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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has complied with all of the conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 12/28/2023, 09/19/2024, and 07/31/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings received on 12/28/2023 were reviewed and are acceptable.
Specification
The specification filed on 12/28/2023 was reviewed and is acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the batter” in line 2 should be replaced with --the battery--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pan et al. (US 2011/0123866 A1; hereinafter “Pan”).
Regarding claim 1, Pan discloses an electrode used in a battery (Title/Abstract) comprising:
n electrode layers sequentially stacked (as shown in e.g. Fig 4 with n = 4),
wherein the electrode plate layer close to a membrane side of the battery is the 1st layer (as shown in e.g. Fig 4, layer 120 corresponds with the 1st layer; see also e.g. Fig 7 which shows the positional relationship between current collectors 20 or 60 and separator 40), and the electrode plate layer close to a current collector side of the battery is the nth layer (as shown in e.g. Fig 4, layer 150 corresponds with the nth layer), n being a natural number greater than or equal to 2 (as shown in e.g. Fig 4, n = 4; see also [0060] which describes up to 100 layers);
an electrode material of the electrode plate layer at the 1st layer comprises first particles (as shown in e.g. Fig 16, larger active material particles correspond with the first particles), and an electrode material of the electrode plate layer at each layer from the 2nd layer to the nth layer comprises at least the first particles and second particles (as shown in e.g. Fig 16, smaller active material particles correspond with the second particles), an average particle size of the first particles being greater than an average particle size of the second particles (as indicated by the terms “larger” and “smaller”).
Pan further discloses that the porosity of the multi-layered electrode may be varied so as to have a porosity gradient within the electrode ([0180]), but does not explicitly disclose which direction the porosity gradient is formed, and therefore does not explicitly disclose that the porosity of each of the electrode plate layers gradually increases layer by layer in a direction from the nth layer to the 1st layer.
Pan is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely multi-layered electrodes for batteries.
Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the porosity gradient in the multi-layered electrode of Pan must necessarily either increase or decrease from the current collector side, i.e. nth layer, to the separator side, i.e. 1st layer, and would find it further obvious that a proportion of larger particles reasonably corresponds with larger pores, i.e. voids (as shown in e.g. Fig 7). Accordingly, the skilled artisan would find it obvious that a porosity gradient increases from the nth layer to the 1st layer, as suggested by Pan.
Regarding claim 2, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses that the proportion of quantity of the first particles in the electrode plate layer at the 1st layer linearly decreases to the nth layer (as shown in e.g. Fig 16), but does not explicitly disclose the recited relationship.
However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the recited relationship is a linearly decreasing relationship, i.e. from 1 at x=1 and decreasing by x/(2n-2) per x, and thus would find it obvious that the disclosed linearly decreasing proportion of first particles reasonably overlaps the recited relationship, and thus find it further obvious to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claims 3-5, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses that the active material particles, i.e. the first and second particles, may have a cross-sectional dimension ranging between 20 nm and 20 mm ([0022]), but does not explicitly disclose that the average particle size of the first particles ranges from 0.90 mm to 1.60 mm, or 1.0 mm to 1.2 mm, and the second particles range from 0.25 mm to 0.70 mm, or 0.35 mm to 0.55 mm, nor that a radius of the first particles is R, and a radius of the second particles is less than or equal to 0.41R.
However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (20 nm to 20 mm completely overlaps the recited ratios and the recited radius ratio) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 6, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses that the electrode plate layer at each layer from the 2nd layer to the nth layer further comprises third particles (e.g. carbon nanoballs, [0014]), but does not explicitly disclose a radius of the third particles, and therefore does not explicitly disclose that the radius of the third particles is less than or equal to 0.225 R.
However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that a radius of e.g. carbon nanoballs are nano-sized, i.e. having a particle size diameter of less than 1 mm, and would thus find it obvious to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (less than 1 mm diameter reasonably overlaps the recited radius ratio) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 9, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses that the electrode material comprises a positive electrode material (as indicated by the term “cathode”, [0160]), and the positive electrode material is lithium iron phosphate (lithium iron phosphate, [0017]).
Regarding claim 10, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses that the electrode material comprises a negative electrode material (as indicated by the term “anode”, [0160]), and the negative electrode material is artificial or natural graphite (graphite, [0020]).
Regarding claim 11, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses a battery (Abstract) comprising the recited electrode (as noted above).
Regarding claim 12, Pan discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Pan further discloses that the electrode includes a first electrode (cathode) and a second electrode (anode), the battery further comprising a first current collector (20), the first electrode (cathode), a membrane (separator 40), the second electrode (anode), and a second current collector (60) that are sequentially arranged (as shown in Fig 7), and an electrolyte being arranged respectively between the first electrode and the membrane and between the second electrode and the membrane (via electrolyte solution, [0185]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance and/or indication of allowable subject matter:
The present invention is related to, inter alia, an electrode, and related preparation method, comprising:
(claim 7) wherein a particle size of the first particle and a particle size of the second particle meet a recited condition;
(claim 8) wherein a quantity of the second particles gradually decreases layer by layer in a direction from being close to the current collector side to being close to the membrane side;
(claim 13) mixing an electrode material fully with a conductive agent and a bonding agent to form a mixture, heating the mixture to bring the bonding agent into a molten state, and curing the bonding agent in the molten state to obtain a powdery mixture.
Pan et al. (US 2011/0123866 A1; hereinafter “Pan”) is considered to be the closest relevant prior art to dependent claims 7 and 8 and independent claim 13. Pan discloses most of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Pan does not disclose, teach, fairly suggest, nor render obvious the above noted limitations. To the contrary, Pan explicitly discloses that the first and second particle gradients follow a linear relationship (as shown in e.g. Fig 16), and that quantity of the second particles increases in the recited direction (as shown in Fig 16). While Pan does disclose that the functional gradient between layers may follow other relationships, e.g. bell-shaped ([0040]), there does not appear to be any reasonable basis for the skilled artisan to abandon the disclosure of Pan and be directed towards the above noted limitations. With respect to the preparation method, Pan explicitly discloses various methods for forming the electrode which introduces the desired pores/voids ([0180-0182]), or via calendaring ([0190]), none of which reasonably involve the recited heating and curing steps.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kolosnitsyn et al. (US 2006/0024579 A1) discloses a battery electrode structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M ERWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 6am-3pm PDT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES M ERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 07/06/2026
Prosecution Insights