DETAILED ACTION
Introductory Notes
Any paragraph citation of the instant is in reference to the U.S. published patent application.
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 .
Joint Inventors
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-4 in the reply filed on 5/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/27/2026.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DUONG (US 20150303481 A1, supplied with an IDS) in view of SHIN (US 20190237748 A1).
Regarding claims 1-4, DUONG discloses a lithium-ion battery binder (“lithium ion battery … PTFE composite binder material” Abstract),
consisting of a mixture of a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) phase and a polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) phase (“PTFE composite binder material can include the PTFE and one of the PVDF, PVDF co-polymer” [0011]; as well as Example 3 which has a cell with “a binder comprising PTFE and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) at a mass ratio of about 1:1” [0126] noted in Figs. 7A-7C as “PTFE/PVDF”; thus fully reading on Claims 1 and 4)
formed from primary particles of PVDF having a size ranging from 10 nm to 1 µm [50 nm to 500 nm for Claim 3] (“Dry PVDF binder powder can include secondary particles which are aggregates of primary particles (e.g., having a size of about 100 nanometers to about 300 nanometers)” [0148]; as well as Figs. 24 and 25 which shows “a size regime of about a few hundred nanometers as shown in these figures” [0151]),
said binder being in the form of a powder (“dry powder” [0051] as well as “the method comprises a dry fabrication process” per claim 24 as well as all examples, including the PTFE/PVDF example, referencing “the dry process described with reference to Example 1” [0126] that is outlined in [120]) .
DUONG does not expressly teach the size of the primary particles of PTFE.
SHIN is directed to a dry process self-supporting electrode film like DUONG. SHIN discloses “the binder may comprise one or more polyolefins and/or co-polymers thereof, and PTFE” [0075] as well as “In some embodiments, the polyolefin can include … polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF)” [0074] and further provides examples with a binder comprising PTFE with PVDF such as in Example 1 [0100]. SHIN discloses “In some embodiments, the binder particles may be about 50 nm, about 100 nm, about 150 nm, about 200 nm, about 250 nm, about 300 nm …” [0077].
SHIN teaches “electrochemical capabilities of electrodes, for example, the capacity and efficiency of battery electrodes, is governed by various factors … distribution of active material, binder and additive(s); the physical properties of materials therein, such as particle size … and the physical characteristics of the electrode film, such as cohesiveness, and adhesiveness to a conductive element” [0039]. SHIN further notes the “dry or self-supporting electrode film as provided herein may provide one or more of improved material loading or electrode material loading … improved Coulombic efficiency” [0044].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the primary particle sizing of SHIN in the free-standing electrode film of DUONG as doing so would lead to expected improved characteristics such as the physical characteristics of the electrode film, such as cohesiveness, and adhesiveness to a conductive element. Furthermore, overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.05, I). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select the overlapping portion of the claimed particle size range (SHIN [0077]) in order to arrive at favorable physical characteristics.
Therefore, modified DUONG discloses formed from primary particles of PTFE having a size ranging from 10 nm to 1 µm [50 nm to 500 nm for Claim 2] (as taught by SHIN).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kondo (US 20230299261 A1) directed to “a positive electrode active material 21 (see FIG. 3) and a binder are dry-mixed without a solvent to produce a positive electrode mixture 20” [0017]. Includes Example 2 wherein “PVdF was used as the binder in addition to PTFE” [0064].
Yao (US 20220166000 A1) directed to solventless multilayered electrode may include mixing electrode particles with binders to form dry electrode mixtures. Yao discloses “binder mixtures may include PTFE mixed with PVDF” [0100].
KOO (US 20200044257 A1) directed to “preparing a mixture by dry mixing a positive electrode active material, a dry conductive material, and a dry binder” [0053]. Includes Example 1 wherein “1.5 g of PVDF-HFP and 1.5 g of PTFE as a binder were mixed without a solvent” [0061].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS L MARTIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm 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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.
/T.L.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights