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 Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: "two or more protrusion are formed" should read -two or more protrusions are formed-. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 5 is 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 5 recites the limitation "the inorganic layer" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
It is unclear if “the inorganic layer” is referring to the inorganic oxide layer or a different inorganic layer. Instead, there is sufficient antecedent basis for the term “inorganic oxide layer”. For purpose of examination, examiner interprets the limitation “the inorganic layer” as the inorganic oxide layer.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites “the multilayer body having a rectangular parallelepiped.” Examiner interprets this as the multilayer body having a rectangular parallelepiped shape.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koga et al. (US 2021/0351435) hereinafter Koga, in view of Ovshinsky et al. (US 5558950 A) hereinafter Ovshinsky.
Regarding claim 1, Koga teaches a power storage device in which a solid electrolyte is used ([0001]) which corresponds to the claimed all solid battery;
Figure 1 shows the claimed multilayer body having a multilayer portion and a pair of cover layers provided on an upper face and a lower face of the multilayer portion in a stacking direction;
PNG
media_image1.png
409
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 shows a series of layers: a first internal electrode 310, a first active material layer 110, a solid electrolyte layer 400, a second active material 120, and a second internal electrode 320, which corresponds to the claimed multilayer portion having structure in which each of a plurality of solid electrolyte layers and each of a plurality of internal electrodes including an electrode active material are alternately stacked;
PNG
media_image2.png
372
627
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figures 1, 4-7 show the claimed rectangular parallelepiped;
The first active material layer 110 may be disposed inside of the solid electrolyte layer 400 and on the first internal electrode 310 and may be electrically connected to the first external electrode (which corresponds to the claimed first end face) 510 ([0045]) and the second active material layer 120 may be disposed inside the solid electrolyte layer 400 and on the second internal electrode 320 and may be electrically connected to the second external electrode (which corresponds to the claimed second end face) 520 ([0045]) and figure 5 shows an example of a battery with 4 internal electrodes, each being alternately extracted to a first external electrode 510 and a second external electrode 520 which corresponds to the claimed plurality of internal electrode being alternately extracted to a first end face and a second end face;
PNG
media_image3.png
349
841
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 4 shows the claimed first end face and a second end face facing each other of the multilayer body;
PNG
media_image4.png
404
751
media_image4.png
Greyscale
A first external electrode 510 disposed outside of the solid electrolyte layer and electrically connected to the first internal electrode ([0004]) which corresponds to the claimed first external electrode that is provided on the first end face and is connected to a first group of the plurality of internal electrodes extracted to the first end face;
A second external electrode 520 disposed outside of the solid electrolyte layer and electrically connected to the second internal electrode ([0004]) which corresponds to the claimed second external electrode that is provided on the second end face and is connected to a second group of the plurality of internal electrodes extracted to the second end face;
The coating layer 600 may include an oxide ([0049]) and Koga gives an example of a coating layer: Li2ZrO3 ([0033]) which corresponds to the claimed inorganic oxide layer;
The coating layer 600 coats the surface of the sintered body of the solid electrolyte layer 400, except that the coating layer 600 does not coat end portions (end surfaces connected to the terminal electrodes) of the first internal electrode 310 and the second internal electrode 320 which corresponds to the claimed inorganic oxide layer that is provided at least between the first external electrode and the second external electrode on four faces other than the first end face and the second end face of the multilayer body,
But Koga does not teach how in a cross section orthogonal to a direction in which the first end face and the second end face are opposite to each other, the inorganic oxide layer includes two or more protrusions protruding outward on at least one face of the four faces and a recess formed between the two or more protrusions.
However, Ovshinsky teaches an inner wall 16 that is bowed inward (Fig. 13, Fig. 14) that can flex in response to pressure changes within the battery (Col. 9, Lines 41-44). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was filed to add protrusions to the four outside faces of the coating layer of Koga in order to adapt to pressure changes in the battery (Ovshinsky, Col. 9, Lines 41-44).
Regarding claim 4, Ovshinsky teaches protrusions on each of the four faces so that each of the four faces can adapt to pressure changes in the battery (Ovshinsky, Col. 9, Lines 41-44).
PNG
media_image5.png
906
779
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Koga teaches adding an upper limit of thickness of 100 μm to the coating layer to prevent the cracking or peeling of the coating layer during a cooling-heating cycle or handling (Koga, [0050]), and a lower limit of thickness of 1 μm to the coating layer to prevent the coating layer from dissolving during formation ([0050]), which overlaps with the claimed thickness of the inorganic layer is 2 μm or more and 125 μm or less. Overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious (See MPEP § 2144.05).
Regarding claim 6, Ovshinsky teaches protrusions on the corners so that the force that usually causes bulging of the case is directed towards its corners, thus keeping the sides of the case flat (Ovshinsky, Col. 9, Lines 46-48, Figure 13, Figure 14), which corresponds to the claimed two or more protrusions are formed on a ridge line part of the multilayer body.
PNG
media_image6.png
484
778
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koga (US 2021/0351435) and Ovshinsky (US 5558950 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kawakami (AU 715182 B2).
Modified Koga suggests the all-solid battery as claimed in claim 1, wherein the coating layer includes an oxide but is silent as to the inclusion of silicon to the oxide layer. However, Kawakami teaches a battery case 109 that can be made of a composite material of glass fiber (Page 59, Lines 10-15), thus it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to use a composite material of glass fiber as a case for a battery as taught by Kawakami (Page 15, Line 9).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koga (US 2021/0351435) and Ovshinsky (US 5558950 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Makoto et al. (WO 2020054549 A1) wherein an English translation is used and cited herein.
Modified Koga suggests all-solid battery as claimed in claim 1, but is silent as to the depth of the recess being 1 μm or more and 100 μm or less. However, Makoto teaches the depth of the curve (corresponding to the claimed recess) particularly being 0.1 x n or more and 0.5 x n or less with respect to the protrusion length n (Fig. 8-11, [Side Reinforcement], Paragraph 9), since the maximum thickness of the coating layer of the modified Koga is 100 μm, modification by Makoto will have the depth of the recess being 10 μm or more and 50 μm or less (0.1 x 100 μm and 0.5 x 100 μm respectively), thus it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the instant invention to add a depth of a recess to any value within Makoto’s range, including a value within the claimed range in order to maintain the shape of the battery (Makoto, [Side Reinforcement], Paragraph 9).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M CLEVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3156. The examiner can normally be reached Tues-Thurs | 9:00am-4:00pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1177. 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M CLEVER whose telephone number is (571)270-3156. The examiner can normally be reached Tues-Thurs | 9:00am-4:00pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1177. 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.
/J.M.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights