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 .
This is the initial Office action based on application number 18/522518 filed on 11/29/2023. Claims 1-18 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (CN 115260413 A). The English translation of the CN 115260413 A is attached.
Regarding to claim 1: Huang et al. disclose a high-safety, low-cost, and environmentally friendly polymer binder system for a lithium-ion battery (par. 1). The lithium-ion battery comprises an electrode. A slurry is used to prepared the electrode (par. 53). The slurry comprising:
an active material (par. 53);
a conductive agent (par. 53); and
a binder (par. 53),
wherein said binder comprises a calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate (A calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is equivalent to a proteinaceous substance. Soy protein is equivalent to one protein) (par. 46-48, 53).
Regarding to claim 2: Huang et al. disclose the calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is denatured by physical means (par. 3).
Regarding to claim 3, 5, 6: Huang et al. disclose the calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is cross-linked (par. 7-9).
Regarding to claim 4: Huang et al. disclose the calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is safe and inexpensive (par. 3).
Regarding to claim 8: Huang et al. disclose the mass ratio of the active material, the conductive agent and the binder is 8:1:1 (par. 53).
Regarding to claim 9: Huang et al. disclose the calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate binder with a mass fraction of about 5-9% (par. 51).
Regarding to claim 10: Huang et al. disclose the electrode comprising:
a copper current collector (par. 53); and
an 100°C treated layer of the slurry of claim 1, applied on a surface of said copper current collector (par. 53).
Regarding to claim 11: Huang et al. disclose a battery comprising the electrode of claim 10 (par. 53).
Regarding to claim 15: Huang et al. disclose a high-safety, low-cost, and environmentally friendly polymer binder system for a lithium-ion battery (par. 1). The lithium-ion battery comprises an electrode. The electrode comprising:
a copper current collector (par. 53); and
a layer of a slurry on a surface of said current collector (par. 53), wherein the slurry comprises:
an active material (par. 53);
a conductive agent (pad. 53); and
a binder (par. 53),
wherein said binder comprises a calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate (A calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is equivalent to a proteinaceous substance. Soy protein is equivalent to one protein) (par. 46-51, 53);
the calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is denatured by physical means (par. 3); and
the calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is cross-linked (par. 7-9).
Regarding to claim 16: Huang et al. disclose a battery comprising the electrode of claim 15 (par. 53).
Regarding to claim 17: Huang et al. disclose a high-safety, low-cost, and environmentally friendly polymer binder system for a lithium-ion battery (par. 1). The lithium-ion battery comprises an electrode. The electrode comprising:
a copper current collector (par. 53); and
a layer of a slurry on a surface of said current collector (par. 53), wherein the slurry comprises:
an active material (par. 53);
a conductive agent (pad. 53); and
a binder (par. 53),
wherein said binder comprises a calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate (A calcium ion modified polyacrylamide grafted soy protein isolate is equivalent to a proteinaceous substance. Soy protein is equivalent to one protein) (par. 46-51, 53);
Regarding to claim 18: Huang et al. disclose a battery comprising the electrode of claim 17 (par. 53).
Claims 1, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sakamoto et al. (US 11495799 B2).
Regarding to claim 1: Sakamoto et al. disclose a negative electrode of a lithium ion battery (abstract). A slurry is used to prepared the electrode (col. 23, lines 32-52). The slurry comprising:
an active material (col. 23, lines 32-52);
a conductive auxiliary (col. 23, lines 32-52); and
a binder (col. 23, lines 32-52),
wherein said binder comprises casein (equivalent to a proteinaceous substance which comprises at least one protein) (col. 18, lines 32-56).
Regarding to claim 10: Sakamoto et al. disclose the electrode comprising:
a collector; and
a heat treated layer of the slurry of claim 1, applied on a surface of said collector (col. 23, lines 32-52).
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.
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.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakamoto et al. (US 11495799 B2).
Regarding to claims 12, 13, 14: Sakamoto et al. disclose a process of preparing the electrode of claim 10, comprising: applying said slurry on said surface; heating said slurry on said surface to a temperature of 50 to 200° C, thereby obtaining said heat treated layer (col. 23, lines 32-52). In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Claims 1, 7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (CN 110707294 A), hereinafter Huang 294, in view of Sakamoto et al. (US 11495799 B2).The English translation of the CN 110707294 A is attached.
Regarding to claim 1: Huang 294 discloses a three-dimensional fiber-frame lithium battery anode (par.2). The lithium-ion battery comprises an anode. A uniformly dispersed suspension is used to prepared the anode (par. 11). The suspension (equivalent to a slurry) comprising:
zinc oxide (equivalent to an active material) (par. 6, 13);
a gelatin solution (equivalent to a binder composition (par. 7, 11, 32),
wherein said gelatin solution comprises gelatin, water, and trifluoroethanol (The combination of gelatin, water, and trifluoroethanol is equivalent to a proteinaceous substance. The gelatin is equivalent to a protein) (par. 18, 19).
Huang 294 fail to explicitly disclose a conductive additive. However, Sakamoto et al. disclose a negative electrode of a lithium ion battery (abstract). A slurry is used to prepared the electrode (col. 23, lines 32-52). The slurry comprising:
an active material (col. 23, lines 32-52);
a conductive auxiliary (col. 23, lines 32-52); and
a binder (col. 23, lines 32-52),
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the conductive auxiliary of Sakamoto et al. into the suspension of Huang 294 because Sakamoto et al. teach that the conductive auxiliary can increase electron conductivity (col. 21, lines 32-38).
Regarding to claim 7: Huang 294. discloses said gelatin solution comprises gelatin, water, and trifluoroethanol (The combination of gelatin, water, and trifluoroethanol is equivalent to a proteinaceous substance) (par. 18, 19).
Regarding to claim 9: Huang 294 discloses said gelatin solution comprises gelatin, water, and trifluoroethanol. The preferred mass concentration of the gelatin solution is 8-15 wt%
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PIN JAN WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7057. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached on 571-272-1295. 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.
/PIN JAN WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights