DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/15/2026.
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 1-17 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.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the lithium metal battery either comprises an anode active material layer, the anode active material layer being between the anode current collector and the separator, or is free of the anode active material layer, the separator comprises: a porous substrate; and a ceramic coating layer on a side of the porous substrate, the ceramic coating layer…” which renders the claim vague and indefinite, because the claim is not clear on the bounds of the alternative embodiment. It is not clear whether the alternative is between the presence of an anode active layer or not having an anode active layer, or if the alternative is between the presence of an anode active layer or not having an anode active layer and the separator comprises a porous substrate and a ceramic coating layer on a side of the porous substrate. For the purposes of examination, the claim is understood to require either an anode active material layer between the anode current collector and the separator or no anode active material layer, which appears to be the interpretation that is consistent with the present specification according to paragraph [0054] therein.
Claim 16 recites “wherein the solid electrolyte comprises an oxide-based solid electrolyte, a sulfide-based solid electrolyte, a polymer solid electrolyte or a combination thereof, and the gel electrolyte comprises a polymer gel electrolyte” which renders the claim vague and indefinite, since claim 15, from which this claim depends, recites “wherein the electrolyte comprises a liquid electrolyte, a solid electrolyte, a gel electrolyte or a combination thereof”, so it is not clear if claim 16 is reciting further limitations of the two optional limitations from claim 15, the solid electrolyte and the gel electrolyte, or if claim 16 is requiring that the electrolyte comprises both a solid electrolyte and a gel electrolyte, with further limitations of both. For the purposes of examination, claim 16 will be understood to be reciting further limitations of the alternative solid and gel electrolyte options from claim 15, where the solid electrolyte and gel electrolyte remain optional alternatives.
As a result of their dependency from claim 1, claims 2-17 are also thereby rendered indefinite.
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, 9, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle.
Regarding claim 1, Herle discloses a lithium metal battery ([0030] Fig 4, Li ion cell 400) comprising:
an anode current collector ([0030] Fig 4, current collector 402);
a cathode ([0030] Fig 4, cathode coating 412 and current collector 414); and
a separator between the anode current collector (402) and the cathode ([0030] Fig 4, coated separator 408),
wherein the lithium metal battery (400) either
comprises an anode active material layer ([0030] Fig 4, anode coating 404), the anode active material layer (404) being between the anode current collector (402) and the separator, or
is free of the anode active material layer,
the separator (408) comprises: a porous substrate; and a ceramic coating layer on a side of the porous substrate ([0021] polymeric porous separator with ceramic particle coating), the ceramic coating layer is positioned to face the anode current collector (402) ([0022] coating faces negative electrode), and
pores in the porous substrate comprise a gel-type polymer electrolyte ([0032] electrolyte infused in coated separator 408 is gel polymer).
Regarding claim 9, Herle discloses wherein the ceramic coating layer has a thickness of about 10 nm to about 5,000 nm ([0022] coating is 3 microns thick),
wherein the ceramic coating layer further comprises a binder ([0015] polymer with particles in coating), and
wherein the binder comprises an acrylic polymer ([0015] polymer may be polyacrylic acid).
Regarding claim 15, Herle discloses wherein the electrolyte comprises a gel electrolyte ([0032] gel polymer electrolyte).
Regarding claim 16, Herle discloses wherein the gel electrolyte comprises a polymer gel electrolyte ([0032] gel polymer electrolyte).
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.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle.
Regarding claim 14, Herle discloses the invention as stated above for claim 1.
Herle further discloses wherein the porous substrate comprises a polyolefin ([0021] polyolefin separator).
Herle does not explicitly disclose wherein the porous substrate comprises polypropylene, polyethylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polybutylene terephthalate, polyester, polyacetal, polyamide, polyimide, polycarbonate, polyetheretherketone, polyaryletherketone, polyetherimide, polyamideimide, polybenzimidazole, polyethersulfone, polyphenylene oxide, a cyclic olefin copolymer, polyphenylene sulfide, polyethylene naphthalene, or a combination thereof.
It would however have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to select polypropylene or polyethylene as the polyolefin in the invention of Herle, since both polypropylene and polyethylene are the most commonly used polyolefins, especially for battery separators, and further as a selection of a known material based on its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle, as stated above for claim 1, in view of Foreign Publication KR20150015918A (supplied by applicant, used attached machine translation), hereafter Kang.
Regarding claim 2, Herle is silent on wherein the ceramic coating layer comprises large-diameter inorganic particles and small-diameter inorganic particles.
In the analogous art of secondary battery separators, Kang discloses wherein the ceramic coating layer comprises large-diameter inorganic particles and small-diameter inorganic particles ([0021] ceramic coating layer includes two or more kinds of ceramic particles having different particle diameters).
Kang further discloses that while laminating the separator on the electrode surface, the air in the space formed by the size difference between ceramic particles escapes while vacuum is adsorbed between the separator and the electrode, thereby improving adhesion to the electrode ([0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to modify the invention of Herle to use larger and smaller diameter inorganic particles in the ceramic coating layer as disclosed by Kang in order to improve adhesion to the electrode, as suggested by Kang.
Regarding claim 3, Kang further discloses wherein a mixing weight ratio of the large-diameter inorganic particles to the small-diameter inorganic particles in the ceramic coating layer is about 9:1 to about 1:1 ([0026] mixing ratio of first ceramic particles to second ceramic particles is 25-75%:75-25%).
Regarding claim 4, modified Herle discloses wherein each of the large-diameter inorganic particles and the small-diameter inorganic particles comprises SiO2 or Al2O3 (Herle [0014]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle, in view of Foreign Publication KR20150015918A (supplied by applicant, used attached machine translation), hereafter Kang, as stated above for claim 2, further in view of Published Application US20170324097A1, hereafter Lee.
Regarding claim 5, Kang discloses wherein the small-diameter inorganic particles have an average particle diameter of about 50 nm to about 500 nm ([0025] second ceramic particles are 300nm).
Modified Herle is silent on wherein the large-diameter inorganic particles have an average particle diameter of about 1 µm to about 10 µm.
In the analogous art, Lee discloses wherein the large-diameter inorganic particles have an average particle diameter of about 1 µm to about 10 µm ([0053] first particle size of 3 µm).
As the gap size between the large diameter inorganic particles is/are variable(s) that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the size of the large diameter inorganic particles, with the gap size between the large diameter inorganic particles increasing as the size of the large diameter inorganic particles is increased, the size of the large diameter inorganic particles would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed diameter of about 1 µm to about 10 µm of the large diameter inorganic particles cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the size of the large diameter inorganic particles in the invention of modified Herle to obtain the desired gap size between the large diameter inorganic particles, resulting in the desired amount of polymer electrolyte between the particles (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Claim(s) 6-8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle, as stated above for claim 1, in view of Published Application US20170324097A1, hereafter Lee.
Regarding claim 6, Herle is silent on wherein the gel-type polymer electrolyte comprises a crosslinked polymer and a liquid electrolyte, the liquid electrolyte comprising an organic solvent and a lithium salt.
In the analogous art of secondary battery separators, Lee discloses wherein the gel-type polymer electrolyte comprises a crosslinked polymer and a liquid electrolyte ([0046] protective layer on separator includes crosslinked material including polymerizable oligomer, filling the pores, resulting in improved strength due to the integrated structure; [0048] polymerizable oligomer is TMPTMA), the liquid electrolyte comprising an organic solvent and a lithium salt ([0083] liquid electrolyte included in protective layer in order to improve ionic conductivity; [0084] liquid electrolyte includes organic solvent and lithium salt).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to modify the invention of Herle to use the crosslinked polymer and liquid electrolyte as disclosed by Lee in order to improve the strength of the separator due to the integrated structure, as suggested by Lee, and further as a selection of a known material based on its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 7, Lee further discloses wherein the crosslinked polymer is a polymerization product of a crosslinkable monomer ([0046] protective layer on separator includes crosslinked material including polymerizable oligomer, filling the pores), and the crosslinkable monomer comprises trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate (TMPTMA) ([0048] polymerizable oligomer is TMPTMA).
Regarding claim 8, Lee further discloses wherein an amount of the crosslinked polymer in the gel-type polymer electrolyte is about 1 part by weight to about 20 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the gel-type polymer electrolyte ([0052] 10-50 parts by weight of crosslinked material in protective layer, which overlaps with the claimed 1 part by weight to about 20 parts by weight. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding claim 10, Herle discloses an anode active material layer between the anode current collector and the ceramic coating layer ([0030] Fig 4, anode coating 404).
Herle is silent on wherein the anode active material layer has a thickness of about 1 µm to about 500 µm.
In the analogous art of secondary battery separators, Lee discloses wherein the anode active material layer has a thickness of about 1 µm to about 500 µm ([0059] 1 to 25 µm).
As the total capacity of the battery is/are variable(s) that can be modified, among others, by adjusting the thickness of the anode active material layer, with the total capacity of the battery increasing as the thickness of the anode active material layer is increased, the thickness of the anode active material layer would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed anode active material layer thickness of about 1 µm to about 500 µm cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the thickness of the anode active material layer in the invention of Herle to obtain the desired energy density of the battery, for example to a thickness of 1-25 µm as disclosed by Lee (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Regarding claim 11, Herle is silent on wherein the anode material layer comprises a lithium metal foil, lithium metal powder, a foil of a lithium alloy, powder of a lithium alloy, or a combination thereof, and the lithium alloy comprises lithium and a first metal, and the first metal comprises indium (In), silicon (Si), gallium (Ga), tin (Sn), aluminum (Al), titanium (Ti), zirconium (Zr), niobium (Nb), germanium (Ge), antimony (Sb), bismuth (Bi), gold (Au), platinum (Pt), palladium (Pd), magnesium (Mg), silver (Ag), zinc (Zn), nickel (Ni), iron (Fe), cobalt (Co), chromium (Cr), cesium (Cs), sodium (Na), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), yttrium (Y), bismuth (Bi), tantalum (Ta), hafnium (Hf), barium (Ba), vanadium (V), strontium (Sr), lanthanum (La), or a combination thereof.
Lee discloses wherein the anode material layer comprises a lithium metal foil or a foil of a lithium alloy ([0059] Li metal or Li alloy electrode; [0094] Li metal alloy includes Li metal and metal alloyable with Li metal such as Si, Sn, Al, Ge, Pb, Bi, Sb; [0095] further Li-Sn alloys).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to further modify the invention of Herle to use a Li metal or Li metal alloy anode active material as disclosed by Lee as a selection of a known material based on its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding claim 12, Herle discloses wherein the anode active material layer comprises an anode active material ([0030] anode coating 404), and the anode active material comprises: a carbonaceous compound ([0031] graphite).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle, in view of Published Application US20170324097A1, hereafter Lee, as stated above for claim 12, and further in view of Published Application US20190181435A1, hereafter Ryu.
Regarding claim 13, Herle is silent on wherein the carbonaceous compound comprises amorphous carbon, and the carbonaceous compound comprises carbon black, carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, fullerenes, activated carbon, carbon fibers, or a combination thereof.
In the analogous art of secondary battery electrode materials, Ryu discloses wherein the carbonaceous compound comprises amorphous carbon, and the carbonaceous compound comprises carbon fibers ([0181] amorphous carbon combined with crystalline carbon, where crystalline carbon is graphite in fibrous form).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to choose a combination of an amorphous carbon and a carbon fiber active material as the negative electrode active material as disclosed by Ryu as obvious selection of known material based on its suitability for the intended purpose (MPEP 2144.07).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20150325828A1 (supplied by applicant), hereafter Herle, as stated above for claim 1, in view of Published Application US20240372158A1, hereafter Chen.
Regarding claim 17, Herle discloses wherein the cathode comprises a cathode current collector and a cathode active material layer ([0030] current collector 414, cathode coating 412), and the metal layer of the current collector comprises copper (Cu) ([0032] copper).
Herle is silent on wherein at least one of the cathode current collector or the anode current collector comprises a base film and a metal layer on at least one side of the base film, the base film comprises a polymer, the polymer comprising polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), polyimide (PI), or a combination thereof.
In the analogous art of secondary battery electrodes, Chen discloses wherein at least one of the cathode current collector or the anode current collector comprises a base film and a metal layer on at least one side of the base film ([0117] composite current collector with polymer base layer and metal material layer formed on base layer), the base film comprises a polymer, the polymer comprising polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), or a combination thereof ([0117] polymer is one or more of PET, PE, PP, PBT).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to choose a composite current collector material including a polymer base film, as disclosed by Chen, in order to impart flexibility to the current collector, and further as obvious selection of known material based on its suitability for the intended purpose (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY HEMINGWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-0235. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6-4.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/T.G.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights