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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/19/2023, 06/07/2024, and 03/12/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph [0112], “secondary battery” is referred to as reference number 100, while in paragraph [0111], “secondary battery” is referred to as reference number 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 6, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsuno et al. (US 2017/0271682 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Matsuno discloses a battery (Matsuno Fig. 3) comprising:
a positive electrode (Annotated Matsuno Fig. 4, Positive electrode is displayed as reference number 3.);
a negative electrode (Annotated Matsuno Fig. 4, Negative electrode is displayed as reference number 4.) comprising a negative electrode active material-containing layer (Annotated Matsuno Fig. 4, Negative electrode active material-containing layer is displayed as reference number 4b.) that includes a Ti-containing oxide and a binder capable of containing water (Para. [0059] states the negative electrode active material includes one compound, or two or more compounds selected from the group consisting of an oxide of titanium, lithium-titanium oxide, and lithium-titanium composite oxide. Para. [0073] states that the binder residing in the negative electrode active material-containing layer may be a binder capable of containing water. Examples of these include carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylamide (PAI).);
and a water-containing electrolyte (Para. [0086] states that the electrolyte solution includes an aqueous solvent and an electrolyte.), the battery satisfying following expression (1):
0.2 ≤ Wbind/WH2O ≤ 15 (1)
where Wbind denotes a content (% by weight) of the binder capable of containing water in the negative electrode active material-containing layer, and WH2O denotes a content (% by weight) of water in the electrolyte (Para. [0170] describes PAI as the selected binder that is capable of containing water. PAI has a Wbind value of 10% by weight in the negative electrode active material-containing layer. Example 34 from Table 6 will be used to find the WH2O value, wherein the electrolyte solution is comprised of lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)amide (LiTFSA) salt dissolved in water at a concentration of 8M. Using the concentration value of 8M and the molecular weight of LiTFSA salt (MW = 287.09), the WH2O value is 30.33%, which will give us a Wbind/WH2O value of 0.303, which satisfies the following expression: 0.2 ≤ Wbind/WH2O ≤ 15.).
PNG
media_image1.png
738
890
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Matsuno Fig. 4: An enlarged cross-sectional view of battery 1 showing a positive electrode (3), a negative electrode (4), and a negative electrode active material-containing layer (4b).
Regarding claim 6, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1,
wherein the Ti-containing oxide comprises at least one of a niobium titanium-containing oxide or a titanium oxide (Para. [0059] states the negative electrode active material includes one compound, or two or more compounds selected from the group consisting of an oxide of titanium, lithium-titanium oxide, and lithium-titanium composite oxide. Table 6 example 34 Li4Ti5O12).
Regarding claim 9, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1,
wherein a battery pack comprises the battery of claim 1 (Matsuno Fig. 6, Para. [0125] describes battery pack 40, which accommodates the secondary battery shown in Annotated Matsuno Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Matsuno discloses the battery pack as discussed in claim 9,
wherein the battery pack is further comprising of:
an external power distribution terminal (Annotated Matsuno Fig. 8, External power distribution terminal is labeled as reference number 59.);
and a protective circuit (Annotated Matsuno Fig. 8, Protective circuit is labeled as reference number 58.).
PNG
media_image2.png
760
853
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Matsuno Fig. 8: A block diagram showing the electric circuit within a battery pack. The battery pack comprises of a protective circuit (58) and an external power distribution terminal (59).
Regarding claim 11, Matsuno discloses the battery pack as discussed in claim 10,
comprising a plurality of the battery, wherein the batteries are electrically connected in series, in parallel, or in combination of series and parallel (Para. [0121] states that according to a third embodiment, the plural lithium secondary batteries may be electrically connected to each other in series, in parallel, or in a combination of in series and in parallel. Para [0127] further states, as additionally shown in Annotated Matsuno Fig. 8, that the unit secondary battery cells 51 are electrically connected to each other in series.).
Regarding claim 12, Matsuno discloses the battery pack as discussed in claim 9,
wherein a stationary power source comprises the battery pack (Para. [0136] states that the battery pack may be used as a stationary battery.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuno as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Matsubara et al. (US 2021/0083324 A1).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1.
Matsuno fails to disclose wherein the WH2O is 10% by weight or less, and the Wbind is 0.8% by weight to 6% by weight, of instant claim 2, and wherein the WH2O is 0.3% by weight or more, of instant claim 3.
However, Matsubara teaches wherein the WH2O is 10% by weight or less (Para. [0022] states when preparing an aqueous electrolyte solution, water is contained in the electrolyte solution at preferably 8% by mass or more and more preferably 10% by mass or more. Furthermore, Para. [0049] gives an example of preparing an aqueous electrolyte solution for an aqueous rechargeable battery wherein the resulting weight % of water in said electrolyte solution was about 10% by weight.), and the Wbind is 0.8% by weight to 6% by weight (Para. [0040] states that, when constructing the negative electrode active material layer, the amount of binder contained within the negative electrode active material layer is more preferably 1% by mass or more relative to 100% by mass of the negative electrode active material.). Matsubara further teaches wherein the WH2O is 0.3% by weight or more (Para. [0022] states when preparing an aqueous electrolyte solution, water is contained in the electrolyte solution at preferably 8% by mass or more and more preferably 10% by mass or more. Furthermore, Para. [0049] gives an example of preparing an aqueous electrolyte solution for an aqueous rechargeable battery wherein the resulting weight % of water in said electrolyte solution was about 10% by weight.).
Matsuno and Matsubara are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same art of developing lithium secondary batteries with improved charge and discharge efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuno to incorporate the teaching of a battery wherein the WH2O is 10% by weight or less of the content within the aqueous electrolyte and the Wbind is 0.8% by weight to 6% by weight of the content in the negative electrode active material-containing layer and wherein the WH2O is 0.3% by weight or more of the content within the aqueous electrolyte as disclosed by Matsubara because Matsubara teaches that a secondary battery possessing these parameters may enhance the coulombic efficiency of a rechargeable battery under application of a voltage of 2 V or more (Para. [0007]). Further, it has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 (I). Matsuno states that when determining the mixing ratio of the negative electrode active material, the conductive agent, and the binder in the negative electrode layer, it is preferable that the binder is included in a range of 2% by weight to 10% by weight. When the mixing ratio of the binder is 2% by weight or more, sufficient electrode strength can be obtained, and when the mixing ratio is 10% by weight or less, the insulating portions within the electrode can be reduced (Para. [0074]).
Claims 4, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuno.
Regarding claim 4, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1.
Matsuno further teaches wherein the binder capable of containing water comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of carboxymethyl cellulose, a salt of carboxymethyl cellulose, styrene-butadiene rubber, and polyvinyl pyrrolidone (Para. [0073] describes that the binder capable of containing water is comprised of carboxymethyl cellulose.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified Matsuno to include the binder capable of containing water comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of carboxymethyl cellulose because Matsuno teaches this as a known alternative for the binder and the simple substitution of one known element for another (carboxymethyl cellulose as a substitute for PAI as the binder capable of containing water) is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art when the results of the substitution would have been predictable. See MPEP 2143 (B).
Regarding claim 7, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1.
Matsuno further teaches wherein the Ti-containing oxide comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of: a niobium titanium-containing oxide which includes at least one crystal phase selected from the group consisting of TiNb2O7, Ti2Nb2O9, Ti2Nb10O29, TiNb14O37, and TiNb24O62; a titanium oxide having a monoclinic structure, a titanium oxide having a rutile structure; and a titanium oxide having an anatase structure (Para. [0060] lists examples of the oxide of titanium which includes an oxide of titanium having a monoclinic structure, an oxide of titanium having a rutile structure, and an oxide of titanium having an anatase structure. Additionally, Example 37 of table 6 illustrates the Ti-containing oxide as a niobium titanium-containing oxide which possesses a crystal phase consisting of TiNb2O7.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified Matsuno to include wherein the Ti-containing oxide comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of: a niobium titanium-containing oxide which includes at least one crystal phase selected from the group consisting of TiNb2O7 because the simple substitution of one known element for another (an oxide of titanium having a monoclinic structure, or an oxide of titanium having a rutile structure, or an oxide of titanium having an anatase structure, or a niobium titanium-containing oxide with a crystal phase consisting of TiNb2O7 as a substitute for Li4Ti5O12 powder as the Ti-containing oxide) is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art when the results of the substitution would have been predictable. See MPEP 2143 (B).
Regarding claim 8, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1.
Matsuno further teaches wherein the Ti-containing oxide comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of a niobium titanium-containing oxide having a monoclinic structure, a titanium oxide having a monoclinic structure, a titanium oxide having a rutile structure, and a titanium oxide having an anatase structure (Para. [0060] lists examples of the oxide of titanium which includes an oxide of titanium having a monoclinic structure, an oxide of titanium having a rutile structure, and an oxide of titanium having an anatase structure.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modified Matsuno to include wherein the Ti-containing oxide comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of a niobium titanium-containing oxide having a monoclinic structure, a titanium oxide having an anatase structure because the simple substitution of one known element for another (a niobium titanium-containing oxide having a monoclinic structure, a titanium oxide having a rutile structure, and a titanium oxide having an anatase structure as a substitute for Li4Ti5O12 powder as the Ti-containing oxide) is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art when the results of the substitution would have been predictable. See MPEP 2143 (B).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuno as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seki et al. (US 2019/0089011 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Matsuno discloses the battery as discussed in claim 1.
Matsuno further teaches wherein the electrolyte further comprises at least one lithium salt selected from the group consisting of LiN(FSO2)2, LiN(CF3SO2)2, and LiN(SO2C2F5)2. Example 34 from Table 6 will be used to find the WH2O value, wherein the electrolyte solution is comprised of lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)amide (LiN(CF3SO2)2) salt dissolved in water at a concentration of 8M. Using the concentration value of 8M and the molecular weight of LiN(CF3SO2)2 (MW = 287.09), the WH2O value is 30.33%. Combining the WH2O value with PAI as the water-soluble binder from para. [0170] which has a Wbind value of 10%, which will give us a Wbind/WH2O value of 0.303, which satisfies the following expression: 0.2 ≤ Wbind/WH2O ≤ 15.).
Matsuno fails to disclose wherein the electrolyte further comprises a compound including an amide bond.
However, Seki teaches wherein the electrolyte further comprises a compound including an amide bond (Para. [0060] describes the organic compound in the aqueous electrolyte is at least one selected from the group consisting of acetamide, N-methylacetamide, dimethylacetamide, dimethylformamide, and butyramide, which are all organic compounds comprising of an amide bond.
Matsuno and Seki are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same art of developing lithium secondary batteries with improved charge and discharge efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuno to incorporate the teachings of an electrolyte further comprising a compound including an amide bond as disclosed by Seki because Seki teaches that keeping the lithium salt and organic compound at a specific concentration suppresses electrolysis of water, thereby improving the charge and discharge efficiency of the lithium secondary battery (Para. [0036]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sugizaki et al. (US 2021/0083298 A1), Hoshina et al. (US 2022/0302448 A1), Harada et al. (US 2022/0085353 A1), and Takami et al. (US 2018/0277885 A1) disclose a battery pack, a protective circuit, an external power distribution terminal, a water-soluble binder, and a titanium oxide having any one of a monoclinic structure, a rutile structure, or an anatase structure.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANTINO M SERVAGNO whose telephone number is (571)270-0847. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:00 am - 5:00 pm, F 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Allen can be reached at (571) 270-3176. 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.
/SANTINO MICHALE SERVAGNO/Examiner, Art Unit 1713
/ERIN F BERGNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights