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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I claims 1-12, 17 & 19 in the reply filed on 7/16/26 is acknowledged.
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.
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, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US 2019/0237731 in view of Horpel et al. US 2008/0138700
With respect to claim 1, Park et al. discloses a separator comprising:
a non-woven fabric base formed by mixing a large-diameter fiber (first fiber) with an average diameter of 100 nm or greater (overlaps approximately 10 µm or more) and a small-diameter fiber (second fiber) with an average diameter of 50 nm or less (overlaps approximately 1 µm or less) [Abstract; 0008;0011; 0022-0027] ; and inorganic particles positioned in pores formed between the large-diameter fiber (first fiber) and small-diameter fiber (second fiber) of the non-woven fabric base [0057; 0071], and the inorganic particles have D50 of 1nm-10µm (overlaps approximately 400 nm or less) [0057-0058].
Park et al. does not disclose wherein the large-diameter fiber (first fiber) has a melting point of about 150 oC or less
Horpel et al. discloses a separator [Abstract] comprising:
a non-woven fabric base [0016] formed by mixing a first fiber and a second fiber; and inorganic particles [0030-0037], wherein the first fiber has a diameter of 10 µm and has a melting point of more than 110 oC (overlaps about 150 oC or less) [0034-0037; 0073],
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. to include a first fiber having a melting point of about 150 oC or less, as disclosed in Horpel et al., in order to allow for thermal stability.
With respect to claim 2, Park et al. discloses wherein a mixing weight ratio of the first fiber and the second fibers is 80:20 (overlaps approximately 1:9 to 9:1). [0127]
With respect to claim 4, Park et al. discloses wherein the inorganic particles have D50 of 1nm-10µm (overlaps approximately 30 nm to 400 nm) [0057-0058].
With respect to claim 5, Park et al. does not disclose wherein the melting point of the first fiber is about 50 oC to 120 oC.
Horpel et al. discloses wherein the first fiber has a melting point of more than 110 oC (overlaps 50 oC to 120 oC) [0034-0037; 0073],
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. to include a first fiber having a melting point of about 50 oC to 120 oC, as disclosed in Horpel et al., in order to allow for thermal stability.
With respect to claim 6, Park et al. discloses wherein the first fiber is formed of one or more polymers is polyamide. [0036-0039];
With respect to claim 9, Park et al. discloses wherein the separator has a thickness of approximately 10 µm to 30 µm [0029]
With respect to claim 11, Park et al. discloses wherein the separator has a permeability of approximately 1s/100 cc to 300 s/100 cc. [0028]
With respect to claim 12, Park et al. discloses wherein the inorganic particles are coated with a binder polymer on at least a portion of surfaces thereof. [0029-0039; 0054-0071];
With respect to claim 17, Park et al. discloses an electrode assembly comprising: a positive electrode; a negative electrode; and the separator of claim 1 disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode. [Figure 3; 0010]
With respect to claim 19, Park et al. discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising the electrode assembly of claim 17. [Figure 3; 0010]
Claim(s) 3 & 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US 2019/0237731 in view of Horpel et al. US 2008/0138700 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Jiyunsuke et al. JPH0729560
With respect to claim 3, Park et al. does not disclose wherein the first fiber has an average diameter of approximately 10 µm to 30 µm, and the second fiber has an average diameter of approximately 0.1 µm and 1 µm.
Horpel et al. discloses a separator [Abstract] comprising:
a non-woven fabric base [0016] formed by mixing a first fiber [0030-0037], wherein the first fiber has a diameter of 10 µm [0034-0037; 0073],
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. to include a diameter of 10 µm, as disclosed in Horpel et al., in order to allow for thermal stability.
Park et al. does not disclose wherein the second fiber has an average diameter of approximately 0.1 µm and 1 µm.
Jiyunsuke et al. discloses a separator comprising:
a base formed by mixing a polyethylene fiber (first fiber) with an average diameter of 20 µm (overlaps approximately 10 µm or more) and a second fiber with an average diameter of 0.8µm (overlaps approximately 0.1µm- 1µm);
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. to include a second fiber has an average diameter of approximately 0.1 µm and 1 µm, as disclosed in Jiyunsuke et al., in order to allow for extended battery life.
With respect to claim 10, Park et al. does not disclose wherein the non-woven fabric base has a basis weight of approximately 5 g/m2 to 30 g/m2, and the inorganic particles has a basis weight of approximately 10 g/m2 to 50 g/m2.
Horpel et al. discloses wherein the non-woven fabric base has a basis weight of approximately 5 g/m2 to 30 g/m2 [0030]
Park et al. does not disclose the inorganic particles has a basis weight of approximately 10 g/m2 to 50 g/m2.
Jiyunsuke et al. discloses a separator comprising:
a base formed by mixing a polyethylene fiber (first fiber) and a second fiber with an average diameter of 0.8µm and inorganic particles wherein the inorganic particles has a basis weight of approximately 10 g/m2 to 50 g/m2 [0027-0028]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. wherein the inorganic particles has a basis weight of approximately 10 g/m2 to 50 g/m2, as disclosed in Jiyunsuke et al., in order to allow for extended battery life.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US 2019/0237731 in view of Horpel et al. US 2008/0138700 as applied to claim 1 above in further view of Hayakawa et al. US 2012/0164514
With respect to claim 7, Park et al. does not disclose wherein the second fiber has a melting point of about 200 oC or more.
Hayakawa et al. discloses a separator comprising:
a non-woven fabric base formed by mixing a polymer fiber layer A (first fiber) and a heat-resistant polymer fiber layer B (second fiber) with an average diameter of approximately 1µm and wherein the polymer fiber layer B (second fiber) has a melting point of over 200 oC. [Abstract; 0068]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. to include a second fiber has a melting point of 200 oC or more, as disclosed in Hayakawa et al., in order to allow for excellent discharge rate.
With respect to claim 8, Park et al. does not disclose, wherein the second fiber is formed from one or more polymers selected from polyimide.
Hayakawa et al. discloses wherein the second fiber is formed from one or more polymers selected from polyimide. [0057]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Park et al. to include a second fiber selected from polyimide, as disclosed in Hayakawa et al., in order to allow for excellent discharge rate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kamisasa et al. US 2011/0177395
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9AM-7PM.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at 571-270-1292. 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.
/KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
