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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restriction
Claims 29-35 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/16/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of group 1, claims 16-28 in the reply filed on 7/16/2026 is acknowledged.
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 24, and 27-28 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.
Regarding Claim 24, the limitation of “the Tg”, “the Tm” and “the Tz” lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding Claim 27, the limitation of “Tm” lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding Claim 28, the limitation of “Tg” lacks antecedent basis.
Furthermore, the limitation “Tz” in claim 28 is unclear if it is the same or different than “the Tz” in claim 24.
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:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16, 21-23 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 and a2 as being anticipated by Traulsen (US Pub No. 2010/0330432)
Regarding Claim 16, Traulsen et al. teaches a method of producing an electrode [Fig. 3A-3F, 0106], comprising the following steps: Step (A) of providing a conductive base material [4, current collector, 0106],
Step (B) of providing a coating composition comprising an electrode active material [6b, Fig. 3D, 0106] and wherein the coating composition is a free-flowing powder [0053],
Step (C) of coating the conductive base material provided in step (A) with the coating
composition provided in Step (B) [Fig. 3A-3F, 0106], and
Step (D) of heating the coated conductive base material obtained in step (C)
[0118, fig. 3A-3C, 0106].
Regarding Claim 21, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. teaches wherein the step (B) of providing a coating composition comprises mixing the electrode active material, a polymeric binder [0024, 0018] to obtain the coating composition as a free-flowing powder [0053]
Regarding Claim 22, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. teaches wherein the electrode active material comprises calcined graphite [0018]
Regarding Claim 23, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. teaches wherein Step (D) further comprises compressing the coated conductive base material [0073-0075].
Regarding Claim 25, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. teaches wherein said Step (D) of heating the coated conductive base material obtained in step (C) [0118] and comprises the step of compressing the coated conductive base material by calendaring [0008]
Regarding Claim 26, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. teaches wherein the calcined graphite is essentially free of surface hydroxide groups [0018].
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.
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.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Traulsen (US Pub No. 2010/0330432)
Regarding Claim 20, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. teaches wherein the conductive base material has a thickness of up to 500 um overlapping the claimed 200 µm or greater [0113].
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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP §2144.05.
Claim(s) 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Traulsen (US Pub No. 2010/0330432) in view of Takenaka (US Pub No. 2019/0356031)
Regarding Claim 17, Traulsen et al. is relied upon for the reasons given above, Traulsen et al. is silent on wherein the conductive base material is a porous conductive base material.
Takenaka et al. teaches a conductive base material is a porous conductive base material [0042-0043].
Since Traulsen et al. teaches that any material can be used for the conductive base [0068], it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to utilize the conductive base of material of Takenaka et al. in place of the conductive base material of Traulsen et al. as it is merely the selection of a conventional engineering design and one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so.
The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, A.)
Regarding Claim 18, within the combination above, modified Traulsen et al. teaches wherein the conductive base material comprises a plurality of metal fibers, forming a network of metal fibers [Takenaka: 0042-0043].
Regarding Claim 19, within the combination above, modified Traulsen et al. teaches wherein the metal fibers are in direct contact with one another [Takenaka: 0042-0043].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24 and 27-28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Traulsen (US Pub No. 2010/0330432) is the closest prior art.
Traulsen et al. teaches a method of producing an electrode [Fig. 3A-3F, 0106], comprising the following steps: Step (A) of providing a conductive base material [3, current collector, 0106],
Step (B) of providing a coating composition comprising an electrode active material [6b, Fig. 3D, 0106] and wherein the coating composition is a free-flowing powder [0053],
Step (C) of coating the conductive base material provided in step (A) with the coating
composition provided in Step (B) [Fig. 3A-3F, 0106], and
Step (D) of heating the coated conductive base material obtained in step (C)
[0118, fig. 3A-3C, 0106].
Modified Traulsen et al. teaches limitations of the claims but does not disclose the limitations of “wherein in Step (D) the coated conductive base material is subjected to hot compression, wherein the heating is (i) a heating set to be above the Tg of the binder but below the Tm of the binder, and/or wherein the heating is (ii) a heating set to be above the Tg of the binder but below the Tz of the binder.” in claim 24, “wherein the heating is set to a temperature in the range of at most 50 °C below the Tm of the binder.” in claim 27, and “wherein the heating is set to a temperature of at least 10 °C above the Tg but below Tz.” in claim 28.
These references, nor any other reference or combination of references in the prior art suggest or render obvious the limitations of “wherein in Step (D) the coated conductive base material is subjected to hot compression, wherein the heating is (i) a heating set to be above the Tg of the binder but below the Tm of the binder, and/or wherein the heating is (ii) a heating set to be above the Tg of the binder but below the Tz of the binder.” in claim 24, “wherein the heating is set to a temperature in the range of at most 50 °C below the Tm of the binder.” in claim 27, and “wherein the heating is set to a temperature of at least 10 °C above the Tg but below Tz.” in claim 28.
Therefore; claim 16 is allowed once the limitations of claim 24, and 27-28 are incorporated into claim 16 and the rejections under 35 USC 112 are overcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL Y SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-0557. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-7PM.
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, MATTHEW MARTIN can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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 Y SUN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728
