DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-8 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6 & 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2022/0045354 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a battery comprising: a positive electrode (910) (fig. 10; [0124]); a negative electrode (920) (fig. 10; [0124]) a solid electrolyte layer (930) disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (fig. 10; [0124]), wherein the negative electrode includes a first negative electrode layer (923) containing a second metal such as Si and a second negative electrode layer (922) containing a first metal such as Si and Li between the first negative electrode layer and the solid electrolyte layer (figs. 1A & 10; [0084]-[0085] & [0124]-[0125]) such that the mole ratio of Li to Si in the second negative electrode layer is higher than a mole ratio of Li to Si in the first negative electrode layer ([0124]-[0125]) since the first negative electrode layer is free of Li (i.e Li/Si mole ratio of 0) whereas the second negative electrode layer comprises Li and Si.
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches the battery according to claim 1 but does not explicitly teach the ratio of the mass of the silicon contained in the second negative electrode layer to the sum of the mass of the silicon contained in the first negative electrode layer and the mass of the silicon contained in the second negative electrode layer is greater than or equal to 5 mass% and less than or equal to 60 mass%. However, Kim discloses an exemplary embodiment using silver (Ag) as the first and second metals used in the respective first and second negative electrode layers, wherein 1g of silver is used in the first negative electrode layer and 1.02g of silver nitrate (i.e corresponding to 0.647g of silver, calculated using the known molar masses of silver and nitrate) is used in the second negative electrode layer ([0196] & [0202]). Thus, Kim teaches a ratio of the mass of the first metal (i.e Ag) contained in the second negative electrode layer to the sum of the mass of the first metal contained in the first negative electrode layer and the mass of the second metal (i.e Ag) contained in the second negative electrode layer being 0.647g/ (0.647g +1g) = 39 mass% which reads on the presently claimed range. Since Kim discloses that the first and second metals can interchangeably be Ag or Si, the claimed mass ratio is anticipated by Kim.
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches the battery according to claim 2 but does not explicitly teach the mass of the silicon contained in the second negative electrode layer is greater than or equal to 10 mass% and less than or equal to 50 mass%. However, Kim teaches an exemplary embodiment in which the second negative electrode layer comprises 2.692g of binder, 3g of carbon as a first particle and 1g of Ag as a second particle such that the amount of the Ag in the second negative electrode layer is: 1/(1+3+2.692) = 14 mass% ([0202]). Since Kim discloses that the second particles can interchangeably be Ag or Si ([0125] & [0128]-[0130]), the claimed range of 10 mass% to 50 mass% for the mass of the silicon contained in the second negative electrode layer is anticipated by Kim.
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches the battery according to claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein the mass of the silicon contained in the second negative electrode layer is smaller than the mass of the silicon contained in the first negative electrode layer. However, Kim teaches an exemplary embodiment using 0.65g of Ag in the second negative electrode layer and 1g of Ag in the first negative electrode layer ([0196] & [0205]) such that the mass of the second metal (Ag) in the second negative electrode layer is smaller than the mass of the first metal (Ag) in the first negative electrode layer. Since Kim teaches that the first metal and second metal can interchangeably use silicon (Si) or silver (Ag), claim 5 is anticipated by Kim.
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches the battery according to claim 1, wherein the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the second negative electrode layer is greater than or equal to 0.5 and less than or equal to 1.4 ([0127]).
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches a method for producing a battery (fig. 10; [0124] & [0179]), comprising: producing a negative electrode (920) including a first negative electrode layer (923) containing a second metal such as silicon and a second negative electrode layer (922) containing a first metal such as silicon with lithium (figs. 1A & 10; [0084]-[0085], [0124]-[0125] & [0179]); and laminating a positive electrode (910), a solid electrolyte layer (930), and the negative electrode (920) on top of each other in this order so that the second negative electrode layer is positioned between the first negative electrode layer and the solid electrolyte layer (fig. 10; [0124] & [0179]), wherein the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the second negative electrode layer is greater than the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the first negative electrode layer ([0124]-[0125]) since the first negative electrode layer is free of Li (i.e Kim’s layer comprises carbon particles and a second metal such as Ag or Si such that the Li/Si mole ratio is 0) whereas the second negative electrode layer comprises Li and a first metal such as Si or Ag.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2022/0045354 A1) in view of Waseda (US 2019/0334205 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches the battery according to claim 1 but is silent as to the negative electrode including a particular region not overlapping the positive electrode in plan view, and in the particular region, the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the second negative electrode layer is greater than the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the first negative electrode layer. Waseda discloses a battery (100) comprising a positive electrode (2), a solid electrolyte layer (3) and a negative electrode (4), wherein the negative electrode includes a particular region not overlapping the positive electrode in plan view (fig. 1; [0036]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to form the negative electrode with a particular region not overlapping the positive electrode in plan view in order to ensure that lithium ions reliably move from the positive electrode to the negative electrode during charging as taught by Waseda ([0063]). While Kim is silent as to, in the particular region, the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the second negative electrode layer being greater than the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the first negative electrode layer, it is noted that Kim discloses that the first metal such as Si is uniformly dispersed in the second negative electrode layer ([0088]). Accordingly, when the battery of Kim is modified by Waseda to include a particular region not overlapping with the positive electrode, the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the second negative electrode layer would be expected to be greater than the mole ratio of lithium to silicon in the first negative electrode layer in the particular region since the first metal is uniformly present in the second negative electrode layer whereas the first negative electrode layer is free of lithium.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record, Kim (as cited above), does not fairly teach or suggest the mass of the silicon contained in the second negative electrode layer being equal to the mass of the silicon contained in the first negative electrode layer. As noted in the instant specification, “according to such a configuration, the stress produced in the interface between the second negative electrode layer and the solid electrolyte layer can be reduced more effectively” ([0028]).
.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (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, BARBARA GILLIAM can be reached at (571)272-1330. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights