DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 5, and 20-23 are presented for examination, wherein claims 1, 5, and 20 are currently amended; plus, claims 21-23 are newly added. Claims 2-4 and 6-19 are cancelled.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 20 over Watanabe is withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 20.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 20 over Seok is withdrawn, as a result of the amendments to claim 20.
The applicants’ August 11, 2023 Petition to Make Special under the Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program was granted on September 20, 2023 by the USPTO.
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 § 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al (US 2015/0380739).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 1, Watanabe teaches a negative electrode plate (e.g. item 30) for nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, said battery comprising:
(i) said negative electrode plate;
(ii) a positive electrode plate (e.g. item 20); and,
(iii) a separator (e.g. item 40) disposed between said negative electrode plate and said positive electrode plate,
wherein said negative electrode plate comprises
a negative electrode collector (e.g. item 32) and
a negative electrode mixture layer (e.g. item 50) disposed on a surface said negative electrode collector,
wherein said negative electrode mixture layer composed of
(i.a.1) an active material that may be a mixture including two or more of e.g. natural graphite, artificial graphite, silicon oxide, and silicon metal; and,
(i.a.2) a binding material (e.g. item 60 and further e.g. items 61 and 62), including a “first binding material” and a “second binding material,” that may be rubber polymers, such as styrene-butadiene copolymers (SBRs) and modified SBRs
said negative electrode mixture layer is divided into two equal parts at a center in a thickness direction, forming three layers:
(i.b.1) a negative electrode mixture layer (b), which is one half of said negative electrode mixture layer, located on a surface side of said negative electrode mixture layer; and,
a negative electrode mixture layer (a), which is the other half of said negative electrode mixture layer, located on a negative electrode collector side of said negative electrode mixture layer, wherein said negative electrode mixture layer (a) is further divided in two equal parts:
(i.b.2) a negative electrode mixture layer (c) is one half of said negative electrode mixture layer (a), located on said negative electrode collector side of said negative electrode mixture layer (a); and,
(i.b.3) a negative electrode mixture layer (d) is the other half of said negative electrode mixture layer (a) disposed between said negative electrode mixture layer (c) and said negative electrode mixture layer (b),
wherein a total amount of said binding material (i.e. first and second binding material) in said negative electrode mixture layer is preferably 0.45-2.0% by mass based on a total amount of mixture (solid content) of said negative electrode mixture layer,
wherein a relative amount of said binding material preferably satisfy a relationship ratio:
C/D is preferably higher than 1.0 and 50 or less and more preferably 2 or more and 20 or less, wherein
a content C (% by mass) of binding materials relative to a mass of said negative active material in said negative electrode mixture layer (c)
a content D (% by mass) of binding materials relative to a mass of said negative active material in said negative electrode mixture layer (d),
wherein Watanabe further recognizes reducing an amount of bind material toward an outer surface enhances flexibility of said negative electrode mixture layer, reduces peeling, increases lithium ion transfer, and provides excellent discharge output characteristics; plus, increasing an amount of bind material towards said current collector enhances binding property between said collector and said negative active material, and enhancing electrical characteristics
(e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 16-17, 19-21, 23-25, 28-31, 45-47, 57, and 73 plus e.g. Figures 1-2), reading on “anode for a secondary battery,” said negative electrode plate comprising:
(1) said negative electrode collector (e.g. item 32) (e.g. supra), reading on “an anode current collector;” and,
(2) negative electrode mixture layer (e.g. item 50) disposed on said surface of said negative electrode collector,
wherein said negative electrode mixture layer composed of said active material that may be said mixture including two or more of e.g. natural graphite, artificial graphite, silicon oxide, and silicon metal; and, said binding material (e.g. item 60 and further e.g. items 61 and 62), including said “first binding material” and said “second binding material,” that may be rubber polymers, such as styrene-butadiene copolymers (SBRs) and modified SBRs (e.g. supra), reading on “an anode mixture layer formed on at least one surface of the anode current collector and comprising an anode active material and a binder” and “the binder comprises styrene butadiene rubber;” plus the newly amended, previously amended, previously added limitation “the anode active material comprises a silicon-based material comprising SiOx and a carbon-based material comprising a mixture of artificial graphite and natural graphite, wherein x is equal to or greater than 0 and less than 2,”
wherein said negative electrode mixture layer is divided into two equal parts at a center in a thickness direction, forming three layers:
(2.a) said negative electrode mixture layer (b), which is one half of said negative electrode mixture layer, located on said surface side of said negative electrode mixture layer; and,
said negative electrode mixture layer (a), which is the other half of said negative electrode mixture layer, located on said negative electrode collector side of said negative electrode mixture layer, wherein said negative electrode mixture layer (a) is further divided in two equal parts:
(2.b) said negative electrode mixture layer (c) is one half of said negative electrode mixture layer (a), located on said negative electrode collector side of said negative electrode mixture layer (a); and,
(2.c) said negative electrode mixture layer (d) is the other half of said negative electrode mixture layer (a) disposed between said negative electrode mixture layer (c) and said negative electrode mixture layer (b)
(e.g. supra),
said taught negative electrode mixture layer (c) corresponding with the claimed “a first area on the anode current collector;”
said taught said negative electrode mixture layer (d) corresponding with the claimed “a second area on the first area;” and,
said taught said negative electrode mixture layer (b) corresponding with the claimed “a third area on the second area,”
(e.g. supra), reading on “the anode mixture layer comprises a first area on the anode current collector, a second area on the first area, and a third area on the second area,” and establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed relationship, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a sum of thicknesses of the first area and the second area is 1/2 or less of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer, and the thickness of the first area is equal to the thickness of the second area.”
Watanabe teaches said total amount of said binding material (i.e. first and second binding material) in said negative electrode mixture layer is preferably 0.45-2.0% by mass based on said total amount of mixture (solid content) of said negative electrode mixture layer,
wherein said relative amount of said binding material preferably satisfy said relationship ratio:
C/D is preferably higher than 1.0 and 50 or less and more preferably 2 or more and 20 or less, wherein
a content C (% by mass) of binding materials relative to a mass of said negative active material in said negative electrode mixture layer (c)
a content D (% by mass) of binding materials relative to a mass of said negative active material in said negative electrode mixture layer (d),
wherein Watanabe further recognizes reducing said amount of bind material toward said outer surface enhances flexibility of said negative electrode mixture layer, reduces peeling, increases lithium ion transfer, and provides excellent discharge output characteristics; plus, increasing said amount of bind material towards said current collector, enhances binding property between said collector and said negative active material, and enhancing electrical characteristics (supra),
[0023] In the negative electrode mixture layer 50 according to this embodiment, the content A (% by mass) of the binding materials 60 relative to the mass of the negative active material in the negative electrode mixture layer (a) 52 and the content B (% by mass) of the binding materials 60 relative to the mass of the negative active material in the negative electrode mixture layer (b) 54 satisfy a relationship: 0.04≦B/(A+B)<0.5. The ratio B/(A+B) is preferably 0.06 or more and 0.3 or less. The content of the binding materials 60 in the negative electrode mixture layer (a) 52 on the negative electrode collector side is high, which enhances the binding property of the negative electrode mixture layer 50 to the negative electrode collector 32. In addition, the content of the binding materials 60 in the negative electrode mixture layer (b) 54 on the surface side is low, which enhances the flexibility of the negative electrode mixture layer 50. As a result, peeling during compression or press forming is inhibited. The enhancement in the binding property between the collector and the negative active material enhances the electrical characteristics, and the reduced content of the binding materials 60 in the negative electrode mixture layer 50 on the surface side smoothens the transfer of the electrolyte such as lithium ions. The nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery produced using the negative electrode plate 30 according to this embodiment, therefore, has excellent discharge output characteristics.[0024] The negative electrode mixture layer 50 according to this embodiment has the above-described structure and can thereby enhance the binding property between the negative electrode mixture layer 50 and the negative electrode collector 32 and simultaneously enhance the flexibility of the negative electrode mixture layer 50. Accordingly, the discharge output characteristics can be further improved by further reducing the total amount of the binding materials 60 in the negative electrode mixture layer 50. In addition, the excellent binding property and flexibility allow the negative electrode mixture layer 50 to have an increased thickness, which improves the battery characteristics.
(Watanabe, at e.g. ¶¶ 0023-24, emphasis added) noting said negative electrode active material is substantially the balance remaining in each of said negative electrode mixture layer (c) and said negative electrode mixture layer (d), but does not expressly teach the limitation “the first area and the second area satisfy, according to energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, Formula 1 below:
1/7 ≤ Iarea2/Iarea1 ≤ 2/3 [Formula 1]
wherein Iarea1 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the first area, and Iarea2 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the second area.”
However, Watanabe teaches a substantially identical composition of said negative electrode mixture layer (c) and said negative electrode mixture layer (d) to those of the instant first and second areas (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-24, 29, 59, 64-66, 74, and 97-101), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed property, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01;
alternatively, Watanabe teaches a substantially identical composition of said negative electrode mixture layer (c) to that of the instant first area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 23-24, 29, 59, 64-66, 74, and 97-101), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of it has the claimed Iarea1 property of said first area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01; and, Watanabe teaches a substantially identical composition of said negative electrode mixture layer (d) to that of the instant second area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 23-24, 29, 59, 64-66, 74, and 97-101), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness it has claimed Iarea2 property of said second area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01, so a ratio of said Iarea1/Iarea1 reading on said claimed property.
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe teaches the negative electrode plate of claim 1, wherein said total amount of said binding material (i.e. first and second binding material in said negative electrode mixture layer is preferably 0.45-2.0% by mass based on said total amount of mixture (solid content) of said negative electrode mixture layer,
wherein said relative amount of said binding material preferably satisfy said relationship ratio:
C/D is preferably higher than 1.0 and 50 or less and more preferably 2 or more and 20 or less, wherein
a content C (% by mass) of binding materials relative to a mass of said negative active material in said negative electrode mixture layer (c)
a content D (% by mass) of binding materials relative to a mass of said negative active material in said negative electrode mixture layer (d),
wherein Watanabe further recognizes reducing said amount of bind material toward said outer surface enhances flexibility of said negative electrode mixture layer, reduces peeling, increases lithium ion transfer, and provides excellent discharge output characteristics; plus, increasing said amount of bind material towards said current collector, enhances binding property between said collector and said negative active material, and enhancing electrical characteristics (supra), but does not expressly teach the claimed property “the first area and the second area satisfy, according to energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, Formula 2 below:
1/12≤(Iarea2/ISi2)/(Iarea1/ISi1)≤2/3 [Formula 2]
wherein Iarea1 refers to the peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the first area, Iarea2 refers to the peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the second area, ISi1 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the silicon-based material in the first area, and ISi2 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the silicon-based material in the second area.”
However, Watanabe teaches a substantially identical composition of said negative electrode mixture layer (c) and said negative electrode mixture layer (d) to those of the instant first and second areas (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-25, 29, 53, 59, 64-66, 74, 97-101, and 107-122), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed property, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01;
alternatively, Watanabe teaches a substantially identical composition of said negative electrode mixture layer (c) to that of the instant first area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 23-24, 29, 59, 64-66, 74, and 97-101), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of it has the claimed Iarea1 and ISi1 properties of said first area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01; and, Watanabe teaches a substantially identical composition of said negative electrode mixture layer (d) to that of the instant second area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 23-24, 29, 59, 64-66, 74, and 97-101), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness it has claimed Iarea2 and ISi2 properties of said second area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01, so a ratio of said Iarea1/ISi1 / Iarea2/ISi2 reading on said claimed property.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seok et al (KR 2020/0096153).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 1, Seok teaches a lithium secondary battery (e.g. item 1) comprising a negative electrode (e.g. item 2), a positive electrode (e.g. item 3), and a separator (e.g. item 4) therebetween,
wherein said negative electrode has an active material layer comprising a plurality of layers, such as two or three layers, applied on a current collector substrate,
wherein said layers include a negative electrode active material that may be at least one or more of e.g. Si, SiOx (0<x<2), fibrous natural graphite, and artificial graphite,
wherein said layers may each include the same binder, such as SBR, and said binder may be included in the plurality of layers so that said binder is non-uniformly distributed,
wherein said plurality of layers may have said binder non-uniformly distributed as follows:
a first layer—closest to said current collector substrate—has the highest concentration of said binder,
a second layer—a middle layer—includes a lower concentration of said binder than that of said layer closest to said current collector substrate, and
a third layer—the layer furthest from said current collector, i.e. closest to a battery electrolyte—does not include said binder,
specifically said binder may be locally present in an area corresponding up to an area of about 35% of the total thickness of the active material layer,
wherein a ratio of binder in said second layer and said first layer may range from e.g. 5:5 to 1:9, or e.g. 4:6 and less than or equal to 2:8,
a total amount of said binder is 1.0 to 1.7 part by weight based on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of said plurality of active material layers,
wherein said non-uniform distribution of binder in said active material layer results in improved adhesion between said active material layer and said current collector substrate can be improved; plus, lowered interfacial resistance
(e.g. ¶¶ 0001, 06-07, 10-13, 20-29, 33, 35, 40-45, 64, 67, 73, 78-86, 96-97, and 10-107 plus e.g. Figure 5), reading on “anode for a secondary battery,” said negative electrode comprising:
(1) said current collector substrate (e.g. supra), reading on “an anode current collector;” and,
(2) said active material layer comprising said plurality of layers, such as said three layers, applied on said current collector substrate, wherein said active material layer comprising said negative electrode active material that may be at least one or more of e.g. Si, SiOx (0<x<2), fibrous natural graphite, and artificial graphite; plus, said binder, such as SBR (e.g. supra), reading on the limitation “an anode mixture layer formed on at least one surface of the anode current collector and comprising an anode active material and a binder;” the previously added limitation “the binder comprises styrene butadiene rubber” and the newly amended, previously amended, previously added limitation “the anode active material comprises a silicon-based material comprising SiOx and a carbon-based material comprising a mixture of artificial graphite and natural graphite, wherein x is equal to or greater than 0 and less than 2,”
wherein said plurality of layers may have said binder non-uniformly distributed as follows:
said first layer—closest to said current collector substrate—has the highest concentration of said binder,
said second layer— said middle layer—includes said lower concentration of said binder than that of said layer closest to said current collector substrate, and
said third layer—the layer furthest from said current collector, i.e. closest to said battery electrolyte—does not include said binder,
specifically said binder may be locally present in said area corresponding up to said area of about 35% of the total thickness of the active material layer,
(e.g. supra), wherein said first layer and said second layer may have the same thicknesses:
[0040] The thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be 60 ㎛ to 210 ㎛, respectively, and the thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be the same or different from each other….
(e.g. ¶0040, emphasis added), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on the previously amended, previously amended limitation “the anode mixture layer comprises a first area on the anode current collector, a second area on the first area, and a third area on the second area” and establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a sum of thicknesses of the first area and the second area is 1/2 or less of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer,”
wherein said first layer and said second layer may have the same thicknesses:
[0040] The thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be 60 ㎛ to 210 ㎛, respectively, and the thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be the same or different from each other….
(e.g. ¶0040, emphasis added), reading on the previously added limitation “the thickness of the first area is equal to the thickness of the second area,”
said first layer—closest to said current collector substrate—has the highest concentration of said binder,
said second layer— said middle layer—includes said lower concentration of said binder than that of said layer closest to said current collector substrate,
wherein said ratio of binder in said second layer and said first layer may range from e.g. 5:5 to 1:9, or e.g. 4:6 and less than or equal to 2:8, and
said total amount of said binder is 1.0 to 1.7 part by weight based on 100 parts by weight of said total weight of said plurality of active material layers, (e.g. supra), wherein said binder content of said second layer to said binder content of said first layer may be calculated to be e.g. 0.111-1 or e.g. 0.25-0.667, but does not expressly teach the claimed property “… the first area and the second area satisfy, according to energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, Formula 1 below:
1/7 ≤ Iarea2/Iarea1 ≤ 2/3 [Formula 1]
wherein Iarea1 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the first area, and Iarea2 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the second area.”
However, Seok teaches a substantially identical composition of said first layer and said second layer to those of the instant first and second areas (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-24, 29, 59, 64-66, 74, and 97-101), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed property, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01;
alternatively, Seok teaches a substantially identical composition of said first layer to that of the instant first area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-25, 29, 53, 59, 64-66, 74, 97-101, and 107-122), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of it has the claimed Iarea1 property of said first area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01; and, Seok teaches a substantially identical composition of said second layer to that of the instant second area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-25, 29, 53, 59, 64-66, 74, 97-101, and 107-122), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness it has claimed property Iarea2 of said second area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01, so a ratio of said Iarea1/Iarea1 reading on said claimed property.
Regarding claim 5, Seok teaches the negative electrode of claim 1, wherein said plurality of layers, such as said three layers, applied on said current collector substrate, wherein said active material layer comprising said negative electrode active material, which may be at least one or more of e.g. Si, SiOx (0<x<2), fibrous natural graphite, and artificial graphite plus, said binder, such as SBR,
wherein said ratio of binder in said second layer and said first layer may range from e.g. 5:5 to 1:9, or e.g. 4:6 and less than or equal to 2:8, and
said total amount of said binder is 1.0 to 1.7 part by weight based on 100 parts by weight of said total weight of said plurality of active material layers (e.g. supra), noting said negative electrode active material is substantially the balance remaining in each of said first and second layers, but does not expressly teach the claimed property “the first area and the second area satisfy, according to energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, Formula 2 below:
1/12≤(Iarea2/ISi2)/(Iarea1/ISi1)≤2/3 [Formula 2]
wherein Iarea1 refers to the peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the first area, Iarea2 refers to the peak intensity corresponding to the binder in the second area, ISi1 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the silicon-based material in the first area, and ISi2 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the silicon-based material in the second area.”
However, Seok teaches a substantially identical composition of said first layer and said second layer to those of the instant first and second areas (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-25, 29, 53, 59, 64-66, 74, 97-101, and 107-122), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed property, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01;
alternatively, Seok teaches a substantially identical composition of said first layer to that of the instant first area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-25, 29, 53, 59, 64-66, 74, 97-101, and 107-122), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of it has the claimed Iarea1 and ISi1 properties of said first area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01; and, Seok teaches a substantially identical composition of said second layer to that of the instant second area (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0006-10, 20, 23-25, 29, 53, 59, 64-66, 74, 97-101, and 107-122), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness it has claimed Iarea2 and ISi2 properties of said second area, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01, so a ratio of said Iarea1/ISi1 / Iarea2/ISi2 reading on said claimed property.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20 and 22-23 are allowed. None of the timely art of teaches or suggests the claimed secondary battery of claim 20, including the specifically claimed anode.
Claim 21 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
None of the timely art of teaches or suggests the specifically claimed anode of claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed September 16, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1 and 5 over Watanabe, the applicant alleges the following.
First, the Patent Office has alleged that Watanabe establishes a prima facie case of
obviousness of the claimed Formula 1 property under MPEP § 2112.01, on the theory that Watanabe teaches a “substantially identical composition” of its negative electrode mixture layers (c) and (d) to those of the claimed first and second areas. Applicant disagrees. The MPEP states, “[t]he fact that a certain result or characteristic may occur or be present in the prior art is not sufficient to establish the inherency of that result or characteristic.” MPEP § 2112, § IV (citing In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1534, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1957 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). Moreover, “[a] prior art reference that discloses a genus still does not inherently disclose all species within that broad category.” Metabolite Labs., Inc.
v. Lab. Corp. of Am. Holdings, 370 F.3d 1354, 1367, 71 USPQ2d 1081, 1091 (Fed. Cir. 2004). In the context of obviousness, “the limitation at issue necessarily must be present, or the natural result of the combination of elements explicitly disclosed by the prior art.” PAR Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. TWI Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 773 F.3d 1186, 1195-96, 112 USPQ2d 1945, 1952 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Watanabe’s C/D binder-content ratio is disclosed as a broad genus of “preferably higher than 1.0 and 50 or less and more preferably 2 or more and 20 or less.” See Watanabe, paragraph [0025]. Watanabe’s own worked examples demonstrate that the claimed Iarea2/Iareal ratio does not necessarily flow from Watanabe’s teachings. The D/C values across Watanabe's examples span from approximately 0.03 to approximately 1.2, a range that extends both well below and well above the claimed window of 1/7 (~0.143) to 2/3 (~0.667). For instance, in Example 3, the binder content in layer (c) is 1.82% and in layer (d) is 0.06%, yielding a D/C value of approximately 0.03, while in Example 4, the binder content in layer (c) is 1.02% and in layer (d) is 1.25%, yielding a D/C value of approximately 1.2. See Watanabe, Table. Because Watanabe’s disclosed compositions produce D/C values that fall both inside and outside the claimed range, a D/C value within 1/7 to 2/3 is not a necessary consequence of Watanabe’s teachings. Further, the Patent Office has not established that Watanabe’s negative electrode mixture layers (c) and (d), measured as claims 1 and 20 require, would yield a value within 1/7 to 2/3, and Watanabe’s own reported data provide no basis for such a finding.
(Remarks, at e.g. 5:5-6:2, emphasis in the original.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that a proper prima facie case of obviousness has been established, noting a proper consideration of the disclosure in the instant specification and that of the art, with relevant portions of the instant Office action are incorporated herein by reference.
Second, regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1 and 5 over Watanabe, the applicant alleges the following.
Furthermore, without conceding to the merits of the rejection, and solely to expedite prosecution of the claims, claim 20 is amended and new claim 21 recites “wherein (XB1/XSil):(XB2/Xsi2) satisfies 1.5:1 to 12:1,” which is not disclosed or suggested by Watanabe. Watanabe says nothing about any relationship between binder content and silicon content in defined sub-regions of the mixture layer. Watanabe's Table reports no silicon content for any exemplified anode, so there is no data from which the recited ratio could be computed.
Claim 5 depends from claim 1 and further requires Formula 2, which includes Isii and Isi2, peak intensities corresponding to the silicon-based material in the first and second areas. Because Watanabe discloses no silicon content in either area, it provides no basis for this requirement.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 1, 5, and 20 are not obvious in view of Watanabe, and requests withdrawal of this rejection.
(Remarks, at e.g. 6:4-6:6, emphasis in the original.)
In response, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Third, regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1 and 5 over Seok, the applicant alleges the following.
First, the Patent Office has alleged that Seok teaches the amended active-material limitation by pointing to Seok’s Example 1, which dry-mixes artificial graphite and natural graphite in an 8:2 weight ratio with SBR binder. See Office Action, pages 24-25 (citing Seok, paragraphs [0105] and [0107]). However, Seok’s Example 1 contains no silicon at all. SiOx (0<x<2) appears in Seok only as one item in a nested list of alternative non-transition metal oxides: “the non-transition metal oxide may be SnO2, SiOx (0<x<2), or the like.” See Seok, paragraph [0082]. None of Seok’s sixteen examples or fourteen comparative examples uses any silicon-based material. The record therefore contains a graphite-mixture example without SiOx and a generic SiOx recitation without a graphite mixture, but no teaching of the specific combination recited by claims 1 and 20 as amended, namely “a silicon-based material comprising SiOx and a carbon-based material comprising a mixture of artificial graphite and natural graphite.”
(Remarks, at e.g. 7:2.)
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments. See e.g. MPEP § 2123(I). Further, “It is well established that a reference is good for all it fairly teaches a person having ordinary skill in the art, even when the teaching is a cursory mention.” In re Mills, 470 F.2d 649, 651 (CCPA 1972). Finally, disclosed examples and preferred embodiments do not constitute a teaching away from a broader disclosure or nonpreferred embodiments. See e.g. MPEP § 2123.
Here, Seok teaches its scope of its disclosure includes a negative electrode active material that may be at least one or more of e.g. Si, SiOx (0<x<2), fibrous natural graphite, and artificial graphite. The relevant portions of the June 17, 2026 and instant Office action incorporated herein by reference.
Fourth, regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1 and 5 over Seok, the applicant alleges the following.
Second, the Patent Office has alleged that Seok establishes a prima facie case of obviousness under MPEP § 2144.05(I) for the limitation “a sum of thicknesses of the first area and the second area is 1/2 or less of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer,” as recited by claims 1 and 20. Applicant submits that the Patent Office has identified no overlapping range. Seok’s paragraph [0040] states only that “[t]he thickness of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be 60 µm to 210 µm, respectively, and ... may be the same or different from each other.” See Seok, paragraph [0040]. This passage says nothing about the sum of those thicknesses relative to a total thickness of a three-layer stack. In Seok’s Example 1, the two layers (each approximately 75 µm) constitute the entire mixture layer, not half or less of it. See Seok, paragraph [0109]. Moreover, Seok’s preferred first-to-second active material layer thickness ratio of 7:3 to 5:5 (see Seok, paragraph [0044]) points away from a structure in which the first and second areas together occupy only half or less of the total mixture layer thickness. The MPEP § 2144.05(I) rationale requires an identified overlapping or close range, and no such range has been shown on this record.
(Remarks, at e.g. 7:2.)
In response, the argument is not commensurate with the scope of the prior and instant rejections and that of the art, noting the prior and instant Office actions provide the following.
wherein said plurality of layers may have said binder non-uniformly distributed as follows:
said first layer—closest to said current collector substrate—has the highest concentration of said binder,
said second layer— said middle layer—includes said lower concentration of said binder than that of said layer closest to said current collector substrate, and
said third layer—the layer furthest from said current collector, i.e. closest to said battery electrolyte—does not include said binder,
specifically said binder may be locally present in said area corresponding up to said area of about 35% of the total thickness of the active material layer,
(e.g. supra), wherein said first layer and said second layer may have the same thicknesses:
[0040] The thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be 60 ㎛ to 210 ㎛, respectively, and the thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be the same or different from each other….
(e.g. ¶0040, emphasis added), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on the previously amended, previously amended limitation “the anode mixture layer comprises a first area on the anode current collector, a second area on the first area, and a third area on the second area” and establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a sum of thicknesses of the first area and the second area is 1/2 or less of a total thickness of the anode mixture layer,”
wherein said first layer and said second layer may have the same thicknesses:
[0040] The thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be 60 ㎛ to 210 ㎛, respectively, and the thicknesses of the first active material layer and the second active material layer may be the same or different from each other….
(e.g. ¶0040, emphasis added), reading on the previously added limitation “the thickness of the first area is equal to the thickness of the second area,”
(June 17. 2026 non-final Office action, at pp. 18-19, emphasis in the original.)
Fifth, regarding the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 1 and 5 over Watanabe and Seok plus the January 22, 2026 declaration, the applicant alleges the following.
For at least this reason, the claims are not obvious in view of Watanabe. However, should the Patent Office maintain that a value within 1/7 to 2/3 would result from Watanabe’s teachings (which Applicant does not acquiesce), the objective evidence in the January 22, 2026 declaration rebuts any such prima facie case, as discussed in the declaration section below.
…
For at least these reasons, the claims are not obvious in view of Seok. However, should the Patent Office maintain that a value within 1/7 to 2/3 would result from Seok’s teachings (which Applicant does not acquiesce), the objective evidence in the January 22, 2026 declaration rebuts any such prima facie case, as discussed in the declaration section below. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection of claims 1, 5, and 20.
…
The Patent Office has alleged that the declaration under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132 is insufficient because the showing of unexpected results is not commensurate in scope with the claims, reasoning that the results are attributable to an unclaimed binder-to-silicon relationship rather than to the claimed features. See Office Action, pages 4-6. Applicant respectfully submits that this objection is answered: for claim 20 as amended and new claim 21, by the amendments reciting the very ratio the Patent Office identified as significant; and for claim 1, by the declaration data itself. Applicant also notes that the Patent Office's § 1.132 discussion is directed to the rejection of claims 1, 5, and 20 over Kwon, which has been withdrawn, so the declaration evidence has not yet been weighed against Watanabe or Seok. The Patent Office identifies the declaration as the one filed September 8, 2025, but the passage and table reproduced in the Office Action are from the declaration filed January 22, 2026.
Claim 20 as amended now expressly recites “wherein (XB1/XSi1):(XB2/XSi2) satisfies 1.5:1 to 12:1,” which is the very binder-to-silicon relationship the Patent Office identified as significant to the unexpected results. The nexus between the declaration evidence and the claimed features is therefore established for that claim.
For claim 1, the declaration data itself shows that the Formula 1 value is the operative variable. The table attached to the declaration tests values immediately inside and immediately outside both endpoints of the claimed 1/7 to 2/3 range. Example 7 (Iarea2/Iareal = 0.146, binder-to-silicon ratio 11.30:1, capacity retention 95.0%, no cracking) and Comparative Example 8 (0.139, 12.3:1, 95.1%, cracking observed) have nearly identical binder-to-silicon ratios and identical capacity retention, yet cracking appears only in Comparative Example 8, where the Formula 1 value falls below 1/7. At the upper endpoint, Example 8 (0.645, 1.80:1, 92.2%, no cracking) and Comparative Example 9 (0.690, 1.49:1, 87.2%, no cracking) likewise have closely matched binder-to-silicon ratios, yet capacity retention drops from 92.2% to 87.2% when the Formula 1 value exceeds 2/3. The two endpoints fail in different ways: below 1/7 the anode cracks even though retention is preserved, and above 2/3 retention collapses even though the anode stays intact. Examples 5 and 6 sit exactly at the endpoints (0.143 and 0.667) and exhibit no cracking and high retention. All eight Examples fall within the 1.5:1 to 12:1 binder-to-silicon ratio, and all nine Comparative Examples fall outside it. See Declaration of Yong Hee Lee under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132 filed January 22, 2026, and the table appended thereto. These paired comparisons demonstrate that the results are due to the claimed Formula 1 range, not to an unclaimed feature.
The comparison is proper under MPEP § 716.02(e). Applicants may compare the claimed subject matter with prior art closer to the claims than that applied by the examiner, and are not required to compare with subject matter that does not exist in the prior art. See MPEP § 716.02(e), subsections I and III. Here, neither Watanabe nor Seok exemplifies any silicon-containing anode or any three-area anode mixture layer, so applicant’s Comparative Examples, which are silicon- containing three-area anodes differing from the Examples only in the recited ratios, are the closest available comparison. Notably, below 1/7 the failure mode is anode cracking rather than a mere reduction in capacity retention, which is a difference in kind rather than degree.
(Remarks, at e.g. 7:2.)
Regarding claims 20 and 21, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Regarding claim 1, the declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 filed on September 8, 2025 is insufficient to overcome the rejection of claims 1 and 5 based upon Watanabe et al (US 2015/0380739) or Seok et al (KR 2020/0096153) as set forth in the Office action because of the following.
The declarant declares the following.
5. The claimed invention is directed to an anode for secondary battery comprising an anode current collector; and an anode mixture layer formed on at least one surface of the anode current collector and comprising an anode active material and a binder, wherein the anode mixture layer comprises a first area on the anode current collector, a second area on the first area, and a third area on the second area, wherein the first area and the second area satisfy, according to energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, Formula 1: [Formula 1] 1/7 ≤Iarea2/Iarea1 ≤ 2/3, wherein Iareal refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the binder included in the first area, and Iarea2 refers to a peak intensity corresponding to the binder included in the second area. I hereby provide additional evidence that the claimed range is critical compared to values outside the range. Notably, when the ratio Iarea2/Iarea1 is within the claimed range, including the lower (1/7) and upper (2/3) limits of Iarea2/Iarea1, the anode exhibits superior performance. However, when the ratio slightly exceeds the upper limit (2/3) or falls slightly below the lower limit (1/7), these advantages are no longer observed. For example, Examples 7 and 8, which fall within the claimed range (Iarea2/Iarea1) 0.146 and 0.645, respectively), exhibit both high capacity retention (95.0% and 92.2%) and no observable cracking. In contrast, Comparative Example 8 (Iarea2/Iarea1 = 0.139) shows good capacity retention (95.1%) but cracking was observed. Comparative Example 9 (Iarea2/Iarea1 = 0.690) shows no cracking, but the capacity retention significantly drops to 87.2%. These results demonstrate that even when the ratio slightly exceeds the upper limit of the claimed range, the beneficial effects of the invention, such 88 high capacity retention and structural integrity, are no longer achieved. This supports the criticality of the claimed range.
PNG
media_image1.png
976
1494
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
462
1494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(June 22, 2026 declaration.)
In response, regarding claim 1, the examiner respectfully notes that since a prima facie case of obviousness has been established, the burden of going forward shifts to the applicant. The applicant may provide evidence of an unexpected result.
The showing of unexpected results must be commensurate in scope with the invention as claimed. The results must be due to the claimed features, not to unclaimed features.
Here, while independent claims 1 and 20 are previously amended to further define “the anode active material comprises a silicon-based material including SiOx and a carbon-based material including a mixture of artificial graphite and natural graphite, wherein x is equal to or greater than 0 and less than 2,” which moves the prosecution forward, the data and the instant specification provides the a ratio relationship of the first and second areas, each area relationship regarding a proportionate amount of binder and silicon, is significant to the unexpected results.
For example, the instant specification teaches the following.
[0021] In an embodiment of the disclosed technology, the anode active material may include a silicon-based material.[0022] In an embodiment of the disclosed technology, the silicon-based material may include one or more selected from a group consisting of SiOx (0≤x<2), Si/C composites, and Si alloys.[0023] In an embodiment of the disclosed technology, in the anode for a secondary battery, (XB1/XSi1):(XB2/XSi2) may satisfy 1.5:1 to 12:1.[0024] Here, XB1 refers to a content of the binder included in the first area, XB2 refers to a content of the binder included in the second area, XSi1 refers to a silicon content included in the first area, and XSi2 refers to a silicon content included in the second area.[0025] In an embodiment of the disclosed technology, the anode active material may be included in an amount of 1 wt % to 20 wt % based on a total solid weight of the anode mixture layer.
…
[0171] According to Table 1 above, in Examples 1 to 4, the value of Iarea2/Iarea1 satisfies 1/7 to ⅔, the content ratio of styrene butadiene rubber which is a binder satisfies 1.5:1 to 7.0:1 in the first area and the second area, the value of (Iarea2/ISi2)/(Iarea1/ISi1) satisfies 1/12 to ⅔, and the ratio of the binder content to the silicon content of the first area and the second area satisfies 1.5:1 to 12:1. It was confirmed that the capacity retention ratio of the secondary battery was excellent in Examples 1 to 4 compared to Comparative Examples 1 to 6, and no cracking occurred in the anode.
[0172] Specifically, the active material type, binder type, and loading amount of the anode mixture layer used in Example 1 and Comparative Example 2 are the same, but Comparative Example 2 differs from Example 1 in that the value of I<area2>/I<area1 >and the value of (Iarea2/ISi2)/(Iarea1/ISi1) exceed ⅔, the content ratio of styrene butadiene rubber is less than 1.5:1 in the first area and the second area, and the ratio of the binder content to the silicon content in the first area and the second area is less than 1.5:1.
…
[0174] In addition, the active material type, binder type, and loading amount of the anode mixture layer used in Example 1 and Comparative Example 6 are the same, but Comparative Example 6 differs from Example 1 in that the value of Iarea2/Iarea1 is less than 1/7, the value of (Iarea2/ISi2)/(Iarea1/ISi1) is less than 1/12, the content ratio of styrene butadiene rubber exceeds 7.0:1 in the first area and the second area, and the ratio of the binder content to the silicon content in the first area and the second area exceeds 12:1. Due to this difference, Comparative Example 6 showed the same capacity retention ratio of the secondary battery as Example 1, but it was confirmed that the anode was cracked due to poor brittleness of the anode.
(Instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0021-25, 171-172, and 174, emphasis added.)
See further the data provided in the declaration which provides data for the ratio of (first area binder content/silicon content) to (second area binder content/silicon content), noting the examples provide data within the taught 1.5/1 to 12/1 ratio, and the comparative examples provide data outside said ratio.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al (US 2024/0030416);
Kim et al (US 2022/0285661);
Lee et al (US 2022/0263063);
Son et al (US 2021/0351410);
Jo et al (US 2021/0167391);
Kim et al (US 2020/0403231);
Lee et al (US 2020/0365883); and,
Sugimori et al (US 2016/0351892).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights