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 Status
Claims 1-10 are pending and under consideration on the merits.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informality: Claim 1 introduces the parameter “OI” but fails to define what the parameter defines which hinders the readability of the claim. The specification defines the OI parameter as the “degree of orientation” which is a peak area ratio between characteristic X-ray diffraction peaks in the negative electrode film ([0060]-[0062]). In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “… wherein the relationship between the degree of orientation (OI) of the second negative electrode film (OI2) and the first negative electrode film (OI1) satisfies OI2-OI1 > 5.” 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 4 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.
Regarding Claim 4, the term “lithium-rich manganese-based materials” is relative which renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear as to what extent a material needs to contain lithium to be considered “lithium-rich”, and the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of lithium within the material to be considered “lithium-rich”. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not reasonably understand the complete scope of the invention. It is noted that the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed term “lithium-rich manganese-based materials” is any material containing both lithium and manganese, regardless of the exact chemical composition of said materials. Therefore, in view of the applicant’s specification and for examination on the merits, this specific limitation is being interpreted as any material containing both lithium and manganese.
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, 2, and 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 20230112421 A1, “Zhang”) in view of Chen et al. (WO 2023050834 A1, machine translation used hereafter, “Chen”).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhang teaches an electrode assembly that is comprised of a positive electrode plate, a negative electrode plate and a separator disposed between the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate.
The positive electrode plate is comprised of a positive electrode current collector and a first positive electrode film layer and a second positive electrode film layer located on two opposite surfaces of the positive electrode current collector. The first positive electrode film layer is comprised of a first positive electrode active material (e.g. active substance) that comprises a phosphate material (see [0145] of Zhang for a complete embodiment list). The second positive electrode film layer is comprised of a second positive electrode active material that has a higher gram capacity than that of the first positive electrode film layer (see [0015] of Zhang, see further Figure 3 as annotated below). The negative electrode plate is comprised of a negative electrode current collector and a first negative electrode film layer and a second negative electrode film layer located on two opposite surfaces of the negative electrode current collector. The first negative electrode film layer is comprised of a first negative electrode active material and the second negative electrode film layer is comprised of a second negative electrode active material (see [0061] of Zhang).
PNG
media_image1.png
541
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 3 of Zhang, as annotated by the examiner
Zhang however does not disclose the OI values for the first or second negative electrode films. Chen discloses a secondary battery featuring a wound cell wherein a first negative electrode film layer is disposed on a first surface of the negative current collector and a second negative electrode film layer is disposed on a second surface of the negative current collector. Both the first and second negative electrode film layers include a carbon-based negative electrode active material (see [0007] of Chen). Further, both negative electrode film layers have a corresponding OI value associated with them, wherein OI1 corresponds to the first negative electrode film layer and OI2 corresponds to the second negative electrode film layer. The battery satisfies a relationship wherein OI1 < OI2. In one embodiment, the OI1 is 50 and the OI2 is 55.1. The difference between the second and first layer is 5.1 (e.g. OI2-OI1 > 5).
Zhang and Chen each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention: electrode assemblies. Therefore, in view of the combined teachings of the prior art, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second negative electrode film layers of Zhang so that the difference between the OI values (OI2-OI1) was greater than 5, which is known to reduce battery expansion and enhance battery cycle performance (see [0044] of Chen). Regarding Claim 2, Zhang in view of Chen discloses an electrode assembly wherein the first positive electrode film layer is located on the side of the positive electrode current collector facing the separator and the second negative electrode film layer is located on the other side of the separator (e.g. the first positive electrode film is adjacent to the second negative electrode film via the separator, see [0061] and [0062] of Zhang). By virtue of this configuration, Zhang also teaches the first positive electrode film layer as being located on a side of the positive electrode current collector away from the separator and the second negative electrode film layer as being located on a side of the negative electrode collector away from the separator (e.g. the second positive electrode film is adjacent to the first negative electrode film via the separator, see [0061] and [0062] of Zhang). Regarding Claims 4 and 5, Zhang in view of Chen discloses a first and second positive electrode active materials containing common lithium transition metal oxides, such as lithium iron phosphate, lithium iron manganese phosphate, lithium manganese oxide (e.g. lithium manganate), lithium cobalt oxide, lithium nickel oxide (e.g. lithium nickelate), lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide, lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide, and further various lithium manganese oxides and phosphates (e.g. lithium-rich manganese-based materials). See [0145] of Zhang for a complete list of embodiments. Zhang further discloses a first and second positive electrode slurry comprising lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide, a binder, a conductive agent in NMP in a weight ratio of 96.2:1.1:2.7, respectively (e.g. the mass content of the positive electrode active substance in both the first and second positive electrode film is 96.2%, which falls within the claimed ranges). being applied to a side of the negative electrode current collector so as to form the first and/or second positive electrode film layer. See [0191] and [0192] of Zhang for further detail.
Regarding Claim 6, Zhang in view of Chen discloses a first and second negative electrode film layers wherein the OI value of the first negative electrode film layer is 50 and the OI value of the second negative electrode film layer is 55.1 (see [0098] of Chen). The difference between the second and first layer is 5.1, which falls within the claimed range (e.g. OI2-OI1 is 5.1, which falls within the claimed range of 5 to 15).
Regarding Claims 7, 8, and 9, Zhang in view of Chen discloses first and second negative electrode film layers that each independently comprise various graphite/carbon and silicon-based materials (see [0153] of Zhang for further detail). The composition of the first and second negative electrode film layers are taught by Zhang, wherein the first negative electrode film is formed via a slurry of graphite, a conductive agent, a thickener, and a binder in a weight ratio of 96.6:1.4:0.5:1.5 in deionized water (e.g. the mass content of the first negative electrode active substance is 96.6% which falls within the claimed range, see [0206] of Zhang) so as to form the first negative electrode film layer. The second negative electrode film is formed via a slurry of graphite, a conductive agent, a thickener, and a binder in a weight ratio of 97:1:0.5:1.5 in deionized water (e.g. the mass content of the second negative electrode active substance is 97.1% which falls within the claimed range, see [0213] of Zhang) so as to form the second negative electrode film layer.
Zhang in view of Chen does not explicitly describe the thickness of the negative film layers nor their relationship. However, by virtue of having both a first and second negative electrode film layer, an implicit relationship exists between their thicknesses wherein they are either the same or are different from one another (See MPEP 2144.01). Regarding Claim 10, Zhang in view of Chen teaches that the battery containing the cell as described in various electrical devices (see [0184]-[0187] of Zhang for further detail).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Chen, in further view of Kim et al. (US 20230104184 A1, “Kim”).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang in view of Chen teaches an electrode assembly as outlined above.
Zhang in view of Chen however does not disclose a thickness ratio between the first positive electrode film and second positive electrode film on the order of (1.1-2.5):1. While both teach a first and second positive electrode film, they fail to explicitly describe the relationship between the thickness of the layers. Kim teaches a first and second positive electrode active material layer as having a thickness ratio of 7:3. When normalized, the thickness ratio becomes 2.33:1 which falls within the range as claimed (see [0091] in Kim). Zhang, Chen and Kim each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention: electrode assemblies. Therefore, in view of the combined teachings of the prior art, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thickness of the positive electrode films so that the first positive electrode film was thicker than the second electrode film so as to improve the stability and output performance of the battery (see [0060] of Kim).
Pertinent Prior Art
The following constitutes a list of prior art which are not relied upon herein, but are considered pertinent to the claimed invention and/or written description thereof. The prior art are purposely made of record hereinafter to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, and consideration thereof is respectfully suggested. Wu et al. (CN 216213552 U, machine translation used hereafter) discloses a pole piece assembly which contains a first active material layer and second active material layer on opposing surfaces of a current collector. The active material layers can be either positive or negative. In the case of a positive active material layer, the active material can be various lithium salts including lithium iron phosphate. Furthermore, the negative active material layers can have the same or different thicknesses, wherein the range of their difference is on the order of 5μm-100μm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P MALONEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1730. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7:30a-5p, F: 7:30a-4p.
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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571) 272-8935. 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.
/MICHAEL PATRICK MALONEY/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights