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 .
Claims 1-18 are pending in the application.
Claims 1-5 are withdrawn in the application.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group (II) in the reply filed on 09/23/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious search burden for the examiner. This is not found persuasive,
• the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification,
• the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter,
• and the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 1-5 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention ( process of making a separator), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09/23/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 recites “ a core portion of the β – chitin” and “ a shell portion of the vinylidene fluoride-trifuoroethylene copolymer” should be corrected to “a core portion of β – chitin” and “a shell portion of a vinylidene fluoride-trifuoroethylene copolymer”. 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.
Claims 6 – 10, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Liang ( Electrospun core-shell …) in view of Ju (KR102344099B1, for prior art discussion see cited machine translation) and Kim (Hierarchical chitin fibers…, for prior art discussion see applicant provided copy, IDS dated 09/26/2026).
Liang discloses a core-shell fiber network by coaxial electrospinning as a separator for lithium ion battery (abstact, page 2, para. 2). An electrospun network is a non woven network. As disclosed by the applicant “non-woven fabric” means a fabric formed by interwinding fibers with each other, rather than a fabric woven from warp and weft yarns using a weaving machine or a knitted fabric using a knitting machine formed by interwinding fibers with each other (instant application specification, para. 0043). Therefore Liang discloses a non-woven separator for the comprises a coaxially electrospun fiber with core-shell structure (page 2, para. 2) with polyacrylonitrile (PAN) as core and poly (vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene) (PVDF-HFP) as the shell. Liang discloses the thermally stable and mechanically strong polyacrylonitrile fibers as the core serve as a rigid framework to preserve the separator structure at elevated temperature and the poly (vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene) (PVDF-HFP) as the shell layer covering on the core provides excellent electrolyte wettability (page 2, para. 2).
Liang fails to disclose β – chitin as the core.
Kim discloses fabricating a nonwoven mat-type separator using β -Chitin fiber for lithium ion batteries (page. 6114, col. 1, para 1, page. 6115, col. 1, para 1, figure 1a). Kim discloses β – chitin is second most abundant natural polysaccharide and suggest its usage as a nonwoven fiber separator for lithium (Li) metal rechargeable
batteries (LMBs) through exploiting both the strong affinity to Li-ions and the inertness to the aprotic electrolytes (page. 6114, col. 1, para. 1). Kim discloses the air permeance, average pore size are superior which implies β – chitin fiber can provide smooth physical paths for the Li-ions transportation. Kim further discloses the β – chitin fiber exhibits mechanical toughness and exhibits an excellent thermal stability in terms of dimension and morphology (page. 6117, col. 1, para.1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to substitute the core fiber of Liang’s non woven separator with β -Chitin as taught by Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to substitute the core fiber with β -Chitin to get a separator which has strong affinity to Li-ions, the inertness to the aprotic electrolytes superior permeance and excellent thermal stability.
The combination of Liang and Kim fails to disclose a PVDF-TrFE as the shell and the copolymer has a crystal grown along a crystal axis, and the crystal grown along the crystal axis is aligned in a direction not parallel to a longitudinal direction of the fiber.
Ju discloses a solution to grow PVDF-TrFE film epitaxially grown on a chitin film with a high crystallinity and perpendicular to the orientation of the chitin (para. 0006). Ju discloses a chitin film and PVDF-TrFE film epitaxially grown on the chitin film (para. 0039) and the PVDF-TrFE film is grown along the b axis in a direction perpendicular to the c-axis surface of said chitin film (para. 0040, 0128). Ju further discloses the PVDF-TrFE film can be vertically grown with a high crystallinity of 95% to 99% in accordance with the orientation of the chitin (para. 0006, 0040) and maximizing the crystallinity and orientation of PVDF-TrFE film is necessary to fully use its ferroelectric properties (para. 0004, 0152 figure 13). Ju further discloses the PVDF-TrFE film covering the chitin film have high moisture stability and that chitin can be protected from the moisture (para. 0164).
Kim discloses β -Chitin runs along the fiber axis (page. 6115, col. 2, para. 1). In the combination of Liang Kim and Ju the PVDF-TrFE film therefore has its c-axis along the fiber and its b-axis perpendicular to the core surface i.e. perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the fiber. Therefore, the combination would disclose the PVDF-TrFE grows along the b-axis in a direction perpendicular to the underlying β -Chitin core fiber surface meeting the limitations the crystal grown along the crystal axis is aligned in a direction not parallel to a longitudinal direction of the fiber and substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the fiber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to cover the β -Chitin core with PVDF-TrFE shell to protect the chitin core from moisture while providing highly crystalline oriented polymer shell as taught by Ju. Such a modification would have resulted in a core shell structure with β -Chitin core with PVDF-TrFE shell where in PVDF-TrFE has a crystal grown along a crystal axis. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to place PVDF-TrFE shell to protect the moisture sensitive Chitin core and provide a highly crystalline oriented shell to fully use its ferroelectric properties.
Regarding claim 8, Liang discloses determining the core content (PAN) in the non woven separator by TGA (page. 4, para. 1, figure 2a) and the weight of the core is about 60% (page. 4, para. 1, figure 2a) thereby disclosing the weight ratio of the core portion to shell portion to be 60:40 falling within the claimed range.
Regarding claim 9 Liang discloses the electro spun core-shell nanofiber has a diameter ranging from 300 nm to 500 nm (page 3, para. 5 – Results and Discussion section) overlapping with the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 10, Liang discloses the thickness of the non-woven separator to be controlled around 30 µm (page. 2, para. 4) overlapping with the claimed range of approximately 2 to 30 µm.
Regarding claim 15, Liang discloses an electrode assembly for lithium secondary battery (coin cell) comprising of a positive electrode (NCM) and Li foil as negative electrode (page. 3, para. 3 – Electrochemical Characterization section). Liang further discloses separator disposed between the anode and cathode (page. 3, para. 3 – Electrochemical Characterization section).
Regarding claim 17, Liang discloses a lithium secondary battery (coin cell) and as discussed above with respect to claim 15 Liang discloses the electrode assembly for the lithium secondary battery (page. 3, para. 3 – Electrochemical Characterization section).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Liang ( Electrospun core-shell …) in view of Ju (KR102344099B1, for prior art discussion see cited machine translation) and Kim (Hierarchical chitin fibers…, for prior art discussion see applicant provided copy, IDS dated 09/26/2026) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of (US PG Pub. 2003/0017386 A1).
Liang, Kim and Ju are relied upon as discussed above.
Liang fails to disclose the non-woven separator has a basis weight of approximately 2 g/m2 to 10 g/m2.
Daido discloses a nonwoven separator for lithium -ion batteries (para. 0012). Daido further discloses the basis weight of the non woven fabric to be 6-20g/m2 overlapping with eh claimed range (MPEP 2144.05(I)). Daido discloses by appropriately controlling the morphology of the lithium ion secondary battery it is possible to impart the overcharge-preventing function as well as practical mechanical properties and ion permeability (para. 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the separator of Liang to have a basis weight as taught by Daido. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the separator to have the basis weight to get a separator which has good mechanical properties and prevent over charging.
Regarding claim 12, Liang fails to disclose the non-woven separator has a permeability of approximately 50 s/100 cc or less.
Daido discloses the non-woven separator has a permeability of no longer than 100 seconds (para. 0045) and in an example discloses of <1 sec (para. 0076, 0098) measured according to JIS P8117 test (para. 0045) which measures time for a fixed volume of air to pass through the separator similar to what applicant uses (instant specification para. 0115). This disclosed value of less than 1 second as measured according to JIS P8117 overlaps with the claimed range of 50 s/100 cc or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the separator of Liang to have a permeability as taught by Daido. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the separator to have the permeability to get a separator which has good mechanical properties, ion permeability and prevent over charging.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Liang in view of Liang ( Electrospun core-shell …) in view of Ju (KR102344099B1, for prior art discussion see cited machine translation) and Kim (Hierarchical chitin fibers…, for prior art discussion see applicant provided copy, IDS dated 09/26/2026) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Chul (KR20130120113A for prior art discussion see cited machine translation).
Liang, Kim and Ju are relied upon as discussed above.
Liang fails to disclose the non-woven separator further comprises a mixture of inorganic particles and a polymer coated on at least one surface of the non-woven separator.
Chul discloses a separator comprising a porous nonwoven substrate made of a core-sheath composite fiber (para. 0001). Chul discloses a porous coating layer on atleast one surface of the non-woven separator and the coating comprises of mixture of inorganic particles and a binder polymer is positioned on part or all of the inorganic particles and connects and fixes the inorganic particle that connects and fixes the inorganic particles together (para. 0005, 0016, 0018). Chul discloses when inorganic particles having a high dielectric constant are used as the inorganic particles, the dissociation of the electrolyte salt, for example, the lithium salt in the liquid electrolyte, can be increased, and the ion conductivity of the electrolyte can be improved (para. 0017). Chul discloses the inorganic particles and a binder polymer which is located on part or all of the inorganic particles connect and fix the inorganic particles (para.0016 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the separator of Liang to comprise of inorganic particles and polymer coated on at least one surface of the separator as taught by Chul. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the separator to comprise inorganic particles and polymer coated on at least one surface of the separator to increase the dissociation of the electrolyte salt thereby improving the ion conductivity of the electrolyte.
Claims 14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Liang ( Electrospun core-shell …) in view of Ju (KR102344099B1, for prior art discussion see cited machine translation) and Kim (Hierarchical chitin fibers…, for prior art discussion see applicant provided copy, IDS dated 09/26/2026) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Lee (KR101073180B1, for prior art discussion see cited machine translation).
Liang, Kim and Ju are relied upon as discussed above.
Liang fails to disclose the non-woven separator comprises a porous polymer film laminated on at least one surface of the non-woven separator.
Lee discloses a multi-layer separator for a lithium secondary battery comprising a porous polymer film and a porous non-woven fabric sheet laminated on at least one surface of the porous polymer film (para. 0005, 0014 ) and bonded at their surfaces by a gel-forming polymer adhesive layer (para. 0023). Lee discloses such a separator formed by combining a non-woven fabric with a porous polyolefin film which would otherwise shrinks and causes internal short circuits (para. 0010) significantly reduces the risk of interlayer separation of the multilayer separator in the winding of the separator or the assembling process of the battery or the use of the secondary battery (para. 0023).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the separator of Liang to comprise porous polymer film laminated on at least one surface of the separator as taught by Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated for the separator to comprise porous polymer film laminated on at least one surface of the separator to significantly reduces the risk of interlayer separation.
Regarding claim 16, Liang discloses an electrode assembly lithium secondary battery comprising of a positive electrode (NCM) and Li foil as negative electrode (page. 3, para. 3 – Electrochemical Characterization section). Liang further discloses separator disposed between he anode and cathode (page. 3, para. 3 – Electrochemical Characterization section) in a coin cell.
Regarding claim 18, Liang discloses a lithium secondary battery (coin cell) and as discussed above with respect to claim 16 Liang discloses the electrode assembly for the lithium secondary battery (page. 3, para. 3 – Electrochemical Characterization section).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISWARYA MATHEW whose telephone number is (571)272-9515. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/I.M./
Iswarya MathewExaminer, Art Unit 1788
10/06/2026
/Alicia Chevalier/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1788
