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 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.
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 1-5 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (US 2020/0403227 A1) in view of Sun (US 2022/0216507 A1) and Mizutani (US 2016/0072120 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Song discloses a composite cathode preparation method (abstract), comprising steps of:
(A) providing a cathode material, a solid electrolyte, a conductive carbon, and an alcohol solvent ([0010], [0014], and [0016]), wherein the cathode material comprises a plurality of first particles and has a composition corresponding to the claimed formula ([0017] – [0020]).
Song does not, however, teach that the solid electrolyte has a composition that matches the formula claimed. Sun, similarly disclosing a solid electrolyte material for use in a secondary battery (abstract), teaches a preferred embodiment where a solid electrolyte precursor has a composition of Li3InCl5F ([0035] – [0037] and [0038]), which corresponds to the claimed formula. Sun also teaches that the use of their disclosed solid electrolytes results in a material that has high ionic conductivity, substantial stability in both air and water, and favorable compatibility with commercially used oxide cathode materials ([0034]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the composite cathode preparation method of Song by substituting the solid electrolyte composition disclosed by Song for the solid electrolyte taught by Sun. Doing so would have provided a solid electrolyte material in Song with high ionic conductivity, substantial stability in air and water, and favorable compatibility with oxide cathode materials.
Song further discloses step (B), which is mixing the cathode material, the solid electrolyte, the conductive carbon, and the alcohol solvent to form a mixture that corresponds to the claimed first slurry (first mixture of a solvent and the solid electrolyte precursor is mixed together with a second mixture of a solvent, cathode active material, and conductive material to form a third mixture; [0056] – [0073]).
It should be noted that while Song mixes the solid electrolyte precursor in a solvent before combining it with the cathode active material and the conductive material, there is no evidence that the opposite order of performing those steps leads to any new or unexpected results. Changes in the sequences of adding components without a new or unexpected result are not considered to be patentable [MPEP 2144 (IV) (C)]. Therefore, the sequence disclosed by Song renders obvious the sequence claimed.
Song does not disclose step (c), which is mixing the first slurry and a binder to form a second slurry. This is because Song does not teach the use of a binder in its composite cathode preparation method. Mizutani, similarly disclosing a cathode mixture for a battery (abstract), teaches mixing a binder into a mixture that contains a conductive material, a cathode active material, and a solid electrolyte ([0019] and [0022]). Mizutani teaches that the addition of a binder into the cathode mixture both improves its adhesiveness to a current collector and increases its formability ([0061]). Mizutani further teaches that it is important to add the binder after the solid electrolyte and cathode active material have already been mixed to ensure that the binder is uniformly dispersed in the cathode mixture ([0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the binder taught by Mizutani into the composite cathode preparation method of Song. Doing so would have resulted in a composite cathode with better adhesion and formability. It would further have been obvious to have added the binder after the solid electrolyte had already been mixed with the solvent, conductive material, and cathode active material to ensure proper arrangement of the materials.
Song additionally discloses step (d), which is heat-treating the second slurry and removing the alcohol solvent to form the composite cathode (final mixture is first subjected to a primary vacuum drying at a temperature between 0-100°C to remove the solvent, then treated to a secondary vacuum drying at a temperature between 150–450 °C to form the composite cathode; [0075] – [0078]).
Song does not, however, exactly disclose that the composite cathode has the binder and conductive carbon evenly distributed between a plurality of second particles that are composed of first particles and solid electrolyte. While Song does disclose both the presence of second particles and a conductive material in the newly formed composite cathode ([0081]), the binder is absent. This is because Song does not teach the use of a binder in its composite cathode preparation method. However, if the binder of Mizutani is incorporated into the composite cathode preparation method of Song, as discussed above, then it would logically follow both that the binder would be present in the newly formed composite cathode and that the binder would be equally distributed amongst the other components as it is mixed in. Therefore, Song in view of Mizutani renders obvious the particle distribution in the composite cathode.
Regarding claim 2, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the cathode active material particles (corresponding to the claimed first particles) have an average particle size range of 3-10 µm, which is within the claimed range of 0.5-30 µm ([0017] - [0019]).
Regarding claim 3, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the cathode material can comprise a single-crystalline cathode material ([0017]).
Regarding claim 4, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the amount of nickel in the cathode material composition can correspond to the newly claimed formula ([0018]).
Regarding claim 5, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the alcohol solvent can be ethanol ([0014]).
Regarding claim 9, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that a cathode composite slurry can be heat treated on an aluminum substrate ([0100]).
Regarding claim 10, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the third mixture corresponding to the second slurry is heat treated with the use of vacuum drying at a temperature between 150-450 °C ([0075] – [0078]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 160-200 °C. The courts have found that when a claimed range overlaps with one of the prior art, the claimed range is prima facie obvious [MPEP 2144.05 (I)]. Therefore, Song renders obvious having the third mixture heat treated with the claimed temperature range.
Regarding claim 11, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the third mixture corresponding to the second slurry is heat treated with vacuum drying for time period between 30 minutes to 24 hours ([0078]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 10 minutes to 180 minutes. The courts have found that when a claimed range overlaps with one of the prior art, the claimed range is prima facie obvious [MPEP 2144.05 (I)]. Therefore, Song renders obvious having the third mixture heat treated for the claimed time period.
Regarding claim 12, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the third mixture corresponding to the claimed second slurry is heat treated with vacuum drying in a non-oxidizing atmosphere ([0078] – [0079]).
Regarding claim 13, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as disused above in claim 1. Song further discloses that the conductive carbon can comprise a carbon nanotube or a carbon fiber ([0016]).
Regarding claim 14, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method as discussed above in claim 1. Mizutani further discloses that the binder can be polytetrafluoroethene (PTFE) ([0046]).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (US 2020/0403227 A1) in view of Sun (US 2022/0216507 A1), Mizutani (US 2016/0072120 A1), and Roh (KR 20200108536 A).
Regarding claim 6, Song in view of Sun and Mizutani discloses the composite cathode preparation method of claim 1. Song does not, however, disclose that the third mixture corresponding to the second slurry is molded before being heat-treated.
Roh, disclosing a method for manufacturing a cathode in a secondary battery ([0010]), teaches molding a positive electrode composition mixture before drying it ([0064] – [0066]). Roh also teaches that molding the positive electrode composition before drying allows for better control of the thickness of the electrode in addition to improving the density of the electrode ([0065]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the molding step taught by Roh into the composite cathode preparation method of Song. Doing so would have resulted in greater control of the thickness of the cathode as well as improvements in its density.
Regarding claim 7, Song in view of Sun, Mizutani, and Roh discloses the composite cathode preparation method of claim 6. Roh further discloses a positive electrode composition example where the positive electrode composition mixture is applied onto an aluminum foil functioning as a current collector by pressing ([0081]). While Roh does not explicitly state that the pressing performed in the example was roll pressing, Roh does feature the use of roll pressing as a molding technique in its method for manufacturing a positive electrode ([0064] – [0066]). The courts have stated "[I]n considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom” (MPEP 2144.01). Based upon the use of roll pressing disclosed in Roh’s cathode preparation method, it is reasonable to infer that the pressing performed in Roh’s disclosed example was also performed by roll pressing or at the very least, such a process would have been obvious as it was known by Roh to allow shaping.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (US 2020/0403227 A1) in view of Sun (US 2022/0216507 A1), Mizutani (US 2016/0072120 A1), Roh (KR 20200108536 A), and Bonhomme (US 2021/0119198 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Song in view of Sun, Mizutani, and Roh discloses the composite cathode preparation method of claim 7. Song, Sun, Mizutani, and Roh do not, however, expressly disclose that the first carrier comprises two first carriers and that the second slurry is disposed between those two first carriers and molded by roll-pressing.
Bonhomme, drawn to battery art (abstract), discloses a process for laminating an electrode ([0035]). Bonhomme further discloses that a step in this electrode lamination process is to situate a composite material film between a carrier film and a current collector and roll press ([0046] – [0048]). Once the roll pressing has been performed, the carrier film is peeled off and the composite material film remains attached to the current collector ([0048]).
As discussed with respect to claim 7, Roh teaches a cathode composition method where a slurry is applied onto a current collector and molded. It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the carrier film taught by Bonhomme into the cathode composition method disclosed by Roh, such that the slurry is disposed between the current collector and the carrier film during the molding. Doing so would have given additional support to the positive electrode composition mixture during molding, thereby rendering the modification a combination of prior art elements to predictably result in a more stable cathode composition method ([MPEP 2143 (I)(A)].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB T LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1723. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8 AM - 4 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, Michael Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-5038. 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.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1746
/MICHAEL N ORLANDO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1746
