim 18, He et al. disclose wherein: the functional layer has a thickness of 2 nm – 100 µm (paragraph 0013), which meets the claimed limitation of about 1 µm to about 5 µm.
With regard to Claim 20, He et al. disclose in Figures 2-3, a rechargeable lithium battery, comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; a separator between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, and an electrolyte solution, wherein the positive electrode, the negative electrode, or both of the positive electrode and the negative electrode are the electrode noted above (paragraphs 0013-0014, 0016-0018).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 7, 9, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 2022/0223926 A1), as applied to Claims 1-6, 8, 10-16, 18 and 20 above.
With regard to Claim 7, He et al. disclose the current collector in paragraph 5 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein: a weight ratio of a content of the flame retardant; and a sum of the contents of the conductive material and the binder is about 75:25 to about 90:10. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the current collector of He et al. to include a weight ratio of a content of the flame retardant; and a sum of the contents of the conductive material and the binder to be about 75:25 to about 90, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
With regard to Claim 9, He et al. disclose the current collector in paragraph 5 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein: a ratio of a thickness of the functional layer; and a thickness of the substrate is about 1:10 to about 2.5:10. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the current collector of He et al. to include a ratio of a thickness of the functional layer; and a thickness of the substrate to be about 1:10 to about 2.5:10, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
With regard to Claim 17, He et al. disclose the electrode in paragraph 5 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein: a weight ratio of a content of the flame retardant; and a sum of the contents of the conductive material and the binder is about 75:25 to about 90:10. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode of He et al. to include a weight ratio of a content of the flame retardant; and a sum of the contents of the conductive material and the binder to be about 75:25 to about 90, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
With regard to Claim 19, He et al. disclose the electrode in paragraph 5 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein: a ratio of a thickness of the functional layer; and a thickness of the substrate is about 1:10 to about 2.5:10. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the electrode of He et al. to include a ratio of a thickness of the functional layer; and a thickness of the substrate to be about 1:10 to about 2.5:10, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
Response to Arguments
10. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-10, filed July 6, 2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-20 as being anticipated by Sugita et al. (US 2016/0254545 A1), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of He et al. (US 2022/0223926 A1).
Conclusion
11. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARIE O APICELLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 5:00PM 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/KARIE O'NEILL APICELLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights