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 .
The Applicant has amended independent claims 14 and 20; and added new dependent claims 25 and 26. Claims 14-26 are pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/21/2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 14-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al., US 20140234721, in view of Redford et al., US 2021/0226228.
Regarding Claim 14, Yang et al., teaches a lithium ion battery (0007; 0041), comprising: a cathode electrode (0073); an anode electrode (0007; 0041) formed of a porous silicon substrate (composite) (abstract; 0007-0009; 0036 (porous silicon composite)) having a large number of through holes (pores) (abstract; claims 1 and 5) formed therein, and a metal silicide thin film (abstract; 0008-0015) without blocking the through holes (0041); a separator element disposed between the cathode electrode and the anode electrode (0081); and an electrolyte (0043; 0081).
Yang does not teach through holes having a length-to-diameter aspect ratio of more than 50:1.
Redford et al., teaches through holes having an aspect ratio of more than 50:1 (0022; 0032; 0062).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Redford into the teachings of Yang because a length to diameter aspect ratio of more than 50:1, is preferable (0025) and “which is quite effective for use as a membrane.” (0062)
Yang et al., does not teach at least a portion of the surface of the through holes is covered with a metal silicide thin film without blocking the through holes.
Redford et al., teaches at least a portion of the surface of the through holes is covered with a metal silicide (0029-0030; 0032) thin film without blocking the through holes (0034; 0076).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Redford et al., into the teachings of Yang et al., because “[0030] The resulting substrate is a porous silicon substrate which includes a metallurgically bonded surface layer of metal silicide on the walls of the porous structure, which advantageously may be used as an electrode in a rechargeable lithium ion battery.” (0030; 0032; 0076).
Regarding Claim 15, Yang et al., teaches wherein the porous silicon substrate (0081) comprises single crystal monocrystalline silicon (007b; 0085).
Regarding Claim 16, Yang et al., teaches wherein the porous silicon substrate (0081) comprises polycrystalline silicon (0076; 0085).
Regarding Claim 17, Yang et al., does not teach wherein the porous silicon substrate comprises amorphous silicon.
Redford et al., teaches the porous silicon substrate comprises amorphous silicon (0034; 0083).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to insert the teachings of Redford into the teachings of Yang because “[0034] The present disclosure also provides an electrode for use in a lithium ion battery, wherein the anode electrode comprises a substrate formed of porous silicon in which surface areas of the pores are coated at least in part with a metal silicide. The silicon substrate may comprise monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, or amorphous silicon, the pores have a length to diameter aspect ratio of >50:1, and the metal silicide preferably is selected from the group consisting of TiSi.sub.2, CoSi.sub.2 and WSi.sub.2 which are given as exemplary (although other metal silicides are contemplated as a function of application).”
Regarding Claim 18, Yang et al., teaches the metal silicide (abstract; 0007-0015).
Yang et al., teaches thin film coating is selected from the group consisting of CoSi2 (0010; 0038; 0049).
Regarding Claim 19, Yang et al., does not teach wherein the electrolyte is selected from the group consisting of LiPF6.
Redford teaches the electrolyte is selected from the group consisting of LiPF6 (0032; 0083), which is well-known in the lithium battery art (“conventional lithium salt electrolyte”) (0032).
Regarding Claim 20, Yang et al., teaches an electrode (0022; 0043) for use in a lithium ion battery (0007), wherein the anode electrode comprises a porous silicon substrate formed of porous silicon (0007-0015) having a plurality of through holes (claims 1, 5, 10).
Yang does not teach through holes having an aspect ratio of 50:1.
Redford et al., teaches through holes having an aspect ratio of greater than 50:1 (0034).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Redford into the teachings of Yang because Redford teaches that “[0062] The resulting pores have a high aspect ratio of length to cross-sectional diameter typically a length to diameter aspect ratio of >50:1 (although other aspect ratios are contemplated as a function of application). The resulting structure, shown in FIG. 2(h) comprises a porous silicon wafer 30 having substantially cylindrical through holes or pores 28 having a length of, e.g., 180 μm and a diameter of 1.6 μm, i.e, an aspect ratio of 112.5:1 which is quite effective for use as a membrane in a PEMFC as will be described below (although other aspect ratios are contemplated as a function of application).” (0062).
Yang et al., does not teach at least a portion of the surface of the through holes is covered with a metal silicide (0006) thin film without blocking the through holes.
Redford teaches at least a portion of the surface of the through holes is covered with a metal silicide (0032; 0034) thin film without blocking the through holes (0076-0077).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Redford et al., into the teachings of Yang et al., because “an electrochemically active material such as a metal silicide is formed on surfaces of the pores of the silicon substrate material, for example, by depositing an appropriate metal such as titanium or tungsten or cobalt on the porous silicon substrate material (although other metals are contemplated as a function of application),.” (0029).
Regarding Claim 21, Yang et al., teaches wherein the porous silicon substrate comprises single crystal silicon (0076; 0085).
Regarding Claim 22, Yang et al., teaches wherein the porous silicon substrate comprises polycrystalline silicon (0076; 0085).
Regarding Claim 23, Yang et al., teaches the porous silicon substrate (0076; 0085) but does not teach comprising amorphous silicon.
Redford teaches the porous silicon substrate (abstract; 0029; 0032) comprises amorphous silicon (0034; 0083).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to insert the teachings of Redford into the teachings of Yang because “[0029] an electrochemically active material such as a metal silicide is formed on surfaces of the pores of the silicon substrate material, for example, by depositing an appropriate metal such as titanium or tungsten or cobalt on the porous silicon substrate material (although other metals are contemplated as a function of application), using various deposition techniques including but not limited to chemical vapor deposition (CVD), plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD), thermal CVD, electroplating, electroless plating, and/or solution deposition techniques, which are given as exemplary, and the metal-coating on the porous silicon substrate material is converted to the corresponding metal silicide by heating.
[0030] The resulting substrate is a porous silicon substrate which includes a metallurgically bonded surface layer of metal silicide on the walls of the porous structure, which advantageously may be used as an electrode in a rechargeable lithium ion battery.”
Regarding Claim 24, Yang et al., teaches wherein the metal silicide (abstract; 0007-0015), wherein the metal silicide thin film is selected from the group consisting of CoSi2 (0010; 0038; 0049).
Regarding claim 25, Yang does not teach the cylindrical through holes have a length to diameter aspect ratio of 112.5 : 1.
Redford teaches the cylindrical through holes have a length to diameter aspect ratio of 112.5 : 1 (0062; 0075).
Regarding claim 26, Yang does not teach the cylindrical through holes have a length to diameter aspect ratio of 112.5 : 1.
Redford teaches the cylindrical through holes have a length to diameter aspect ratio of 112.5 : 1 (0062; 0075).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that “Yang does not teach the porous silicon substrate comprise amorphous silicon.”
However, Redford et al., teaches “The silicon substrate may comprise monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, or amorphous silicon” (0034).
The Applicant argues that “independent claims 14 and 20 require that the plurality of through holes are “cylindrical” mesoporous silicon does not have cylindrical through holes.”
However, Redford teaches through holes (pores) that are cylindrical in shape (0022; 0025; 0062; 0067; 0075).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1288. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-4pm.
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.
ANGELA J. MARTIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/ANGELA J MARTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1727