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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jin et al (PGPUB 2022/0140320)
Claim 1: Jin teaches a positive electrode having two active material layers formed on a current collector [abstract]. The active material layer is a combination of layer 20, applicant’s deep layer, and layer 30, applicant’s surficial layer, formed on a current collector (10), applicant’s core layer [Fig 1]. The positive electrode includes an auxiliary agent of carbon nanotubes (CNT) [0013, 0043-0044, 0060-0068, 0099-0115].
Claim 2: Jin teaches the positive electrode active material (20) to include a conductive material that is exemplified to be acetylene black [0057-0058].
Claim 3: Jin teaches carbon nanotubes on the surface of the active material layer opposite the current collector for improving the conductivity and formation of electrode during pressing [0034-0035] and a conductive carbon material that does not need to be carbon nanotubes for the active material layer in the vicinity of the surface of the active material layer on the current collector [0057-0058].
Claim 4: Jin teaches applicant’s deep layer being the interface of element 20 and element 10 and a surficial layer being the interface of element 20 and element 30 [Fig 1].
Claim 5: Jin teaches a bimodal particle diameter distribution having large and small particles [0042-0056].
Claim 7: Jin teaches the current collector (10) to be made of an aluminum alloy [0038].
Claim 8: Jin teaches the use of the cathode in a battery [0002, 0087-0094].
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al (PGPUB 2022/0140320) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamamoto et al (PGPUB 2024/0405192).
Claim 6: Jin teaches a method to improve the rolling density [0033, 0044-0046], but is silent to teach the amount of particle packing density.
Yamamoto teaches a positive electrode for use in a secondary battery [abstract] having a positive electrode (20) and current collector (21) with active material [0051-0052] that comprises a deep and surficial layer [Fig 1]. Yamamoto teaches the particle packing density to be 3.5g/cm3 [0087]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cathode of Jin to have the packing density of Yamamoto in order to improve the compressive strength of the active material [Abstract] and produce a high density after rolling to improve energy density and stability of the electrode produced [0087].
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto et al (PGPUB 2024/0405192) and further in view of Jin et al (PGPUB 2022/0140320).
Claim 1-3, 8: Yamamoto teaches a positive electrode for use in a secondary battery [abstract]. The positive electrode (20) includes a current collector (21), applicant’s core body, and an active layer material layer (22) [Fig 1; 0101]. The active material [0051-0052] comprises a conductive auxiliary agent of acetylene black [0086].
Yamamoto is silent to teach the inclusion of CNT on the surface of the active material opposite the core body.
Jin teaches a positive electrode [abstract] that comprises a surface layer of CNT (30) on the active material (20) prior to pressing in order to achieve a higher rolling density [0044]. One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have been motivated to include a surface layer of CNT as taught by Jin on the electrode active layers of Yamamoto in order to improve the rolling density of particles and improve output characteristics by reducing cracking [0033-0035].
The product obviated by Yamamoto in view of Jin includes CNT on the surface opposite the current collector and therefore does not include CNT at the surface of the active material and the current collector.
Claim 4: Yamamoto teaches an active material to have a deep layer (R2) and a surficial layer (R1) [Fig 1].
Claim 5: Yamamoto teaches the active material layer to comprise active material particles in a secondary particle size, large, and primary particle size, small [0034-0038].
Claim 6: Yamamoto teaches the particle packing density to be 3.5g/cm3 [0087].
Claim 7: Yamamoto teaches the positive electrode current collector to be an aluminum alloy foil [0059, 0087, 0089].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J YANCHUK whose telephone number is (571)270-7343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10a-8p.
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, Nick Smith can be reached at 571-272-8760. 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.
/STEPHEN J YANCHUK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights