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 .
Status of the Claims
The claims submitted 10/19/2023 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-22 are pending and examined herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 9-10, 18, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2015-164127 A (“Nagayama” – machine translation of record dated 12/16/2025 cited herein).
Regarding claims 1-2, Nagayama discloses a negative electrode composition comprising Si composite carbon particles (A), natural graphite particles (B), artificial graphite particles (C) ([0019]) and a conductive additive ([0197]).
Nagayama discloses examples comprising Si composite carbon particles (A) having a BET specific surface area (SA) of 16.4 m2/g, natural graphite particles (B1) having an SA of 4.6 m2/g, and artificial graphite particles (C1) having an SA of 1.1 m2/g (Table 1; [0247]-[0249]). Note that the comparative examples anticipate the claim as well (Table 1; [0253]-[0254]).
Regarding claim 9, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 2. Nagayama discloses Examples wherein the natural graphite particles (B1) and artificial graphite particles (C1) are provided in a mass ratio of 30:70 based on the total mass of natural graphite particles (B1) and artificial graphite particles (C1) ([0247]-[0249]).
Regarding claim 10, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 1. Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition further comprises a binder ([0191]-[0196]).
Regarding claim 18, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 1. Nagayama discloses a negative electrode comprising a current collector and an active material layer formed on the current collector, the active material layer including the negative electrode composition ([0191]).
Regarding claims 21-22, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode of claim 18. Nagayama further discloses a cylindrical lithium-ion secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, the negative electrode, and a separator between the positive electrode and the negative electrode ([0203], [0217]-[0218]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 3-7, 11-12, 14-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2015-164127 A (“Nagayama” – machine translation of record dated 12/16/2025 cited herein).
Regarding claim 3, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 2. Nagayama does not expressly disclose the BET specific surface area of the silicon carbon composite is greater than the BET specific surface area of the natural graphite by 1 m2/g to 9 m2/g. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the Si composite carbon particles (A) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 17 m2/g or less ([0037]). If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, resulting in poor high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics. On the other hand, if the specific surface area is too large, the activity of the active material in the electrolyte becomes excessive, leading to a large initial irreversible capacity, which tends to prevent the manufacture of high-capacity non-aqueous secondary batteries ([0038]). Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the natural graphite particles (B) is preferably 3 m2/g or more and 6 m2/g or less ([0129]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0129]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the difference between the two through routine experimentation as Nagayama teaches the SA of the Si composite carbon particles (A) affects the high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, output characteristics, and initial irreversible capacity; and the SA of the natural graphite particles (B) affects initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics.
Regarding claim 4, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 2. Nagayama does not expressly disclose the BET specific surface area of the silicon carbon composite is greater than the BET specific surface area of the artificial graphite by 2 m2/g to 10 m2/g. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the Si composite carbon particles (A) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 17 m2/g or less ([0037]). If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, resulting in poor high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics. On the other hand, if the specific surface area is too large, the activity of the active material in the electrolyte becomes excessive, leading to a large initial irreversible capacity, which tends to prevent the manufacture of high-capacity non-aqueous secondary batteries ([0038]). Nagayama further discloses the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 5 m2/g or less ([0145]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0145]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the difference between the two through routine experimentation as Nagayama teaches the SA of the Si composite carbon particles (A) affects the high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, output characteristics, and initial irreversible capacity; and the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) affects initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics.
Regarding claim 5, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 2. Nagayama does not expressly disclose the BET specific surface area of the natural graphite is greater than the BET specific surface area of the artificial graphite by 0.1 m2/g to 2 m2/g. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the natural graphite particles (B) is preferably 3 m2/g or more and 6 m2/g or less ([0129]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0129]). Nagayama further discloses the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 5 m2/g or less ([0145]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0145]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the difference between the two through routine experimentation as Nagayama teaches the SA of the natural graphite particles (B) the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) affects the initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics.
Regarding claim 6, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 2. It is recognized that BET specific surface area is generally correlated with pore volume (see e.g. Table 1 and [0153]-[0156] of US 2021/0408527 A1, of record). It is therefore assumed that the claimed relationship between the pore volumes is necessarily present in the Examples of Nagayama wherein the Si composite carbon particles (A), natural graphite particles (B1), and artificial graphite particles (C1) have BET specific surface areas (SA) of 16.4 m2/g, 4.6 m2/g, and 1.1 m2/g, respectively. Alternatively, the claimed relationship between the pore volumes would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of Nagayama’s disclosure of BET specific surface areas affecting the high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, output characteristics, initial irreversible capacity, initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics ([0038], [0129], [0145]).
Regarding claim 7, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 2. Nagayama discloses an example wherein the BET specific surface area (SA) of the artificial graphite particles (C1) is 1.1 m2/g (Table 1; [0250]-[0252]).
Nagayama does not expressly disclose the natural graphite has a BET specific surface area of 1.5 m2/g or more and 3.5 m2/g or less. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the natural graphite particles (B) is 1 m2/g or more and 6 m2/g or less ([0129]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0129]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the BET specific surface area of the natural graphite particles to limit a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation while providing high high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics.
Regarding claims 11-12, Nagayama discloses a method for preparing a negative electrode composition comprising Si composite carbon particles (A), natural graphite particles (B), artificial graphite particles (C) ([0019]) and a conductive additive ([0197]).
Nagayama discloses examples comprising Si composite carbon particles (A) having a BET specific surface area (SA) of 16.4 m2/g, natural graphite particles (B1) having an SA of 4.6 m2/g, and artificial graphite particles (C1) having an SA of 1.1 m2/g (Table 1; [0247]-[0249]). Note that the comparative examples anticipate the claim as well (Table 1; [0253]-[0254]).
Nagayama discloses there are no particular restrictions on the mixing method of the negative electrode composition ([0183]) and discloses the components of the negative electrode composition are dispersed in a dispersion medium to form a slurry, where water is used as the dispersion medium ([0198]).
Nagayama does not expressly disclose forming a first mixture by mixing water with a negative electrode conductive material; and forming a second mixture by mixing a silicon carbon composite and a graphite with the first mixture (emphasis added). However, forming such a first mixture and a second mixture would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as the selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious. In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930). See also MPEP 2144.04(IV)(C). Moreover, as noted above, Nagayama discloses there are no particular restrictions on the mixing method of the negative electrode composition ([0183]) and one would expect predictable results from first dispersing the negative electrode conductive material then adding the silicon carbon composite and the graphite.
Regarding claim 14, modified Nagayama discloses the method of claim 12. Nagayama discloses Examples wherein the natural graphite particles (B1) and artificial graphite particles (C1) are provided in a mass ratio of 30:70 based on the total mass of natural graphite particles (B1) and artificial graphite particles (C1) ([0247]-[0249]).
Regarding claim 15, modified Nagayama discloses the method of claim 12. Nagayama does not expressly disclose the BET specific surface area of the silicon carbon composite is greater than the BET specific surface area of the natural graphite by 1 m2/g to 9 m2/g. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the Si composite carbon particles (A) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 17 m2/g or less ([0037]). If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, resulting in poor high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics. On the other hand, if the specific surface area is too large, the activity of the active material in the electrolyte becomes excessive, leading to a large initial irreversible capacity, which tends to prevent the manufacture of high-capacity non-aqueous secondary batteries ([0038]). Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the natural graphite particles (B) is preferably 3 m2/g or more and 6 m2/g or less ([0129]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0129]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the difference between the two through routine experimentation as Nagayama teaches the SA of the Si composite carbon particles (A) affects the high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, output characteristics, and initial irreversible capacity; and the SA of the natural graphite particles (B) affects initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics.
Regarding claim 16, modified Nagayama discloses the method of claim 12. Nagayama does not expressly disclose the BET specific surface area of the silicon carbon composite is greater than the BET specific surface area of the artificial graphite by 2 m2/g to 10 m2/g. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the Si composite carbon particles (A) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 17 m2/g or less ([0037]). If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, resulting in poor high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics. On the other hand, if the specific surface area is too large, the activity of the active material in the electrolyte becomes excessive, leading to a large initial irreversible capacity, which tends to prevent the manufacture of high-capacity non-aqueous secondary batteries ([0038]). Nagayama further discloses the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 5 m2/g or less ([0145]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0145]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the difference between the two through routine experimentation as Nagayama teaches the SA of the Si composite carbon particles (A) affects the high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, output characteristics, and initial irreversible capacity; and the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) affects initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics.
Regarding claim 17, modified Nagayama discloses the method of claim 12. Nagayama does not expressly disclose the BET specific surface area of the natural graphite is greater than the BET specific surface area of the artificial graphite by 0.1 m2/g to 2 m2/g. However, Nagayama discloses the BET specific surface area (SA) of the natural graphite particles (B) is preferably 3 m2/g or more and 6 m2/g or less ([0129]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0129]). Nagayama further discloses the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) is preferably 1 m2/g or more and 5 m2/g or less ([0145]). If the specific surface area is too large, when used as a negative electrode active material, the reactivity between the exposed portion and the electrolyte increases, which tends to lead to a decrease in initial efficiency and an increase in gas generation, making it difficult to obtain a desirable battery. If the specific surface area is too small, there are fewer areas for lithium ions to enter and exit, which tends to result in inferior high-speed charge/discharge characteristics and output characteristics ([0145]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the difference between the two through routine experimentation as Nagayama teaches the SA of the natural graphite particles (B) the SA of the artificial graphite particles (C) affects the initial efficiency, gas generation, high-speed charge/discharge characteristics, and output characteristics.
Regarding claim 19, modified Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 6. Nagayama discloses a negative electrode comprising a current collector and an active material layer formed on the current collector, the active material layer including the negative electrode composition ([0191]).
Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2015-164127 A (“Nagayama” – machine translation of record dated 12/16/2025 cited herein) in view of US 2022/0255060 A1 (“Oh”).
Regarding claim 8, Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 1. Nagayama discloses the mass ratio of Si composite carbon particles (A) is 1% by mass or more and 50% by mass or less ([0178]), the mass ratio of natural graphite particles (B) is 30% by mass or more and 90% by mass or less ([0179]), and the mass ratio of artificial graphite particles (C) is 30% by mass or more and 90% by mass or less ([0181]) based on the total amount of Si composite carbon particles (A), natural graphite particles (B), and artificial graphite particles (C). See also Example 2, where the mass ratio of Si composite carbon particles (A)/natural graphite particles (B1)/artificial graphite particles (C1) = 50/15/35 ([0248]); and Example 3, where mass ratio of Si composite carbon particles (A)/natural graphite particles (B1)/artificial graphite particles (C1) = 30/21/49 ([0249]).
Nagayama discloses the conductive additive is not particularly limited ([0197]) but does not expressly disclose the negative electrode conductive material includes single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT), wherein the single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) is included in an amount of 0.01 part by weight to 5 parts by weight.
Oh discloses a negative electrode active material containing a silicon-based active material and a carbon-based active material, a binder, and single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates. The single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates are comprised at 0.05 parts by weight to 0.37 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the silicon-based active material in the negative electrode active material layer (Abstract). The specific amount of the single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates can form a stable conductive network in a negative electrode active material layer due to its long fiber length and high conductivity, and thus the electrical connection between active materials can be maintained even when the negative electrode active material is volumetrically expanded/contracted due to charging and discharging, resulting in an improvement in lifetime characteristics of the negative electrode and a secondary battery ([0016], [0025]-[0026]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates in an amount of 0.05 parts by weight to 0.37 parts by weight as taught by Oh to improve lifetime characteristics of the negative electrode and a secondary battery.
Regarding claim 20, modified Nagayama discloses the negative electrode composition of claim 8. Nagayama discloses a negative electrode comprising a current collector and an active material layer formed on the current collector, the active material layer including the negative electrode composition ([0191]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2015-164127 A (“Nagayama” – machine translation of record dated 12/16/2025 cited herein) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US 2022/0255060 A1 (“Oh”).
Regarding claim 8, Nagayama discloses the method of claim 11. Nagayama discloses the mass ratio of Si composite carbon particles (A) is 1% by mass or more and 50% by mass or less ([0178]), the mass ratio of natural graphite particles (B) is 30% by mass or more and 90% by mass or less ([0179]), and the mass ratio of artificial graphite particles (C) is 30% by mass or more and 90% by mass or less ([0181]) based on the total amount of Si composite carbon particles (A), natural graphite particles (B), and artificial graphite particles (C). See also Example 2, where the mass ratio of Si composite carbon particles (A)/natural graphite particles (B1)/artificial graphite particles (C1) = 50/15/35 ([0248]); and Example 3, where mass ratio of Si composite carbon particles (A)/natural graphite particles (B1)/artificial graphite particles (C1) = 30/21/49 ([0249]).
Nagayama discloses the conductive additive is not particularly limited ([0197]) but does not expressly disclose the negative electrode conductive material includes single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT), wherein the single-walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) is included in an amount of 0.01 part by weight to 5 parts by weight.
Oh discloses a negative electrode active material containing a silicon-based active material and a carbon-based active material, a binder, and single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates. The single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates are comprised at 0.05 parts by weight to 0.37 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the silicon-based active material in the negative electrode active material layer (Abstract). The specific amount of the single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates can form a stable conductive network in a negative electrode active material layer due to its long fiber length and high conductivity, and thus the electrical connection between active materials can be maintained even when the negative electrode active material is volumetrically expanded/contracted due to charging and discharging, resulting in an improvement in lifetime characteristics of the negative electrode and a secondary battery ([0016], [0025]-[0026]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include single-walled carbon nanotube aggregates in an amount of 0.05 parts by weight to 0.37 parts by weight as taught by Oh to improve lifetime characteristics of the negative electrode and a secondary battery.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2023/0223537 A1 discloses a negative electrode active material comprising silicon carbon composite particles and artificial graphite (Abstract; [0230]). In Example 3, the silicon carbon composite particles have a BET specific surface area of 5.4 m2/g and the artificial graphite has a BET specific surface area of 2.7 m2/g (Table 2; [0230]).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Scott Carrico whose telephone number is (571)270-5504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:15AM-6PM ET.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
Robert Scott Carrico
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/Robert S Carrico/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights