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 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim language defined by a Markush grouping requires selection from a closed group "consisting of" the alternative members. Treatment of claims reciting alternatives is not governed by the particular format used (e.g., alternatives may be set forth as "a material selected from the group consisting of A, B, and C" or "wherein the material is A, B, or C"). See MPEP 2117(I).
Claim 1 recites “includes at least one selected from a gel, a polymer, and a high viscosity electrolyte”. It appears that applicant is intending for the selection to made from one of the components in the list or a combination of those components and the claim is interpretated as such.
The Examiner suggests amending the claim to recite “includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a gel, a polymer, and a high viscosity electrolyte” or “includes at least one of a gel, a polymer, or a high viscosity electrolyte” to reflect the alternative selection of a component or a combination of those from the list.
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.
Claims 1-3 are 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation “said current collector” in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is interpretated as “said porous current collector”, pending further clarification from applicant.
Claims 2-3 are indefinite as they depend from an indefinite base and fail to cure the deficiencies of said claim.
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.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hasuo (US 2022/0173378 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hasuo teaches an all-solid-state battery (Hasuo [0075-0080], Fig. 1) comprising:
an all-solid-state battery positive electrode in which a positive electrode active material (2, Hasuo Fig. 1) layer is formed on a positive electrode current collector (1, Hasuo Fig. 1)
an all-solid-state battery negative electrode in which a negative electrode active material layer (4, Hasuo Fig. 1) is formed on a negative electrode current collector (5, Hasuo Fig. 1)
a solid electrolyte layer disposed between said all-solid-state battery positive electrode and said all-solid-state battery negative electrode (3, Hasuo Fig. 1)
wherein the positive electrode active material layer is a porous active material layer including a porous current collector (aluminum fiber A, Hasuo Fig. 1) and an active material filled in said porous current collector (11, Hasuo Fig. 1)
an intermediate layer disposed between said porous active material layer and said solid electrolyte layer (interface between the solid electrolyte layer (3) and the cathode layer (2), Hasuo Fig. 1).
said intermediate layer including a polymer (polyvinylidene fluoride, Hasuo [0075,0079])
Regarding claim 2, Hasuo teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Hasuo further teaches said porous active material layer comprising a void on said solid electrolyte layer side (spaces between the fibers A, Hasuo Fig. 1) and said intermediate layer is disposed in said void (Hasuo Fig. 1).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasuo.
Regarding claim 3, Hasuo teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Hasuo does not expressly teach an embodiment of an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1 wherein the negative electrode active material layer comprises metallic lithium, a lithium alloy, or silicon.
However, Hasuo teaches that the embodiment of their invention may be used to form a solid-state battery that uses a silicon negative active material (silicon anode, Hasuo [0034]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a silicon negative active material in the all-solid-state battery of Hasuo in order to obtain the predictable result of an all-solid-state battery comprising a negative electrode capable of intercalating and deintercalating lithium ions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chang (US 2023/0163347 A1): appears to disclose a solid state battery comprising a positive electrode and a negative electrode comprising a current collector, a porous layer, and a solid electrolyte layer (abstract, Fig. 2).
Tao (Tao, X. et al. Solid-State Lithium-Sulfur Batteries Operated at 37°C with Composites of Nanostructured Li7La3Zr2O12/Carbon Foam and Polymer. Nano Letters. 17, 2967-2972 (2017)): appears to disclose an all-solid-state battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a solid electrolyte layer, wherein the positive electrode comprises a porous current collector (carbon foam) and an active material filled in the porous current collector (sulfur) (Fig. 1).
Yan (Yan, C. et al. Interconnected cathode-electrolyte double-layer enabling continuous Li-ion conduction throughout solid-state Li-S battery. Energy Storage Materials. 44, 136-144 (2022)): appears to disclose an all-solid-state battery comprising a cathode comprising a porous layer and active material, a solid electrolyte layer, and a negative electrode layer (Fig. 1-2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA S CASERTO whose telephone number is (571)272-5114. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/J.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/LARISSA ROWE EMRICH/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights