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 .
Summary
This is the initial Office Action based on Application 18/550,695 filed 09/15/2023 by Raoudha Haddad and Bertrand Rupin.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10, 12-14, 16-17, and 19-26 are previously pending. Of those claims, claims 22-24 are withdrawn from consideration as being drawn to non-elected subject matter. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10, 12-14, 16-17, 19-21, and 25-26 are currently pending and have been fully considered.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10, 12-14, 16-17, 19-21, and 25-26 are allowable. The restriction requirement between groups I and II, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 03/27/2026, has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is maintained because the nonelected claims do not require all the limitations of an allowable claim.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10, 12-14, 16-17, 19-21, and 25-26 in the reply filed on 05/20/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious burden on the Examiner. This is not found persuasive because the two groups the product and the process do not overlap in scope, as the claimed separator includes subject matter and limitations that are not present in the process of producing the battery separator, and the process of producing the battery separator includes steps and elements that would not be present in the claimed product. Therefore there would be a serious burden due to the non-overlapping subject matter and separate classification.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 2, 8, 10, 17 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.
Line 5 of claim 2 recites “optionally wherein the softwood fibers are bleached softwood fibers.” The use of the term “optionally” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if this is a required limitation or not. In the alternative it is noted that the term “optionally” fails to further limit the claim. Therefore the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained.
Line 3 of claim 8 recites “optionally wherein the micro fibrillated cellulosic fibers …”. The use of the term “optionally” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if this is a required limitation or not. In the alternative it is noted that the term “optionally” fails to further limit the claim. Therefore the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained.
Line 3 of claim 10 recites “optionally wherein the fibers are para-aramid fibers.” The use of the term “optionally” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if this is a required limitation or not. In the alternative it is noted that the term “optionally” fails to further limit the claim. Therefore the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained.
Line 4 of claim 17 recites “optionally wherein the binder of the binder layer penetrates ….” The use of the term “optionally” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if this is a required limitation or not. In the alternative it is noted that the term “optionally” fails to further limit the claim. Therefore the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 10, 12-14, 16, 19-21, and 25-26 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
OGAWA (US 2019/0074499 a1) – OGAWA teaches a separator constituted by a non-woven fabric made of cellulose fibers, and synthetic fibers, and a binder with an average pore diameter of 1-10 microns (paragraph 0192).
WADA (US 2019/0355950 A1) – WADA teaches a separator (paragraph 0052) comprising a nonwoven fabric comprising synthetic fibers and beaten regenerated cellulose fibers (paragraph 0053). The beated regenerated cellulose fibers are used as regenerated cellulose fibers (paragraph 0113). The beating causes fine fibrils branched form the fibers like a tree (paragraph 0113). The fibrils dropping off the steps fill voids in the separator so as to be stable (paragraph 0117). The separator 10 includes the regenerated cellulose fibers and thermoplastic synthetic fibers (paragraph 0146). Stem of the regenerated cellulose fibers 11, thermoplastic synthetic fibers 12, and fibrils of regenerated cellulose fibers 13 (paragraph 0146).
FUSHIMI (US 2017/0043565 A1) – FUSHIMI teaches a sheet nonwoven fabric layer (paragraph 0063). The sheet layer includes fine cellulose fibers (paragraph 0063). Further there may be fibers other than the fine cellulose fibers, such as synthetic fibers (paragraph 0064). The cellulose fine fibers are mixed with the other fibers in an amount of the fin fibers other than the fine cellulose fibers is 40 mass% or less (paragraph 0064).
None of the prior art of record explicitly teaches or suggests a battery separator that includes highly refined cellulosic fibers, where the highly refined cellulosic fibers have at least 60 wt.% fines based on the total weight of the cellulosic fibers and at least 35 wt% secondary fines based on total weight of the fines.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN G JELSMA whose telephone number is (571)270-5127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM EST.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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.
/JONATHAN G JELSMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights