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 .
Status of the Claims
The claims submitted 12/14/2023 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-18 are pending and examined herein.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: each claim lists both “polyvinylidene fluoride” and “polyvinylidene difluoride.” These are widely recognized as referring to the same polymer:
-
C
H
2
C
F
2
n
-
It is believed that one of these should be deleted from the claims.
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.
Claims 15 and 17 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.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the dispersant” in lines 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that claim 14 recites “a dispersant” contained in both the first coating layer and the second coating layer. For the purpose of this Office action, the instant claim will be interpreted as depending from claim 14.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the binder” in lines 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is noted that claim 16 recites “a binder” contained in both the first coating layer and the second coating layer. For the purpose of this Office action, the instant claim will be interpreted as depending from claim 16.
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:
Claims 1-8 and 10-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2023/0261201 A1 (“Jiang”).
The applied reference has a common joint inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Jiang discloses an electronic apparatus comprising an electrochemical apparatus (Abstract; [0059]). The electrochemical apparatus comprises a negative electrode, the negative electrode comprising a current collector 1, a first coating 2, and a second coating 3. The first coating 2 is provided between the current collector 1 and the second coating 3 (Abstract; Fig. 1; [0006]).
The first coating 2 comprises a conductive agent in an amount of 30%-60% based on a total mass of the first coating 2 ([0010], [0033]). The conductive agent is a carbon nanotube ([0016], [0037], [0092]).
The second coating 3 comprises a negative electrode active material ([0043]).
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Jiang discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Jiang further discloses the negative electrode active material may include at least one of artificial graphite, natural graphite, silicon-oxygen compound, or hard carbon ([0043]).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Jiang discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Jiang further discloses examples wherein the thickness of 300 nm to 1700 nm (Table 4). See also the broader disclosure in [0038].
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Jiang discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Jiang further discloses examples wherein the cover rate of the first coating is 60% to 100% (Table 5). See also the broader disclosure in [0040].
Regarding claims 5-6 and 14-15, Jiang discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Jiang further discloses the first coating 2 comprises a dispersant in an amount of 2% to 5% based on a total mass of the first coating 2, wherein the dispersant includes at least one of sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium polyacrylate, or polyoxyethylene ([0010], [0012], [0033], [0035]). Jiang further discloses the second coating 3 comprises sodium carboxymethyl cellulose in an amount of 1.2 mass% based on a total mass of the second coating 3 ([0096]).
Regarding claims 7-8 and 16-17, Jiang discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Jiang further discloses the first coating 2 comprises a binder in an amount of 30% to 60% based on a total mass of the first coating wherein the binder includes at least one of styrene-butadiene rubber, polyvinyl alcohol, polyethylene glycol, or polyvinylidene fluoride ([0010]-[0011], [0033]-[0034]). It is noted that the first coating 2 comprises a dispersant including at least one of sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, sodium polyacrylate, or polyoxyethylene ([0010], [0012], [0033], [0035]). This also reads on the binder in claim 7. Jiang further discloses the second coating 3 comprises a styrene-butadiene polymer and sodium carboxymethyl cellulose in amounts of 1.3 and 1.2 mass%, respectively, based on a total mass of the second coating 3 ([0096]).
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 102842701 A (“Li” – machine translation of record dated 11/27/2024 cited herein).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising an anode electrode (Abstract; [0021]). The anode electrode comprises a current collector 1, a first coating 2 disposed on the surface of the current collector 1, and a second coating 3 disposed on the surface of the first coating 2 such that the first coating 2 is disposed between the current collector 1 and second coating 3 (Fig. 1; [0028]).
The first coating 2 is a composite material layer comprising a binder and a conductive agent ([0009]). The conductive agent comprises at least one of carbon nanotubes and graphene ([0013]). In an example, graphene accounts for 50% of the total mass of the first coating ([0048]). See also the broader discussion of the amount of the conductive agent in [0011].
The second coating comprises an active material ([0009]).
Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1. Li discloses the active material comprises graphite ([0009]). While Li is silent regarding the type of graphite, it must necessarily be one of natural graphite or synthetic graphite.
Regarding claim 3, Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1. Li discloses the thickness of the first coating is 1 µm ([0015]). See also the broader discussion in [0010] and [0014].
Regarding claim 4, Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1. Li discloses the ratio of the projected area of the first coating 2 to the projected area of the current collector 1 is (0.6-1):1 (i.e. greater than or equal to 60%) ([0016]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0261201 A1 (“Jiang”).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Jiang discloses the electrochemical device of claim 2 and the electronic device of claim 10. As discussed above, Jiang discloses the negative electrode active material is artificial graphite, natural graphite, or hard carbon ([0043]). Jiang discloses an example wherein the active material, in this case graphite, is included in an amount of 97.5 mass% of the second coating 3 ([0096]). While Jiang does not expressly disclose a single embodiment wherein the negative active material is hard carbon, and, based on a mass of the second coating layer, a mass percent of the hard carbon is 95% to 99%, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used hard carbon in the exemplary amount disclosed by Jiang because Jiang discloses hard carbon is an equivalent negative electrode active material to graphite and one would expect predictable results from its use in the exemplary amount.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 102842701 A (“Li” – machine translation of record dated 11/27/2024 cited herein).
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising an anode electrode (Abstract; [0021]). The anode electrode comprises a current collector 1, a first coating 2 disposed on the surface of the current collector 1, and a second coating 3 disposed on the surface of the first coating 2 such that the first coating 2 is disposed between the current collector 1 and second coating 3 (Fig. 1; [0028]).
The first coating 2 is a composite material layer comprising a binder and a conductive agent ([0009]). The conductive agent comprises at least one of carbon nanotubes and graphene ([0013]). In an example, graphene accounts for 50% of the total mass of the first coating ([0048]). See also the broader discussion of the amount of the conductive agent in [0011].
The second coating comprises an active material ([0009]).
Li does not expressly disclose an electronic device comprising the lithium-ion battery; however, Li discloses lithium-ion batteries are widely used in various consumer electronics products and electric vehicles due to their high energy density, long cycle life, superior mechanical properties, and environmental friendliness ([0004]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the lithium-ion battery in an electronic device as Li discloses the batteries are known to be used for that purpose.
Regarding claim 11, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 10. Li discloses the active material comprises graphite ([0009]). While Li is silent regarding the type of graphite, it must necessarily be one of natural graphite or synthetic graphite.
Regarding claim 12, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 10. Li discloses the thickness of the first coating is 1 µm ([0015]). See also the broader discussion in [0010] and [0014].
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the electronic device of claim 10. Li discloses the ratio of the projected area of the first coating 2 to the projected area of the current collector 1 is (0.6-1):1 (i.e. greater than or equal to 60%) ([0016]).
Claims 5-6, 9, 14-15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 102842701 A (“Li” – machine translation of record dated 11/27/2024 cited herein) in view of US 2014/0248534 A1 (“Chikugo”).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Li discloses the first coating 2 comprises a binder (“dispersant”), wherein an example of the binder is sodium carboxymethyl cellulose ([0012]).
Li does not expressly disclose the second coating layer comprises a dispersant, wherein the dispersant comprises at least one of carboxymethyl cellulose salt, polyacrylic acid sodium salt, polyethylene glycol, or polyethylene oxide.
Chikugo discloses an electrode, such as a negative electrode, including a thickener (“dispersant”) (Abstract; [0079]). The thickener is included to improve the coating property of the slurry for the electrode. Examples of the thickener include alkali metal salts of carboxymethyl cellulose, polyethylene oxides, and sodium polyacrylate ([0087]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the thickener (“dispersant”) taught by Chikugo in the second coating of Li to improve the coating property of the slurry.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, modified Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 5 and the electronic device of claim 14. Chikugo discloses the thickener is preferably added in an amount of 0.5 parts by mass and equal to or less than 2.0 parts by mass. When the used amount of the thickener is in the above-described range, balance between the coating property of the electrode slurry and the binding property of the binder is further improved ([0088]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the amount of the thickener (“dispersant”) in the second coating to improve the balance between the coating property of the electrode slurry and the binding property of the binder. Moreover, the amount disclosed by Chikugo overlaps the claimed range. The amount would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the amount disclosed by Chikugo overlaps the amount as claimed. 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). Furthermore, “[t]he normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.” In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See also In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 2 and the electronic device of claim 10. Li discloses the active material is at least one of graphite, silicon, silicon alloy, and tin alloy ([0009]). Li does not expressly disclose the negative active material is hard carbon, and, based on a mass of the second coating layer, a mass percent of the hard carbon is 95% to 99%.
Chikugo discloses a lithium ion secondary battery electrode comprising (A) a non-fluorinated polymer in an amount equal to or more than 0.5 parts by mass and equal to or less than 3.0 parts by mass, (B) an active material is equal to or more than 95.1 parts by mass and equal to or less than 97.9 parts by mass, (C) a thickener in an amount equal to or more than 0.5 parts by mass and equal to or less than 2.0 parts by mass, and (D) a conductive auxiliary agent in an amount equal to or more than 0.1 parts by mass and equal to or less than 2.0 parts by mass (Abstract; [0039]). When the composition of the electrode is in the above-described range, balance between the yield of the electrode and the battery characteristics of the obtained lithium ion secondary battery is particularly superior ([0040]). The electrode is a negative electrode, wherein exemplary negative electrode active materials include natural graphite, artificial graphite, and hard carbon ([0083]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute hard carbon for graphite as Chikugo shows the materials to be equivalents known in the art for the same purpose, and to provide the hard carbon in the claimed amount as Chikugo teaches the composition of the electrode provides a superior balance between the yield of the electrode and the battery characteristics of the obtained lithium ion secondary battery.
Claims 7-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 102842701 A (“Li” – machine translation of record dated 11/27/2024 cited herein) in view of US 2014/0038036 A1 (“Nishide”).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 10. Li discloses the first coating 2 comprises a binder, wherein the binder is at least one selected from styrene-butadiene rubber, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyvinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene polymer, and sodium carboxymethyl cellulose ([0012]).
Li does not expressly disclose the second coating layer comprises a binder, wherein the binder comprises at least one of polyvinylidene fluoride, polyvinylidene difluoride, poly(vinylidene difluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene), styrene-butadiene rubber, styrene-acrylic latex, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, polyacrylic acid sodium salt, polyethylene oxide, or polyvinyl alcohol.
Nishide discloses a negative electrode for a lithium-ion battery (Abstract; [0070]). Nishide discloses the negative electrode comprises a binder to strengthen binding between the respective materials in the negative electrode. Such a binder includes resin binders such as polyvinylidene fluoride, a vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer, and a styrene-butadiene copolymer rubber. These binders can be used alone, or two or more thereof may also be mixed and used ([0079]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the binder taught by Nishide in the second coating of Li to strengthen binding between the respective materials in the negative electrode.
Regarding claims 8 and 17, modified Li discloses the electrochemical device of claim 7 and the electronic device of claim 16. Nishide discloses the proportion of the binder in the electrode is preferably 5 to 30% by mass ([0079]). The amount would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the amount disclosed by Nishide overlaps the amount as claimed. 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). Furthermore, “[t]he normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.” In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See also In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and MPEP 2144.05. Moreover, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the amount of the binder through routine experimentation as Nishide discloses the binder is included to strengthen binding between the respective materials in the negative electrode and in recognition that if the binder is included in large amounts, a smaller proportion of the electrode is available for active material, decreasing capacity. “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Scott Carrico whose telephone number is (571)270-5504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:15AM-6PM ET.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
Robert Scott Carrico
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/Robert S Carrico/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights