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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 recites “or a combination of more of following groups”. This appears to be grammatically incorrect. The claim should recite something similar to “or a combination of the following groups”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 20 recites “wherein in the negative electrode active material, a mass ratio of the silicon-based negative electrode material to the carbon-based negative electrode material ranges from 10:0 to 1:9”.
Claim 20 as written allows for 100 parts of silicon-based negative electrode material and 0 parts carbon-based negative electrode material.
However, claim 20 depends from claim 11, and claim 11 recites “wherein the negative electrode active material further comprises a carbon-based negative electrode material, and the carbon-based negative electrode material comprises at least one of artificial graphite, natural graphite, mesocarbon microbead, hard carbon, or soft carbon”.
Claim 11 requires the carbon-based negative electrode material to be present in the negative electrode active material.
Therefore, the range set forth in claim 20 renders the claim unclear, as it allows for no carbon-based negative electrode material to be present, while claim 11 requires the carbon-based negative electrode material to be present.
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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (CN 110707361A, given in the 07/26/2024 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet) in view of Machida (US 20130326864 A1) in view of Kizu et al (US 20030165739 A1), as evidenced by Sigma-Aldrich (Ethylene carbonate) and Sigma-Aldrich (Ethyl propionate).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a lithium-ion battery, wherein the lithium-ion battery comprises a positive electrode plate, a negative electrode plate, a separator, and a non-aqueous electrolyte solution; the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer coated on a surface of either or both sides of the negative electrode current collector, and the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode active material, a negative electrode conductive agent, and a negative electrode binder (see entire disclosure and especially P22-23, 25, 37-39, 41);
the non-aqueous electrolyte solution comprises ethylene sulfate, fluoroethylene carbonate, and a carboxylate organic solvent (the electrolyte can include additives of ethylene sulfate and fluoroethylene carbonate and a solvent including ethyl propionate; see entire disclosure and especially P10-11, 16).
Li discloses a mass percentage of the ethylene sulfate in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (A) is 0.2 – 3 wt. % (P18). Li discloses a mass percentage of the fluoroethylene carbonate in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (B) is 6 – 15 wt. % (P16).
Li is silent to the mass percentage of the carboxylate organic solvent in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution.
In a similar field of endeavor, Machida teaches a content of nonaqueous solvent in a nonaqueous electrolyte is preferable 70 to 90% by mass (P56). Machida teaches when the content is less than 70% by mass, the viscosity may excessively increase, and when the content is more than 90% by mass, a sufficiently high conductivity is sometimes not achieved (P56).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Machida and provided the non-aqueous organic solvent used in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution to be used in a mass percentage range of 70 to 90%, given Machida teaches this prevents viscosity from excessively increasing while providing a sufficiently high conductivity.
Li discloses the non-aqueous organic solvent used in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution includes a cyclic carbonate such as ethylene carbonate alongside the carboxylate organic solvent (ethyl propionate). Li discloses the cyclic carbonate is provided in 15-40 vol% of 100% of the non-aqueous organic solvent, and the carboxylate organic solvent can be 60-85 vol% of 100% of the non-aqueous organic solvent (P13).
The density of ethylene carbonate is 1.321 g/ml (as evidenced by Sigma-Aldrich - Ethylene carbonate). The density of ethyl propionate is 0.888 g/ml (as evidenced by Sigma-Aldrich – Ethyl propionate).
A person of ordinary skill in the art would be able to use the volume percent, density, and mass percent of modified Li in order to find the mass percentage of the carboxylate organic solvent (ethyl propionate) in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution.
Assuming a 100 mL sample of the non-aqueous organic solvent and that the non-aqueous solvent includes the ethylene carbonate (EC) and ethyl propionate (EP):
Minimum Bound of Mass Percent Range:
Mass of EC: 40 mL * 1.321 g/mL = 52.84 g
Mass of EP: 60 mL * 0.888 g/mL = 53.28 g
Total Solvent Mass = 106.12 g
Weight Percent of EP in solvent: (53.28 g / 106.12 g) * 100 = 35.15 wt %
Weight Percent of EP in Total Electrolyte: (50.21% * 70 wt% total solvent) = 31.15 wt %
Maximum Bound of Mass Percent Range:
Mass of EC: 15 mL * 1.321 g/mL = 19.82 g
Mass of EP: 85 mL * 0.888 g/mL = 75.48 g
Total Solvent Mass = 95.30 g
Weight Percent of EP in solvent: (75.48 g / 95.30 g) * 100 = 79.21 wt %
Weight Percent of EP in Total Electrolyte: (79.21% * 90 wt% total solvent) = 71.29 wt %
Therefore, the mass percentage of the carboxylate organic solvent (ethyl propionate) in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (Y) is in a range of 31.15 to 71.29 wt. %.
Li is silent to the mass percentage range of the negative electrode binder in the negative electrode active material layer.
In a similar field of endeavor, Kizu teaches a binder is included in a range of 1 to 15 wt. % of a negative electrode active material composition (P159). Kizu teaches that when the amount of the binder is lower than 1 wt %, the adhesion between the negative electrode active material layer and the current collector becomes insufficient to permit easy release, as a result of which the cycle characteristic is unpreferably and inconveniently degraded (P159). Kizu further teaches that when the amount of the binder exceeds 15 wt %, an excess presence of the binder in the negative electrode active material layer, which is an insulator, increases the electrode resistance and the cycle characteristic and rate characteristic are inconveniently preferably degraded (P159).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Kizu and provided the negative electrode binder of Li to be used in the negative electrode active material layer in a mass percentage of 1 to 15 wt. %, given Li teaches this reaches a desired adhesion between the negative electrode active material layer and the current collector while preventing an undesired increase in electrode resistance and degradation of cycle/rate characteristics.
Therefore, a mass percentage of the negative electrode binder in the negative electrode active material layer (X) of modified Li is 1 to 15 wt. %.
In summary of what is stated above:
A = 0.2 – 3 wt. %
B = 6 – 15 wt. %
Y = 31.15 – 71.29 wt. %
X = 1 – 15 wt. %
In regards to the relationships set forth in claim 1:
The range of A+B in modified Li is 6.2 ≤ A+B ≤ 18. This range overlaps the claimed range of 10 ≤ A+B ≤ 21. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
The range of X/(A+B+Y) of modified Li is 0.02677 ≤ X/(A+B+Y) ≤ 0.16799. This range lies within the claimed range of 0.02 ≤ X/(A+B+Y) ≤ 0.2.
The range of X/Y of modified Li is 0.0321 ≤ X/Y ≤ 0.2104. This range lies within the claimed range of 0.02 ≤ X/Y ≤ 0.25.
Therefore, modified Li meets the limitations set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the range of A+B in modified Li is 6.2 ≤ A+B ≤ 18. This range overlaps the claimed range of 12 ≤ A+B ≤ 18. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 3, the range of X/(A+B+Y) of modified Li is 0.02677 ≤ X/(A+B+Y) ≤ 0.16799. This range overlaps the claimed range of 0.05 ≤ X/(A+B+Y) ≤ 0.18. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 4, the range of X/Y of modified Li is 0.0321 ≤ X/Y ≤ 0.2104. This range overlaps the claimed range of 0.05 ≤ X/Y ≤ 0.2. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 5, the mass percentage A of the ethylene sulfate in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution of modified Li ranges from 0.2 – 3 wt. %, which overlaps the claimed range of from 0.1 wt% to 2.5 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 6, the mass percentage B of the fluoroethylene carbonate in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution of modified Li from 6 – 15 wt. %, which overlaps the claimed range of from 7.5 wt% to 20.9 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 7, the mass percentage Y of the carboxylate organic solvent in the non-aqueous electrolyte solution of modified Li from 31.15 – 71.29 wt. %, which overlaps the claimed range of from 0.5 wt% to 40 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 8, the mass percentage X of the negative electrode binder in the negative electrode active material layer of modified Li from 1 – 15 wt. %, which overlaps the claimed range of from 0.5 wt% to 15 wt%. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 9, modified Li meets the limitation wherein the carboxylate organic solvent is selected from at least one of ethyl propionate, propyl propionate, or propyl acetate (ethyl propionate, see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claims 10-11, Li discloses the negative electrode active material in Example 10 is a composite of artificial graphite and 5% SiO/C material (P57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the negative electrode active material to have selected the negative electrode active material of modified Li to be a composite of artificial graphite and 5% SiO/C material, given this is a known negative electrode active material disclosed by Li and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Therefore, the negative electrode active material of modified Li meets the limitation wherein the negative electrode active material comprises a silicon-based negative electrode material, and the silicon-based negative electrode material is selected from at least one of elemental silicon or silicon monoxide (silicon monoxide, as drawn to claim 10) and wherein the negative electrode active material further comprises a carbon-based negative electrode material, and the carbon-based negative electrode material comprises at least one of artificial graphite, natural graphite, mesocarbon microbead, hard carbon, or soft carbon (artificial graphite, as drawn to claim 11).
Claims 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (CN 110707361A, given in the 07/26/2024 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet) in view of Machida (US 20130326864 A1) in view of Kizu et al (US 20030165739 A1), as evidenced by Sigma-Aldrich (Ethylene carbonate) and Sigma-Aldrich (Ethyl propionate), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Jeon et al (US 20220140347 A1) and Shi et al (CN103509153A using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet).
Regarding claims 12-17, Li discloses the negative electrode includes a negative electrode binder (see entire disclosure and especially P23). Li further discloses the negative electrode can include a silicon-carbon composite material (see entire disclosure and especially P25).
However, modified Li does not meet the limitation wherein the negative electrode binder comprises a polyanionic binder, the polyanionic binder comprises a polymer, and a molecular chain of the polymer comprises at least one or a combination of more of following groups:
PNG
media_image1.png
138
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(claim 12), wherein a molar percentage of the group comprised in the polyanionic binder ranges from 5 mol% to 100 mol% (claim 13), wherein a molar percentage of the group comprised in the polyanionic binder ranges from 10 mol% to 60 mol% (claim 14), wherein the polymer further comprises a repeating unit structure formed by a flexible monomer, and the flexible monomer comprises at least one of an acrylate, acrylonitrile, vinyl alcohol, or acrylic acid (claim 15), wherein a molar percentage of the repeating unit structure formed by the flexible monomer comprised in the polyanionic binder ranges from 0 mol% to 95 mol% (claim 16), and wherein a molar percentage of the repeating unit structure formed by the flexible monomer comprised in the polyanionic binder ranges from 10 mol% to 80 mol% (claim 17).
In a similar field of endeavor, Jeon teaches a silicon (Si) anode material is attracting great attention as a next-generation anode material capable of replacing graphite of a lithium battery (P5). However, Jeon teaches in the case of the silicon anode materials, electrical resistance in an anode rapidly increases due to occurrence of cracks and breakage of inter-particle connectivity, thereby reducing the cycle lifespan thereof (P6).
Jeon teaches several studies have been conducted to improve the cycle performance of silicon anodes by using self-healing polymers as binders (P8). Jeon teaches, since self-healing polymers have the ability to self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting, the self-healing polymers can improve the reliability of related materials and increase the lifespan of a device (P8).
Jeon teaches a polyfunctional self-healing binder for lithium battery anodes capable of self-healing a silicon anode, which is severely damaged mechanically, and having electrical conductivity by including a polyelectrolyte, a polyvalent chelator, and a conductive polymer (P12).
Jeon teaches an anode including a negative electrolyte active material layer formed on a negative electrode current collector, wherein the negative electrode active material layer includes a silicon-based active material (which can be a silicon-carbon composite material, P149), the self-healing binder, and a carbon-based conductor (P35, 37, 148-149).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Jeon and selected the negative electrode active material binder of modified Li to be a the self-healing binder including a polyelectrolyte, a polyvalent chelator, and a conductive polymer of Jeon, given Li uses a silicon-carbon composite material as the negative electrode active material, Jeon teaches their self-healing binder used alongside a silicon-based active material, Jeon teaches self-healing polymers have the ability to self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting which can improve the reliability of related materials and increase the lifespan of a device, and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Jeon and substituted the negative electrode active material layer of modified Li with the negative electrode active material layer of Jeon, given they are both known active material layers utilizing a silicon-carbon composite material, Jeon teaches the use of their self-healing binder inside their active material layer can self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting which can improve the reliability of related materials and increase the lifespan of a device, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Also in a similar field of endeavor, Shi teaches a block copolymer monoionic polymer monoionic electrolyte obtained by copolymerizing (p-vinylbenzenesulfonyl) (perfluoroalkylsulfonyl)imide lithium monomer and methoxyethylene glycol acrylate monomer, with the general structural formula shown in formula (I):
PNG
media_image2.png
250
192
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(I)
R is H or CH 3 , n is an integer from 2 to 20, R F = C m H 2m+1 , m = 0-8 (P12-14).
Shi teaches the number-average molecular weight of the polymer single-ion electrolyte of formula (I) is 2000-150000 g/mol, preferably 20000-50000 g/mol (P15). Shi teaches when formula (Ⅰ) is a block polymer Poly(LiSR F FSI-b-MPEGA): x is an integer from 5 to 500; y is an integer from 2 to 500; the number-average molecular weight of block A is 500-25000 g/mol; and the number-average molecular weight of block B is 1000-120000 g/mol (P16-17, 22). Shi teaches the block polymer can form polymer single-ion electrolytes (P27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Shi and selected/substituted the polyelectrolyte in the binder of modified Li (self-healing binder of Jeon) to be the block polymer (LiSR F FSI-b-MPEGA) wherein x is an integer from 5 to 500, y is an integer from 2 to 500, the number-average molecular weight of block A is 500-25000 g/mol, as taught by Shi, given Shi teaches their block polymer as a copolymer that can form single-ion electrolytes, the binder of modified Li includes a poly electrolyte, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07), and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Given the block polymer (LiSR F FSI-b-MPEGA) of modified Li includes x in an integer from 5 to 500 and y in an integer from 2 to 500, the molar percent of the MPEGA block can be calculated to be 0.99-99.01 % ((x/(x+y) *100)) and the molar percent of the LiSR F FSI block can be calculated to be 0.40-99.60 % ((y/(y+x) *100)). These molar percents overlap the claimed ranges found in claims 13-14 and 16-17, and in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (See MPEP § 2144.05). Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Claims 12, 15, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (CN 110707361A, given in the 07/26/2024 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet) in view of Machida (US 20130326864 A1) in view of Kizu et al (US 20030165739 A1), as evidenced by Sigma-Aldrich (Ethylene carbonate) and Sigma-Aldrich (Ethyl propionate), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Jeon et al (US 20220140347 A1) and Zhang et al (CN110003399A using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet).
Regarding claims 12, 15, and 18-19, Li discloses the negative electrode includes a negative electrode binder (see entire disclosure and especially P23). Li further discloses the negative electrode can include a silicon-carbon composite material (see entire disclosure and especially P25).
However, modified Li does not meet the limitation wherein the negative electrode binder comprises a polyanionic binder, the polyanionic binder comprises a polymer, and a molecular chain of the polymer comprises at least one or a combination of more of following groups:
PNG
media_image1.png
138
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(claim 12) , wherein the polymer further comprises a repeating unit structure formed by a flexible monomer, and the flexible monomer comprises at least one of an acrylate, acrylonitrile, vinyl alcohol, or acrylic acid (claim 15), wherein the polymer has a structure shown in Formula I
PNG
media_image3.png
362
214
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
wherein m = 10-200, preferably ranges from 20 to 120; n = 0-190, preferably ranges from 20 to 160; and p = 1-50, preferably ranges from 1 to 10 (claim 18), and wherein the polymer has a structure shown in Formula I
PNG
media_image3.png
362
214
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
wherein m= 20-120; n= 20-160; and p = 1-10 (claim 19).
In a similar field of endeavor, Jeon teaches a silicon (Si) anode material is attracting great attention as a next-generation anode material capable of replacing graphite of a lithium battery (P5). However, Jeon teaches in the case of the silicon anode materials, electrical resistance in an anode rapidly increases due to occurrence of cracks and breakage of inter-particle connectivity, thereby reducing the cycle lifespan thereof (P6).
Jeon teaches several studies have been conducted to improve the cycle performance of silicon anodes by using self-healing polymers as binders (P8). Jeon teaches, since self-healing polymers have the ability to self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting, the self-healing polymers can improve the reliability of related materials and increase the lifespan of a device (P8).
Jeon teaches a polyfunctional self-healing binder for lithium battery anodes capable of self-healing a silicon anode, which is severely damaged mechanically, and having electrical conductivity by including a polyelectrolyte, a polyvalent chelator, and a conductive polymer (P12).
Jeon teaches an anode including a negative electrolyte active material layer formed on a negative electrode current collector, wherein the negative electrode active material layer includes a silicon-based active material (which can be a silicon-carbon composite material, P149), the self-healing binder, and a carbon-based conductor (P35, 37, 148-149).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Jeon and selected the negative electrode active material binder of modified Li to be a the self-healing binder including a polyelectrolyte, a polyvalent chelator, and a conductive polymer of Jeon, given Li uses a silicon-carbon composite material as the negative electrode active material, Jeon teaches their self-healing binder used alongside a silicon-based active material, Jeon teaches self-healing polymers have the ability to self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting which can improve the reliability of related materials and increase the lifespan of a device, and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Jeon and substituted the negative electrode active material layer of modified Li with the negative electrode active material layer of Jeon, given they are both known active material layers utilizing a silicon-carbon composite material, Jeon teaches the use of their self-healing binder inside their active material layer can self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting which can improve the reliability of related materials and increase the lifespan of a device, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Also in a similar field of endeavor, Zhang teaches a single-ion conductive polymer electrolyte membrane utilizing lithium-containing monomer, (meth)acrylate polyethylene glycol, a cross-linking agent, and a plasticizer (P12-16). Zhang further teaches the lithium-containing monomer has the general structure of formula 2 (see P19 and Page 5 of foreign document) wherein n is an integer from 2 to 10, R1 is an oxygen atom or a trifluoromethylsulfonylimide group, and R2 is a fluorine atom or a trifluoromethyl group (P18-20). Jeon teaches the (meth)acrylate polyethylene glycol has the general structure of formula 3 or 4 (see P22 and Page 5 of foreign document) wherein the value of n ranges from 4 to 40, and the molecular weight of (meth)acrylate polyethylene glycol ranges from 300 to 2000 Da (P21-23). Jeon teaches the crosslinking agent is a monomer with two or more double bonds that has polymerization activity, such as one or more of divinylbenzene, polyethylene glycol dimethacrylate, polyethylene glycol diacrylate, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate, trimethylolpropane triacrylate, trimethylpropane trimethacrylate, pentaerythritol triacrylate, pentaerythritol tetraacrylate, and N,N'-methylenebisacrylamide (P24).
Zhang teaches the prepared polymer electrolyte has high ionic conductivity (P35).
While Zhang utilizes their polymer electrolyte for a polymer electrolyte membrane rather than a polymer electrolyte used in a binder, Jeon teaches using polymer electrolytes within a self-healing binder inside an active material layer to self-repair cracks and mechanical damage caused by external stress or accidental cutting which can increase the lifespan of a device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarny skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Zhang and selected the polymer electrolyte used in Zhang to be utilized as the polymer electrolyte used in the binder of modified Lee, given it is a known polymer electrolyte, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07), and applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is likely to be obvious. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, D.).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (CN 110707361A, given in the 07/26/2024 IDS, using the provided machine English translation from Espacenet) in view of Machida (US 20130326864 A1) in view of Kizu et al (US 20030165739 A1), as evidenced by Sigma-Aldrich (Ethylene carbonate) and Sigma-Aldrich (Ethyl propionate), as applied to claim 11, further in view of Shimooka et al (US 20110262796 A1).
Regarding claim 20, modified Li does not meet the limitation wherein in the negative electrode active material, a mass ratio of the silicon-based negative electrode material to the carbon-based negative electrode material ranges from 10:0 to 1:9.
In a similar field of endeavor, Shimooka teaches a negative electrode active material can be chosen to be a silicon oxide composite with a carbon material (P63-66). Shimooka teaches the silicon oxide can be coated with the carbon material in order to improve the conductivity of the silicon oxide (P66). Shimooka teaches the amount of carbon material to the amount of silicon oxide can be 10 parts by mass or more and 50 parts by mass or less based on 100 parts of the silicon oxide in order to balance the conductive effects of the carbon while providing a sufficient amount of silicon oxide in the negative electrode mixture layer (P66, 76).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the teaching of Shimooka and substituted the negative electrode active material of modified Li with the negative electrode active material of Shimooka, given Shimooka teaches their composite active material has improved conductivity and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
From the modification, modified Li meets the limitation wherein in the negative electrode active material, a mass ratio of the silicon-based negative electrode material (silicon oxide) to the carbon-based negative electrode material (carbon coating) ranges from 10:0 to 1:9 (given Shimooka teaches the carbon material can be in 10 parts by mass or more and 50 parts by mass or less based on 100 parts of the silicon oxide, the mass ratio of the silicon-based negative electrode material (silicon oxide) to the carbon-based negative electrode material (carbon coating) in modified Li is 10:1 to 2:1 (100 silicon oxide to 10 carbon to 100 silicon oxide to 50 carbon).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mary Harris whose telephone number is (571)272-0690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm 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.
/MARY GRACE HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights