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 .
Summary
Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments submitted June 26th, 2026 have been entered into the file. Currently, claims 1 and 5-7 are amended, claims 8-10 are newly added, and claims 2-3 are cancelled without prejudice, resulting in claims 1 and 4-10 pending for examination.
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.
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.
Claims 1, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao (CN112467076A; US20240014375A1 used for purposes of translation) and further in view of Nagai (JP2011187186A).
Regarding claim 1, Yao teaches:
An electrode body, comprising: a stack of a negative electrode plate, a positive electrode plate, and a separator in which the separator is arranged between the negative electrode plate and the positive electrode plate (Yao discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode piece and negative electrode piece with specific macro-pore/micro-mesopore surface areas (claim 1), a current collector (claim 10), and a conductive agent (claims 4 and 7) for respective electrode pieces. Although Yao does not explicitly recite a 'separator' as a separate component, the disclosed battery structure inherently includes a separator because the term 'lithium-ion battery' inherently requires a separator disposed between the positive and negative electrode pieces to prevent electrical short-circuiting and to allow for ion conduction via an electrolyte (MPEP § 2112). It is well-known in the art that a lithium-ion battery cannot function as a rechargeable energy storage device without a separator to keep the cathode and anode physically separated. Therefore, the separator is an inherent characteristic of the claimed 'lithium-ion battery' of Yao.),
wherein the positive electrode plate has a positive electrode density of 3.0 g/cm3 or less (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; positive electrode density is 2.6 g/cm3),
the negative electrode plate has a negative electrode density of 1.3 g/cm3 or less (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; negative electrode density is 0.8 g/cm3),
and a ratio of a specific surface area of the positive electrode plate to a specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is 0.7 or greater (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; macro-pore specific surface area ratio ~4.06 and micro-mesopore specific area ratio is 3.5 when the specific surface area ratio =
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
r
e
a
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
r
e
a
),
Yao further teaches an electrode body wherein the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate is 3.2 m2/g, which falls within the claimed range of 2.5 m2/g to 4.0 m2/g (Yao, specification, pg 5, Table 2, Embodiment 4, micro-mesosphere specific surface area is 3.2 m2/g).
However, Yao does not teach the specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is set to a range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g.
Nagai discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive and negative electrode plate with respective active material layers (Nagai, claims 1-3). Nagai further discloses that the specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 3.5 to 6.0 m2/g (Nagai, specification, pg. 3, lines 32-33), which overlaps with the claimed range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery system of Yao to include a negative electrode plate having a specific surface area within the claimed range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g (hereby referred to as “modified Yao”), because Nagai teaches that such specific surface area values for the negative electrode plate are suitable for use in a battery and discloses a preferred operating range that overlaps with the claimed range for achieving suitable battery performance (Nagai, specification, pg. 11, lines 20-22). Such modification would have involved applying a known parameter to a known battery component to obtain predictable results in terms of battery performance.
Regarding claim 6, Yao teaches:
A rechargeable battery, comprising: an electrode body including a stack of a negative electrode plate, a positive electrode plate, and a separator in which the separator is arranged between the negative electrode plate and the positive electrode plate (Yao discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode piece and negative electrode piece with specific macro-pore/micro-mesopore surface areas (claim 1), a current collector (claim 10), and a conductive agent (claims 4 and 7) for respective electrode pieces. Although Yao does not explicitly recite a 'separator' as a separate component, the disclosed battery structure inherently includes a separator because the term 'lithium-ion battery' inherently requires a separator disposed between the positive and negative electrode pieces to prevent electrical short-circuiting and to allow for ion conduction via an electrolyte (MPEP § 2112). It is well-known in the art that a lithium-ion battery cannot function as a rechargeable energy storage device without a separator to keep the cathode and anode physically separated. Therefore, the separator is an inherent characteristic of the claimed 'lithium-ion battery' of Yao.)
wherein the positive electrode plate has a positive electrode density of 3.0 g/cm3 or less (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; positive electrode density is 2.6 g/cm3),
the negative electrode plate has a negative electrode density of 1.3 g/cm3 or less (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; negative electrode density is 0.8 g/cm3),
and a ratio of a specific surface area of the positive electrode plate to a specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is 0.7 or greater (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; macro-pore specific surface area ratio ~4.06 and micro-mesopore specific area ratio is 3.5, where the specific surface area ratio =
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
r
e
a
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
r
e
a
).
Yao further teaches an electrode body wherein the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate is 3.2 m2/g, which falls within the claimed range of 2.5 m2/g to 4.0 m2/g (Yao, specification, pg 5, Table 2, Embodiment 4, micro-mesosphere specific surface area is 3.2 m2/g).
However, Yao does not teach the specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is set to a range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g.
Nagai discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive and negative electrode plate with respective active material layers (Nagai, claims 1-3). Nagai further discloses that the specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 3.5 to 6.0 m2/g (Nagai, specification, pg. 3, lines 32-33), which overlaps with the claimed range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery system of Yao to include a negative electrode plate having a specific surface area within the claimed range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g (hereby referred to as “modified Yao”), because Nagai teaches that such specific surface area values for the negative electrode plate are suitable for use in a battery and discloses a preferred operating range that overlaps with the claimed range for achieving suitable battery performance (Nagai, specification, pg. 11, lines 20-22). Such modification would have involved applying a known parameter to a known battery component to obtain predictable results in terms of battery performance.
Regarding claim 7, Yao teaches
A method for manufacturing an electrode body (Yao, specification, [0036]), the electrode body including a stack of a negative electrode plate, a positive electrode plate, and a separator in which the separator is arranged between the negative electrode plate and the positive electrode plate (Yao discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode piece and negative electrode piece with specific macro-pore/micro-mesopore surface areas (claim 1), a current collector (claim 10), and a conductive agent (claims 4 and 7) for respective electrode pieces. Although Yao does not explicitly recite a 'separator' as a separate component, the disclosed battery structure inherently includes a separator because the term 'lithium-ion battery' inherently requires a separator disposed between the positive and negative electrode pieces to prevent electrical short-circuiting and to allow for ion conduction via an electrolyte (MPEP § 2112). It is well-known in the art that a lithium-ion battery cannot function as a rechargeable energy storage device without a separator to keep the cathode and anode physically separated. Therefore, the separator is an inherent characteristic of the claimed 'lithium-ion battery' of Yao.),
the method comprising: setting a positive electrode density of the positive electrode plate to 3.0 g/cm3 or less (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; positive electrode density is 2.6 g/cm3);
setting a negative electrode density of the negative electrode plate to 1.3 g/cm3 or less (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; negative electrode density is 0.8 g/cm3);
and setting a ratio of a specific surface area of the positive electrode plate to a specific surface area of the negative electrode plate to 0.7 or greater (Yao, specification, Table 2, Embodiment 2; macro-pore specific surface area ratio ~4.06 and micro-mesopore specific area ratio is 3.5, where the specific surface area ratio =
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
r
e
a
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
e
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
r
e
a
).
Yao further teaches an electrode body wherein the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate is 3.2 m2/g, which falls within the claimed range of 2.5 m2/g to 4.0 m2/g (Yao, specification, pg 5, Table 2, Embodiment 4, micro-mesosphere specific surface area is 3.2 m2/g).
However, Yao does not teach the specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is set to a range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g.
Nagai discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive and negative electrode plate with respective active material layers (Nagai, claims 1-3). Nagai further discloses that the specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 3.5 to 6.0 m2/g (Nagai, specification, pg. 3, lines 32-33), which overlaps with the claimed range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery system of Yao to include a negative electrode plate having a specific surface area within the claimed range of 3.5 m2/g to 4.5 m2/g (hereby referred to as “modified Yao”), because Nagai teaches that such specific surface area values for the negative electrode plate are suitable for use in a battery and discloses a preferred operating range that overlaps with the claimed range for achieving suitable battery performance (Nagai, specification, pg. 11, lines 20-22). Such modification would have involved applying a known parameter to a known battery component to obtain predictable results in terms of battery performance.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao and Nagai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Onoda (JP2020035564A).
Regarding claim 4, modified Yao teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, and further teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode piece and negative electrode piece with specific macro-pore/micro-mesopore surface areas (Yao, claim 1). Yao further provides a preparation method (Yao, specification, [0036]) according to the requirements of various parameters for the positive and negative electrodes in Tables 1-2 such as the active substance, particle sizes, compacted density, macro-pore and micro-mesopore specific surface area values, and performance test results of a discharge rate test and high-rate cycle test (Yao, specification, Tables 1-2; performance test results in Table 3, [0040]-[0041]).
However, Yao does not expressly teach that a ratio of a single-electrode capacity of a negative electrode, obtained from a specific capacity of the negative electrode plate and a negative electrode active material, to a single-electrode capacity of a positive electrode, obtained from a specific capacity of the positive electrode plate and a positive electrode active material, referred to as a positive-negative electrode capacity ratio, is in a range of 1.5 to 2.0.
Onoda teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery such as a lithium-ion battery (Onoda, specification, pg. 2, lines 47-55) and additionally teaches that the capacity ratio of the negative electrode to the positive electrode (i.e. the positive-negative electrode capacity ratio of instant claim 4) affects battery performance, including suppression of micro short circuits and maintenance of thermal stability (Onoda, specification, pg. 1, lines 23-59 to pg. 2, lines 1-2). Further, Onoda explicitly discloses a capacity ratio of the negative electrode to the positive electrode within a range of 1.75-1.96 (Onoda, claim 1), which falls within the claimed range of 1.5 – 2.0.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery system of Yao to include a capacity ratio of the negative electrode to the positive electrode (i.e. the positive-negative electrode capacity ratio of instant claim 4) to be within the claimed range of 1.5 – 2.0, because Onoda teaches that such ratios are suitable for use in a battery and discloses a preferred operating range that falls within the claimed range for achieving the desired battery performance. Such modification would have involved applying a known and suitable parameter to a known battery system to obtain predictable results in terms of battery performance.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao and Nagai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kobayashi (JP2001052707A).
Regarding claim 5, modified Yao teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, and further teaches an electrode body wherein the positive electrode plate includes a positive electrode conductive material (Yao, specification, positive electrode conductive agent in [0013] and [0036]). However, Yao does not expressly disclose the positive electrode conductive material has a specific surface area set in a range of 150 m2/g to 300 m2/g.
Kobayashi teaches a lithium secondary battery (Kobayashi, specification, pg. 1, lines 9-11) and an amorphous conductive material with a BET specific surface area of 500 m2/g or less (Kobayashi, claim 1). Kobayashi further teaches that when the specific surface area of the conductive material exceeds 500 m2/g, battery performance characteristics such as capacity retention rate in terms of charge/discharge load characteristics, power characteristics, and regenerative characteristics may be adversely affected (Kobayashi, specification, pg. 2, lines 38-43).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery system of Yao to include a conductive material having a specific surface area within the claimed range of 150 m2/g to 300 m2/g, because Kobayashi teaches that maintaining the specific surface area at or below 500 m2/g is suitable for use in a battery to avoid degradation of battery performance characteristics. Thus, selecting a specific surface within the claimed range would have been an obvious design choice within the range of acceptable operating conditions as taught by Kobayashi for battery conductive materials. Such modification would have involved applying a known and suitable parameter to a known battery component to obtain predictable results in terms of battery performance.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao and Nagai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hayashida (US20050053833A1).
Regarding claim 8, modified Yao teaches all features of claim 1 as described above, but does not expressly teach wherein the ratio of the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate to the specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is in a range of 0.7 to 1.1, inclusive.
Hayashida discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising an electrode assembly having a high-density positive electrode in which a positive electrode active material layer is formed on at least one surface of a positive electrode current collector, a high-density negative electrode in which a negative electrode active material layer is formed on at least one surface of a negative electrode current collector, and a separator and an electrolyte are included, wherein a specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode is 0.5 to 1.0 times a specific surface area per unit area of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode (claim 1) in order to balance the speeds of permeation of the nonaqueous electrolyte to the positive and negative electrodes, to provide a uniform nonaqueous electrolyte permeation distribution between the positive and negative electrodes, and to impregnate the positive electrode with a sufficient amount of the nonaqueous electrolyte ([0011]). Additionally, Hayashida teaches that if the specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode is less than 0.5 times that of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode, the effect of drawing the nonaqueous electrolyte to the positive electrode becomes unsatisfactory; conversely, if the specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode exceeds 1.0 times that of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode, the strength of the positive electrode active material layer is reduced, and the positive electrode active material layer peels off from the current collector. Hayashida further discloses that the high-density positive electrode has a density of not less than 3.0 g/cm3, and the high-density negative electrode has a density of not less than 1.3 g/cm3 (claim 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the electrode body of Yao by optimizing the specific surface areas of the positive and negative electrode plates to achieve a ratio within the range of 0.7 to 1.1, as suggested by Hayashida, because Hayashida teaches that maintaining a specific surface area ratio between the positive and negative electrode active layers within a closely balanced range (specifically 0.5 to 1.0, which overlaps the claimed range of 0.7 to 1.1) successfully balances the electrolyte permeation speed, ensures uniform electrolyte distribution, and prevents the positive electrode from starving for electrolyte. A PHOSITA would have been motivated to implement this optimal ratio in the electrode body of Yao to achieve these improvements, particularly when employing high-density electrodes.
Furthermore, because the claimed range of 0.7 to 1.1 overlaps with the range of 0.5 to 1.0 disclosed by Hayashida, the selection of the specific ratio range represents a routine optimization of workable values within the prior art disclosure, since the prior art recognizes that the ratio of specific surface areas directly impacts electrolyte permeation and cell performance. Accordingly, the modification of Yao in view of Hayashida would have yielded the predictable result of an electrode body possessing uniform electrolyte impregnation and optimized electrochemical performance.
Regarding claim 9, modified Yao teaches all features of claim 6 as described above, including a rechargeable battery, comprising: an electrode body including a stack of a negative electrode plate, a positive electrode plate, and a separator in which the separator is arranged between the negative electrode plate and the positive electrode plate (see rejection of claim 6 above). Modified Yao does not expressly teach wherein the ratio of the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate to the specific surface area of the negative electrode plate is in a range of 0.7 to 1.1, inclusive.
Hayashida discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising an electrode assembly having a high-density positive electrode in which a positive electrode active material layer is formed on at least one surface of a positive electrode current collector, a high-density negative electrode in which a negative electrode active material layer is formed on at least one surface of a negative electrode current collector, and a separator and an electrolyte are included, wherein a specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode is 0.5 to 1.0 times a specific surface area per unit area of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode (claim 1) in order to balance the speeds of permeation of the nonaqueous electrolyte to the positive and negative electrodes, to provide a uniform nonaqueous electrolyte permeation distribution between the positive and negative electrodes, and to impregnate the positive electrode with a sufficient amount of the nonaqueous electrolyte ([0011]). Additionally, Hayashida teaches that if the specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode is less than 0.5 times that of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode, the effect of drawing the nonaqueous electrolyte to the positive electrode becomes unsatisfactory; conversely, if the specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode exceeds 1.0 times that of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode, the strength of the positive electrode active material layer is reduced, and the positive electrode active material layer peels off from the current collector. Hayashida further discloses that the high-density positive electrode has a density of not less than 3.0 g/cm3, and the high-density negative electrode has a density of not less than 1.3 g/cm3 (claim 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode body in the battery of Yao by optimizing the specific surface areas of the positive and negative electrode plates to achieve a ratio within the range of 0.7 to 1.1, as suggested by Hayashida, because Hayashida teaches that maintaining a specific surface area ratio between the positive and negative electrode active layers within a closely balanced range (specifically 0.5 to 1.0, which overlaps the claimed range of 0.7 to 1.1) successfully balances the electrolyte permeation speed, ensures uniform electrolyte distribution, and prevents the positive electrode from starving for electrolyte. A PHOSITA would have been motivated to implement this optimal ratio in the electrode body of the battery of Yao to achieve these improvements, particularly when employing high-density electrodes.
Furthermore, because the claimed range of 0.7 to 1.1 overlaps with the range of 0.5 to 1.0 disclosed by Hayashida, the selection of the specific ratio range represents a routine optimization of workable values within the prior art disclosure, since the prior art recognizes that the ratio of specific surface areas directly impacts electrolyte permeation and cell performance. Accordingly, the modification of Yao in view of Hayashida would have yielded the predictable result of a battery comprising an electrode body possessing uniform electrolyte impregnation and optimized electrochemical performance.
Regarding claim 10, modified Yao teaches all features of claim 7 as described above, including a method for manufacturing an electrode body (Yao, specification, [0036]), the electrode body including a stack of a negative electrode plate, a positive electrode plate, and a separator in which the separator is arranged between the negative electrode plate and the positive electrode plate (see rejection of claim 7 above). Modified Yao but does not expressly teach wherein the setting of the ratio includes setting the ratio of the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate to the specific surface area of the negative electrode plate to a range of 0.7 to 1.1, inclusive.
Hayashida discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising an electrode assembly having a high-density positive electrode in which a positive electrode active material layer is formed on at least one surface of a positive electrode current collector, a high-density negative electrode in which a negative electrode active material layer is formed on at least one surface of a negative electrode current collector, and a separator and an electrolyte are included, wherein a specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode is 0.5 to 1.0 times a specific surface area per unit area of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode (claim 1) in order to balance the speeds of permeation of the nonaqueous electrolyte to the positive and negative electrodes, to provide a uniform nonaqueous electrolyte permeation distribution between the positive and negative electrodes, and to impregnate the positive electrode with a sufficient amount of the nonaqueous electrolyte ([0011]). Additionally, Hayashida teaches that if the specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode is less than 0.5 times that of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode, the effect of drawing the nonaqueous electrolyte to the positive electrode becomes unsatisfactory; conversely, if the specific surface area per unit area of the positive electrode active material layer of the positive electrode exceeds 1.0 times that of the negative electrode active material layer of the negative electrode, the strength of the positive electrode active material layer is reduced, and the positive electrode active material layer peels off from the current collector. Hayashida further discloses that the high-density positive electrode has a density of not less than 3.0 g/cm3, and the high-density negative electrode has a density of not less than 1.3 g/cm3 (claim 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for manufacturing the electrode body of Yao by optimizing the specific surface areas of the positive and negative electrode plates to achieve a ratio within the range of 0.7 to 1.1, as suggested by Hayashida, because Hayashida teaches that maintaining a specific surface area ratio between the positive and negative electrode active layers within a closely balanced range (specifically 0.5 to 1.0, which overlaps the claimed range of 0.7 to 1.1) successfully balances the electrolyte permeation speed, ensures uniform electrolyte distribution, and prevents the positive electrode from starving for electrolyte. A PHOSITA would have been motivated to implement this optimal ratio in the method for manufacturing the electrode body of Yao to achieve these improvements, particularly when employing high-density electrodes.
Furthermore, because the claimed range of 0.7 to 1.1 overlaps with the range of 0.5 to 1.0 disclosed by Hayashida, the selection of the specific ratio range represents a routine optimization of workable values within the prior art disclosure, since the prior art recognizes that the ratio of specific surface areas directly impacts electrolyte permeation and cell performance. Accordingly, the modification of Yao in view of Hayashida would have yielded the predictable result of a method for manufacturing the electrode body comprising an electrode body possessing uniform electrolyte impregnation and optimized electrochemical performance.
Response to Arguments
Response – Claim Rejections 35 USC § 112
In view of the cancellation of claim 3 in the reply filed on June 26th, 2026, the rejection of this claim under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) is moot.
The rejection of claim 5 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, is overcome by Applicant’s amendments to claim 5 in the response received June 26th, 2026. The rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) is withdrawn.
Response – Claim Rejections 35 USC § 102 and 103
Regarding independent claims 1, 6, and 7, Applicant's arguments filed on June 26th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not found persuasive.
On page 7 of the response, Applicant states that Yao does not teach that the specific surface area of the positive electrode plate because Yao separately discloses specific surface areas for the macropores and the micro-mesopores within the positive electrode coating region, rather than a specific surface of the positive electrode plate itself. Applicant further states that the "micro-mesopore specific surface area" of Yao is a pore-size-specific parameter of the positive electrode coating region and is not the claimed specific surface area of the positive electrode plate.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Yao teaches controlling the specific surface area characteristics of the electrode coating region in order to obtain desired battery performance; in particular, Yao explains that the micro-mesopore and macropore specific surface areas of the electrode pieces are related to the composition and structure of the electrode coating, including the active material, conductive agent, adhesive agent, and the manner in which the electrode material is compacted. Yao further teaches that these surface area characteristics affect lithium-ion transport charge discharge performance cycle life and energy density ([0025]).
The distinction asserted by the Applicant between the electrode plate and the electrode coating region does not render the claimed subject matter non-obvious. As described in Applicant’s specification, the positive electrode plate includes a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode mixture layer formed thereon. Further, the positive electrode mixture layer is formed by preparing a positive electrode mixture paste applying the paste to the positive current collector and drying the applied paste (Applicant, [0025]). Thus, the surface characteristics of the mixture layer are characteristics of the structure from which the claimed positive electrode plate is formed.
Further, since the Applicant's specification itself describes a relationship between the specific surface area of an active material and the resulting specific surface area of a positive electrode plate, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the specific surface area of the electrode mixture layer is a parameter that directly effects and can be controlled to obtain the specific surface area of the resulting electrode plate. Therefore, Yao provides the relevant teaching concerning controlling the surface area characteristics of the electrode material forming the electrode piece. In addition, the fact that Yao expresses particular surface area characteristics in terms of “macropores” and “micro-mesopores” does not, by itself, establish that such characteristics are unrelated to the resulting electrode plate or that the claimed electrode plate specific surface area would have been unobtainable from the structures and materials taught by Yao.
Lastly, it is noted that the present rejection of amended claim 1 is based on the combination of Yao and Nagai under 35 USC §103; accordingly, the prior art references are not required to disclose every limitation individually, rather the relevant inquiry is whether the claimed subject matter as a whole would have been obvious in view of the teachings of the references and the articulated reason to combine those teachings.
On pages 7-8 of the response, Applicant states that Nagai does not cure the foregoing deficiency of Yao in terms of the ratio of the specific surface areas of the positive and negative electrode plates, because Nagai discloses that the specific surface area of a negative electrode active material layer is preferably 3.5 to 6.0 m2/g, and the specific surface area of a positive electrode active material layer is preferably 0.8 to 1.4 m2/g. Therefore, Nagai teaches a positive-side specific surface area that is substantially lower than the positive-side range 2.5 to 4.0 m2/g.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant’s argument evaluates Nagai as though Nagai must independently disclose all limitations of amended claim 1. It is noted that the present rejection is based on Yao in view of Nagai, and, with respect to the claimed ratio of 0.7 or greater, Yao alone teaches this feature (see rejection of claim 1).
Yao is further relied upon for the positive electrode surface area characteristics, while Nagai is relied upon for its teaching concerning the specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer (i.e. the negative electrode characteristics). Nagai expressly discloses that the specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer is preferably 3.5 to 6.0 m2/g, which overlaps with the claimed range of 3.5 to 4.5 m2/g. Thus, Nagai provides a teaching directed to the particular negative electrode characteristic that Applicant states is absent from Yao, and the rejection relies on the teachings of the two references in combination, with Yao providing the positive electrode characteristics and Nagai providing the negative electrode specific surface area teaching.
On page 8 of the response, Applicant states that Nagai teaches a balance between the positive electrode and the negative electrode that is fundamentally different from the claimed balance, and that even if the upper end of Nagai's positive-side range and the lower end of Nagai's negative-side range are used, the resulting ratio of the positive-side specific surface area to the negative-side specific surface area is only 1.4/3.5 = 0.4, which is well below the claimed ratio of 0.7 or greater. Further, Applicant states that in the embodiment of Nagai, the positive electrode active material layer has a specific surface area of 1.1 m2/g and the negative electrode active material layer has a specific surface area of 4.5 m2/g, resulting in an even smaller ratio of about 0.24. Thus, Nagai does not teach or suggest the claimed relationship between the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s calculations concern the relationship between the positive and negative electrode specific surface areas disclosed by Nagai alone. However, the present rejection is not based on Nagai alone and does not rely upon Nagai’s positive electrode specific surface area range. As discussed above, the positive electrode surface area limitation is supplied by Yao, while Nagai is relied upon for its teaching concerning the negative electrode limitation (see rejection of claim 1 above). Therefore, the fact that a ratio calculated solely from Nagai’s disclosed positive and negative ranges may be less than the claimed ratio, does not demonstrate that the combination of Yao in view of Nagai would not have resulted in, or rendered obvious, the claimed relationship.
Furthermore, as noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, Yao (Table 2, Embodiment 2) expressly discloses a macro-pore specific surface area ratio of ~4.06 and a micro-mesopore specific area ratio of 3.5, both of which are 0.7 or greater. Yao also explicitly teaches a positive electrode plate specific surface area of 3.2 m²/g (Table 2, Embodiment 4), which falls squarely within the claimed range of 2.5 m²/g to 4.0 m²/g.
On pages 8-9 of the response, Applicant states that Nagai is directed to maintaining a balance between positive-electrode resistance and negative-electrode resistance over a wide temperature range, and that Nagai does not teach or suggest setting a ratio of the specific surface area of a positive electrode plate to the specific surface area of a negative electrode plate to 0.7 or greater, nor does Nagai teach or suggest setting the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate to the respective specific surface area ranges now recited in amended claims 1 and 6-7. Accordingly, Applicant states that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to selectively extract only Nagai's negative-side specific surface area range and apply it to Yao while disregarding Nagai's positive-side specific surface area range and Nagai's overall electrode balance.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, with respect to the claimed ratio of 0.7 or greater, Yao alone teaches this feature. As noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, Yao (Table 2, Embodiment 2) expressly discloses a macro-pore specific surface area ratio of ~4.06 and a micro-mesopore specific area ratio of 3.5, both of which are 0.7 or greater. Yao also explicitly teaches a positive electrode plate specific surface area of 3.2 m²/g (Table 2, Embodiment 4), which falls squarely within the claimed range of 2.5 m²/g to 4.0 m²/g.
Second, regarding the negative electrode specific surface area, the modification of Yao in view of Nagai is not a bodily incorporation of Nagai's entire electrode structure into Yao, nor does it require adopting Nagai’s specific positive-to-negative ratio. Rather, the test for obviousness is whether the teachings of Nagai would have suggested to a person of ordinary skill in the art the selection of the claimed negative electrode specific surface area range (MPEP 707.07, see In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871). Further, Nagai explicitly teaches that a negative electrode specific surface area of 3.5 to 6.0 m²/g is preferred for achieving suitable battery performance (Nagai, pg. 3, lines 32-33; pg. 11, lines 20-22). Nagai’s range heavily overlaps with the claimed range of 3.5 m²/g to 4.5 m²/g. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize Yao’s battery system by selecting a negative electrode surface area within Nagai's disclosed preferred range because when the prior art discloses a general range that overlaps or routinely encompasses the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness is established (see MPEP §2144.05). A person of ordinary skill in the art seeking to optimize Yao's negative electrode using Nagai's preferred values, would mathematically recognize that pairing Yao’s positive electrode (3.2 m²/g) with a negative electrode selected from the overlapping range (3.5 m²/g to 4.5 m²/g) yields a ratio (
3.2
3.5
≈ 0.91) to (
3.2
4.5
≈ 0.71). This calculated ratio remains 0.7 or greater, thereby preserving and satisfying the structural ratio taught by Yao, and claimed by Applicant. The combination would represent the application of a known parameter (specific surface area) to a known battery component (the negative electrode) to achieve predictable results in battery performance.
Lastly, Nagai’s focus on resistance balance does not teach away from the modification, as Nagai does not criticize, discredit, or discourage the use of the claimed negative electrode surface area values. Therefore, the combination of Yao and Nagai renders the claimed invention obvious.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXIS R OSTWALT whose telephone number is (571)272-8650. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am-5pm.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 5712707692. 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.
/A.R.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights