605DETAILED 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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 14-15, and 17-31 are pending in this application.
Claims 1-13, 16, and 32-41 are canceled in the amendment filed on 12/11/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/28/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 30 and 31 are 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.
Regarding claims 30 and 31, each claim recites "the battery according to claim 20." However, claim 20 recites “a cathode for a lithium ion battery”, and is thus directed to a cathode and not a battery.
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.
Claims 14-15, and 17-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feng et al. (US 20220052340 A1), and further in view of Zhamu et al. (US 20180212247 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Feng teaches a cathode active material for a lithium battery comprising a composite of graphene and copper fluoride ([0048]).
Specifically, Feng teaches a copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material for use as a lithium battery cathode material ([0018, 0048]).
Feng also provides scanning electron micrographs of the composite material (Fig. 5). As the term nanocomposite is not definite in the claim, it is the examiner’s position that the small scale particle aggregations shown in figure 5 meets the recited nanocomposite.
Feng is silent on the use therein in a cathode for a lithium ion battery.
However, Zhamu teaches this limitation. Specifically, Zhamu teaches a graphene/metal fluoride composite material for a lithium or a lithium ion battery ([0001]). Zhamu further teaches that the metal fluoride can be copper fluoride ([0022]), and that both the metal fluoride and graphene components are nanoscale, thereby providing a nanocomposite ([0057-0058, 0065]).
Further, Feng and Zhamu are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both references are directed to graphene-containing metal fluoride cathode active materials for high-energy lithium batteries. Both references seek to improve the electrochemical performance of metal fluoride cathode materials through the incorporation of graphene.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cathode material of Feng by specifically providing it for a lithium ion battery, as taught by Zhamu, as Zhamu identifies such materials as suitable for lithium ion batteries.
Furthermore, the recitation of "for a lithium-ion battery" in the preamble of claim 14 merely states an intended use and does not impart structural limitations on the recited cathode active material. See MPEP 2111.02(II).
Regarding claim 15, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 14, as stated above. Modified Feng further teach a limitation wherein the nanocomposite comprises copper fluoride-to-graphene bonding.
Feng teaches a cathode active material comprising a composite of copper fluoride and fluorinated graphene. Feng teaches preparing the composite by mixing copper fluoride and fluorinated graphene and drying the mixture to form the composite material ([0032-0043]). The formation of such a composite necessarily requires at least some interparticle interaction or adhesion between the copper fluoride particles and the fluorinated graphene sheets, such as van der Waals forces, electrostatic attraction, or other weak molecular interactions. Thus, Feng at least suggests particle-to-particle association between copper fluoride and graphene.
Zhamu specifically teaches a graphene-enabled hybrid material for use as a lithium battery cathode active material, wherein the cathode active material may comprise transition metal fluorides including CuF₂ ([0053-0055]). Zhamu further teaches that the transition metal fluoride particles are bonded to graphene surfaces ([0028, 0055, 0057]). Additionally, Zhamu teaches that the graphene sheets and the metal fluoride particles are mutually bonded or agglomerated into a secondary particle ([0053, 0055]). Zhamu further teaches that this graphene-bonded structure improves electrochemical performance, including high-rate capability and active material utilization ([0019, 0056-0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify modified Feng's CuF₂/fluorinated graphene composite to include the copper fluoride-to-graphene bonding expressly taught by Zhamu in order to improve electrochemical performance, including high-rate capability and active material utilization ([0019, 0056-0057]).
Regarding claim 17, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 14, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode active material has a ratio of graphene to copper fluoride whereby graphene comprises from about 0.5 to about 30%, by weight, of the cathode active material ([0008-0015]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that copper fluoride and fluorinated graphene may be mixed in various mass ratios, including ratios of (0.4 to 4):1 ([0008]), (0.8 to 4):1 ([0009]), (1 to 4):1 ([0011]), and (4 to 9):1 ([0013]), with specific embodiment of 4:1 ([0014]).
In particular, Feng expressly teaches embodiments containing approximately 10 wt% and 20 wt% fluorinated graphene. Moreover, because fluorinated graphene includes fluorine atoms in addition to the graphene carbon framework, the weight percent of graphene itself is necessarily less than the weight percent of fluorinated graphene. Accordingly, embodiments disclosed by Feng having fluorinated graphene contents of about 10 wt% and 20 wt% necessarily contain graphene in amounts that also fall within the claimed range of about 0.5 wt% to about 30 wt%.
The disclosed range therefore at least overlaps the claimed range of about 0.5 wt% to about 30 wt% graphene. It has been held that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 18, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 14, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode active material has a specific capacity of at least 500 mAh/g and a working potential plateau of at least 2.5 V ([0048]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material exhibits a discharge medium voltage of 2.61 V to 2.64 V and a specific capacity of 432.2 mAh/g to 687.5 mAh/g ([0048]). Because the disclosed voltage range lies entirely above 2.5 V, Feng teaches the claimed working potential plateau limitation. Furthermore, the disclosed specific-capacity range overlaps the claimed limitation of at least 500 mAh/g. It has been held that where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 19, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 14, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode active material has a specific energy of at least 1400 Wh/kg ([0048]).
Specifically, Fang teaches the energy density is 1391 Wh/kg for copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene (8:2), and 1582 Wh/kg for copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene (3:7), and the energy density of copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene (5:5) is the best to reach 1815 Wh/kg ([0048]). Thus, Feng teaches embodiments having specific energies of 1582 Wh/kg and 1815 Wh/kg, both of which exceed the claimed limitation of at least 1400 Wh/kg. Therefore, Feng teaches the limitation that the cathode active material has a specific energy of at least 1400 Wh/kg.
Regarding claim 20, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 14, as stated above. Feng further teaches a cathode for a lithium battery comprising the cathode active material according to claim 14 ([0018, 0032]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material is used as a lithium metal battery cathode material ([0018]). Feng further teaches preparing a positive electrode/ cathode by combining the composite material with carbon black and a PVDF binder and coating the resulting slurry onto an aluminum foil current collector ([0032-0046]).
The recitation of "for a lithium-ion battery" in the preamble of claim 20 merely states an intended use and does not impart structural limitations on the recited cathode. See MPEP 2111.02(II).
Regarding claim 21, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode further comprises a polymeric binder material ([0034]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the positive electrode/cathode includes binder (PVDF) as a component of the electrode composition ([0034]), and PVDF (polyvinylidene difluoride) is a polymeric binder material.
Regarding claim 22, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 21, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode further comprises carbon black ([0034]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the positive electrode/cathode includes carbon black as a component of the electrode composition ([0034]).
Regarding claim 23, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 21, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the polymeric binder comprises polyvinylidene difluoride ([0034]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the positive electrode/cathode includes binder (PVDF) as a component of the electrode composition ([0034]), and PVDF is the abbreviation for the polyvinylidene difluoride polymeric material.
Regarding claim 24, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode comprises from about 75% to about 85% cathode active material, from about 8% to about 12% polymeric binder material and from about 8% to about 12% carbon black ([0034, 0037, 0040]).
Specifically, Feng teaches preparing the positive electrode by mixing 80 mg of the copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material, 10 mg of carbon black, and 10 mg of PVDF binder ([0034, 0037, 0040]) The total electrode composition therefore contains: 80 wt% cathode active material, 10 wt% carbon black, and 10 wt% PVDF binder. The disclosed amounts of 80 wt% active material, 10 wt% carbon black, and 10 wt% PVDF binder each fall within the claimed ranges of about 75–85 wt%, about 8–12 wt%, and about 8–12 wt%, respectively. Accordingly, Feng teaches the claimed composition.
Regarding claim 25, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode has a specific capacity of at least 500 mAh/g and a working potential plateau of at least 2.5 V ([0048, 0034, 0037, 0040]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material exhibits a discharge medium voltage of 2.61 V to 2.64 V and a specific capacity of 432.2 mAh/g to 687.5 mAh/g ([0048]). Because the disclosed discharge medium voltage range lies entirely above the claimed working potential plateau of at least 2.5 V, Feng teaches the claimed voltage limitation.
Moreover, Feng teaches a cathode composition comprising approximately 80 wt% active material ([0034, 0037, 0040]). To the extent that the specific capacity disclosed in [0048] is reported on the basis of the cathode, Feng discloses the claimed specific-capacity limitation. If the disclosed capacities are interpreted as capacities of only the active material, the cathode capacity would be approximately proportional to the active-material loading. Using Feng's highest disclosed capacity value of 687.5 mAh/g and the disclosed active-material of 80 wt%, the corresponding cathode capacity would be approximately 550 mAh/g which exceeds the claimed threshold of at least 500 mAh/g.
Accordingly, Feng teaches or at least renders obvious a cathode having a specific capacity of at least 500 mAh/g and a working potential plateau of at least 2.5 V.
Regarding claim 26, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the cathode has a specific energy of at least 1400 Wh/kg ([0048]).
Specifically, Feng teaches that the copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material exhibits an energy density of 1391 Wh/kg for a copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene ratio of 8:2, 1582 Wh/kg for a ratio of 3:7, and 1815 Wh/kg for a ratio of 5:5 ([0048]). The disclosed energy densities of 1582 Wh/kg and 1815 Wh/kg are each greater than the claimed specific energy of at least 1400 Wh/kg.
To the extent that the energy density values disclosed in [0048] are reported on the basis of the cathode, Feng teaches the claimed limitation. If the disclosed energy density values are interpreted as corresponding to the active material alone, Feng at least renders obvious a cathode having a specific energy of at least 1400 Wh/kg because Feng demonstrates energy densities substantially exceeding the claimed threshold.
Accordingly, Feng teaches or at least renders obvious the limitation that the cathode has a specific energy of at least 1400 Wh/kg.
Regarding claim 27 and claim 30, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the battery is a primary lithium-ion battery ([0003, 0018]).
Specifically, Feng discloses that lithium primary batteries are a main power source for long-term and high-capacity energy products ([0003]) and further teaches the use of the disclosed copper fluoride/fluorinated graphene composite material as a lithium metal battery cathode material ([0018]).
The instant specification uses the term "primary lithium-ion battery" to refer to primary batteries employing lithium metal anodes and various cathode material (see instant specification [0006]). Accordingly, the recited "primary lithium-ion battery" encompasses the lithium primary/lithium metal batteries taught by Feng.
Regarding claim 28 and claim 31, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Modified Feng further teaches a limitation wherein the battery is a secondary lithium-ion battery.
Specifically, Zhamu teaches a graphene-enabled hybrid material for use as a lithium battery cathode active material, wherein the cathode active material may comprise transition metal fluorides including CuF₂ ([0053-0055]). Zhamu further teaches that such cathode active materials are preferred for use in lithium-ion batteries, including electric vehicle applications ([0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ Feng's CuF₂/fluorinated graphene cathode active material in a secondary lithium-ion battery as taught by Zhamu in order to obtain the known benefits of graphene-containing metal fluoride cathodes in lithium-ion battery systems, including suitability for high-energy applications such as electric vehicles ([0025]).
Regarding claim 29, Feng, as modified by Zhamu, teaches all limitations of claim 20, as stated above. Modified Feng further teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising the cathode according to claim 20, an anode, and an electrolyte.
Specifically, Zhamu teaches that "the invention also provides a lithium battery (i.e., a lithium metal battery or lithium ion battery) comprising an anode, a cathode of the present invention, and an electrolyte in physical contact with both the anode and the cathode" ([0035]). Zhamu further teaches that the cathode of the present invention comprises a graphene-containing metal fluoride cathode active material that may include CuF₂ ([0053-0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to employ Feng's CuF₂/fluorinated graphene cathode active material as the cathode in the lithium-ion battery configuration taught by Zhamu, including an anode and an electrolyte, in order to obtain the known benefits of graphene-containing metal fluoride cathodes in lithium-ion battery systems, including suitability for high-energy applications such as electric vehicles ([0025]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lili Rassouli whose telephone number is (571)272-9760. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 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, Matthew T Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/LILI RASSOULI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights