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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7-14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US20170288192A1 (corresponding to EP3226325A1 cited in IDS filed 23 October 2025) in view of Yokohata US6218051B1.
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a separator (Cen, Fig. 1, separator 10), comprising:
a substrate (Chen, Fig. 2, substrate 12) and a first coating layer disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (Chen, Fig. 2, coating 16),
wherein the first coating layer comprises a first polymer (Chen, [0009], organic polymer particles)
and based on a total mass of the first coating layer, a mass percent x of the first polymer is 5 wt% to 95 wt% (Chen, [0011]), rendering obvious the overlapping claimed range of 60 to 90 wt%, see MPEP § 2144.05. Chen does not disclose wherein a softening point of the first polymer is 90 °C to 150 °C.
Yokohata teaches a substrate (Yokohata, col. 2 line 11) and a first polymer (Yokohata, col. 2 lines 14-16) wherein a softening point of the first polymer is greater than 130°C (Yokohata, col. 3 lines 6-7), rendering obvious the claimed range of 90 °C to 150 °C, see MPEP § 2144.05. Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Chen wherein the softening point is greater than 130°C, as taught by Yokohata, thereby improving fabrication yield (Yokohata, col. 5 line 40 – col. 6 line 1).
Regarding claim 2, Chen as modified by Yokohata also teaches wherein a thickness of the first coating layer is 3 μm to 40 μm (Chen, [0040], 30 µm).
Regarding claim 5, Chen as modified by Yokohata further teaches wherein the density of the first coating layer controls the ionic conductivity (resistivity) of the separator (Chen, [0045]), and when the first coating layer is too dense (e.g., dependent on x, the first polymer wt%) the ionic conductivity (resistivity) of the separator will decrease (increase) (Chen, [0045]), satisfying the limitation wherein Z = x·b, wherein Z Ω is an ionic resistance of the separator, b represents a first ionic resistance coefficient. While Chen does not explicitly teach wherein 1 ≤ b ≤ 1.2, Chen teaches wherein the first polymer selected from polymers of vinylidene fluoride, hexafluoropropylene, acrylic acid, styrene, butadiene (Chen, [0012]) and these same materials, following Instant Table 1, used in a similar environment for a similar purpose would be understood by the skilled artisan to possess the claimed first ionic resistance coefficient, satisfying the limitation wherein 1 ≤ b ≤ 1.2. See MPEP §2112.
Regarding claim 7, Chen as modified by Yokohata teaches based on a total mass of the first coating layer, a mass percent x of the first polymer is 60 wt% to 90 wt% (Chen, [0011], 5~95 wt%) (see claim 1 above), and with respect to the limitation wherein F = x·a, wherein F N/m is a bonding force between the first coating layer and a positive electrode plate, a represents an adhesion coefficient, and 5.0 ≤ a ≤ 30, it is that examiner’s position that such limitations are simply measurements of, and thus descriptions of, inherent properties of the recited first coating layer.
Chen as modified by Yokohata teaches a first polymer selected from polymers of vinylidene fluoride, hexafluoropropylene, acrylic acid, styrene, butadiene (Chen, [0012]) and these same materials, as disclosed by applicant in Instant Table 1, are used in a similar environment for a similar purpose. Therefore, based upon such substantial similarities, it appears reasonable that the prior art taught by Chen would inherently possess physical properties, e.g., a bonding for F = x·a between the first coating layer and a positive electrode plate, a represents an adhesion coefficient, and 5.0 ≤ a ≤ 30, such that the first coating layer as taught by Chen would necessarily fulfill the recited limitations. See MPEP §2112.
Regarding claim 8, Chen as modified by Yokohata additionally teaches wherein the first polymer comprises at least one of vinylidene fluoride, hexafluoropropylene, acrylic acid, styrene, butadiene (Chen, [0012]).
Regarding claim 9, Chen as modified by Yokohata further teaches wherein the first polymer is a secondary particle, and a particle diameter Dv50 of the secondary particle is 10 μm to 30 μm (Chen, [0010], 1~150µm), the claimed range if found to be obvious for overlapping the prior art range at least at 10 to 30 µm, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 10, Chen as modified by Yokohata also teaches wherein a first surface of the substrate is coated with the first coating layer (Chen, Fig. 2, substrate 12, coating 16), and a second surface of the substrate is coated with a second coating layer, (Chen, Fig. 2, substrate 12, coating 14) and a thickness of the second coating layer is 0.2 μm to 4 μm (Chen, [0036], 4µm).
Regarding claim 11, Chen as modified by Yokohata additionally teaches wherein the second coating layer comprises a second polymer (Chen, [0016], binder, Fig. 2, layer 14), and based on a total mass of the second coating layer, a mass percent of the second polymer is 78 wt% to 87.5 wt% (Chen, [0016], 5~95 wt%), the claimed range if found to be obvious for overlapping the prior art range at least at 78 to 87.5 wt%, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 12, Chen as modified by Yokohata further teaches wherein the second coating layer comprises a second polymer (Chen, [0016], binder, Fig. 2, layer 14), the second polymer comprises a high-molecular-weight polymer of a non-core-shell structure, and the high-molecular-weight polymer of a non-core-shell structure is at least one selected from acrylate, acrylonitrile, or propylene (Chen, [0012]).
Regarding claim 13, Chen discloses an electrochemical device (Chen, [0017]), comprising a positive electrode plate (Chen, [0017]), a negative electrode plate (Chen, [0017]), a separator (Chen, [0017]), and an electrolyte solution (Chen, [0041]), wherein the separator is located between the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate (Chen, [0017]),
and the separator comprises a substrate (Chen, Fig. 2, substrate 12) and a first coating layer disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (Chen, Fig. 2, coating 16),
wherein the first coating layer comprises a first polymer (Chen, [0009], organic polymer particles)
and based on a total mass of the first coating layer, a mass percent x of the first polymer is 60 wt% to 90 wt% (Chen, [0011], 5~95 wt%), the claimed range if found to be obvious for overlapping the prior art range at least at 60 to 90 wt%, see MPEP § 2144.05. Chen does not disclose wherein a softening point of the first polymer is 90 °C to 150 °C.
Yokohata teaches a substrate (Yokohata, col. 2 line 11) and a first polymer (Yokohata, col. 2 lines 14-16) wherein a softening point of the first polymer is greater than 130°C (Yokohata, col. 3 lines 6-7), rendering obvious the claimed range of 90 °C to 150 °C, see MPEP § 2144.05. Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Chen wherein the softening point is greater than 130°C, as taught by Yokohata, thereby improving fabrication yield (Yokohata, col. 5 line 40 – col. 6 line 1).
Regarding claim 14, Chen as modified by Yokohata also teaches wherein a thickness of the first coating layer is 3 μm to 40 μm (Chen, [0040], 30 µm).
Regarding claim 18, Chen as modified by Yokohata further teaches wherein the first polymer is a secondary particle, and a particle diameter Dv50 of the secondary particle is 10 μm to 30 μm (Chen, [0010], 1~150µm), the claimed range if found to be obvious for overlapping the prior art range at least at 10 to 30 µm, see MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim(s) 3, 15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US20170288192A1 (corresponding to EP3226325A1 cited in IDS filed 23 October 2025) in view of Yokohata US6218051B1 and further in view of Zhang US20160164060A1.
Regarding claim 3, Chen as modified by Yokohata does not teach wherein, in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30.
Zhang teaches it is well known in the art wherein the coating layer on a separator, particle size, shape, type and content are optimized (Zhang, [0014]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the product as taught by Chen as modified by Yokohata by optimizing the number and maximum length of the first polymer, as taught by Zheng, wherein in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30, thereby improving the separator for use with a cell or battery (Zhang, [0014]).
Regarding claim 15, Chen as modified by Yokohata does not teach wherein, in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30.
Zhang teaches it is well known in the art wherein the coating layer on a separator, particle size, shape, type and content are optimized (Zhang, [0014]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the product as taught by Chen as modified by Yokohata by optimizing the number and maximum length of the first polymer, as taught by Zheng, wherein in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30, thereby improving the separator for use with a cell or battery (Zhang, [0014]).
Regarding claim 19, Chen as modified by Yokohata and Zhang additionally teaches wherein a first surface of the substrate is coated with the first coating layer (Chen, Fig. 2, substrate 12, coating 16), and a second surface of the substrate is coated with a second coating layer, (Chen, Fig. 2, substrate 12, coating 14) and a thickness of the second coating layer is 0.2 μm to 4 μm (Chen, [0036], 4µm).
Claim(s) 4 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US20170288192A1 (corresponding to EP3226325A1 cited in IDS filed 23 October 2025) Yokohata US6218051B1 and further in view of Hansen US20180143157A1 and Zhang US20160164060A1.
Regarding claim 4, Chen as modified by Yokohata does not teach wherein an ionic resistance Z of the separator is 0.5 Ω to 1.2 Ω.
Chen as modified by Yokohata teaches a substantially similar separator to that of the claimed invention and further teaches wherein a thickness of the first coating layer is 3 μm to 40 μm (Chen, [0040], 30 µm) and the first polymer selected from polymers of vinylidene fluoride, hexafluoropropylene, acrylic acid, styrene, butadiene (Chen, [0012]) and these same materials, following Instant Table 1, used in a similar environment for a similar purpose.
Hansen evidences wherein the width of the separator controls the ionic resistance (Hansen, [0132]) which can be selectively modified by the skilled artisan (Hansen, [0127]) allowing for simplifications in assembly and improvements in reliability (Hansen, [0126]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the product taught by Chen as modified by Yokohata, wherein the separator width is modified such that it has a desired ionic resistance, as taught by Hansen, such as 0.5 Ω to 1.2 Ω, thereby controlling the ionic resistance between electrodes (Hansen, [0132]), as such changes, substitutions, and alterations to the methods, techniques and systems are within the ambit of the skilled artisan to be combined or integrated with other systems (Hansen, [0180]).
Chen as modified by Yokohata and Hansen does not teach wherein, in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30.
Zhang teaches it is well known in the art wherein the coating layer on a separator, particle size, shape, type and content are optimized (Zhang, [0014]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the product as taught by Chen as modified by Yokohata and Hansen by optimizing the number and maximum length of the first polymer, as taught by Zheng, wherein in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30, thereby improving the separator for use with a cell or battery (Zhang, [0014]).
Regarding claim 17, Chen as modified by Yokohata does not teach wherein an ionic resistance Z of the separator is 0.5 Ω to 1.2 Ω.
Chen as modified by Yokohata teaches a substantially similar separator to that of the claimed invention and further teaches wherein a thickness of the first coating layer is 3 μm to 40 μm (Chen, [0040], 30 µm) and the first polymer selected from polymers of vinylidene fluoride, hexafluoropropylene, acrylic acid, styrene, butadiene (Chen, [0012]) and these same materials, following Instant Table 1, used in a similar environment for a similar purpose.
Hansen evidences wherein the width of the separator controls the ionic resistance (Hansen, [0132]) which can be selectively modified by the skilled artisan (Hansen, [0127]) allowing for simplifications in assembly and improvements in reliability (Hansen, [0126]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the product taught by Chen as modified by Yokohata, wherein the separator width is modified such that it has a desired ionic resistance, as taught by Hansen, such as 0.5 Ω to 1.2 Ω, thereby controlling the ionic resistance between electrodes (Hansen, [0132]), as such changes, substitutions, and alterations to the methods, techniques and systems are within the ambit of the skilled artisan to be combined or integrated with other systems (Hansen, [0180]).
Chen as modified by Yokohata and Hansen does not teach wherein, in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30.
Zhang teaches it is well known in the art wherein the coating layer on a separator, particle size, shape, type and content are optimized (Zhang, [0014]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the product as taught by Chen as modified by Yokohata and Hansen by optimizing the number and maximum length of the first polymer, as taught by Zheng, wherein in a region of 250 μm × 200 μm on a surface of the first coating layer, a number of particles of the first polymer with a maximum particle length of 10 μm to 30 μm is 10 to 30, thereby improving the separator for use with a cell or battery (Zhang, [0014]).
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen US20170288192A1 (corresponding to EP3226325A1 cited in IDS filed 23 October 2025) in view of Yokohata US6218051B1 and further in view of Sasaki US20160268565A1.
Regarding claim 6, Chen as modified by Yokohata does not teach wherein a bonding force F between the first coating layer and a positive electrode plate is 3 N/m to 35 N/m.
Sasaki teaches wherein a bonding force F between the first coating layer and a positive electrode plate (Sasaki, [0023]) is 3 N/m to 35 N/m (Sasaki, Table 1, Adhesiveness, 4.7 to 6.5 N/m). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bonding force of Chem with the teaching of Sasaki thereby giving preferable low temperature output property (Sasaki, [0024]) and preferable high temperature cycle property (Sasaki, [0025]).
Regarding claim 16, Chen as modified by Yokohata does not teach wherein a bonding force F N/m between the first coating layer and a positive electrode plate is 3 N/m to 35 N/m.
Sasaki teaches wherein a bonding force F N/m between the first coating layer and a positive electrode plate (Sasaki, [0023]) is 3 N/m to 35 N/m (Sasaki, Table 1, Adhesiveness, 4.7 to 6.5 N/m). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the bonding force of Chem with the teaching of Sasaki thereby giving preferable low temperature output property (Sasaki, [0024]) and preferable high temperature cycle property (Sasaki, [0025]).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams US20160301052A1 in view of Chen US20170288192A1 (corresponding to EP3226325A1 cited in IDS filed 23 October 2025) and further in view of Yokohata US6218051B1.
Regarding claim 20, Adams teaches an electronic device (Adams, [0014], claim 22),
comprising an electrochemical device (Adams, [0014]),
the electrochemical device comprises a positive electrode plate, a negative electrode plate, a separator (Adams, [0015], cathode/separator/anode), and an electrolyte solution (Adams, [0021]), wherein the separator is located between the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate (Adams, [0015], cathode/separator/anode), and
the separator comprises a substrate and a first coating layer disposed on at least one surface of the substrate (Adams, [0097], a polypropylene-based multi-layer membrane), wherein the first coating layer comprises a first polymer (Adams, [0097], polypropylene layer on a polyethylene or polypropylene layer). Adams however does not disclose based on a total mass of the first coating layer, a mass percent x of the first polymer is 60 wt% to 90 wt%, and a softening point of the first polymer is 90 °C to 150 °C.
Chen teaches based on a total mass of the first coating layer, a mass percent x of the first polymer is 60 wt% to 90 wt% (Chen, [0011], 5~95 wt%), the claimed range if found to be obvious for overlapping the prior art range at least at 60 to 90 wt%, see MPEP § 2144.05. Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the first coating layer of Chen in Adams, thereby enduring higher expansion force (Chen, [0083]). Adams as modified by Chen does not teach wherein a softening point of the first polymer is 90 °C to 150 °C.
Yokohata teaches a substrate (Yokohata, col. 2 line 11) and a first polymer (Yokohata, col. 2 lines 14-16) wherein a softening point of the first polymer is greater than 130°C (Yokohata, col. 3 lines 6-7), rendering obvious the claimed range of 90 °C to 150 °C, see MPEP § 2144.05. Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Adams as modified by Chen wherein the softening point is greater than 130°C, as taught by Yokohata, thereby improving fabrication yield (Yokohata, col. 5 line 40 – col. 6 line 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 13 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liu US5720780A (discloses a softening point above 120 and below 160 °C),
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARED HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4590. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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 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.
/JARED HANSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights