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 .
Specification
The amendment filed 12/27/2023 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
In paragraph 24 of the specification, the term “water-based particle type binder” is amended to “water-soluble particle-type binder. However, it is not clear from the rest of the specification that the applicant had possession of a “water-soluble particle-type binder” especially because paragraph 59 describes a particle-type binder that is in a particle form in the aqueous binder layer and has a low-solubility in water-based solvents. Therefore, it is not clear from the original specification that the water-based particle type binder was intended to refer to a water soluble particle type binder rather than simply a particle type binder in a water-based/aqueous solution. It should also be noted that though this amendment was made as a preliminary amendment it is considered as introducing new matter because the preliminary amendment is not part of the original disclosure when filed with a submission to enter the national stage of an international application under 35 U.S.C. 371 (see MPEP 714.01(e)).
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Interpretation
In claim 3, the limitation “at least one selected from group consisting of poly(vinylidenefluoride) (PVDF); and a copolymer of a vinylidenefluoride monomer and at least one selected from the group consisting of…” is interpreted to mean the fluorine containing binder includes at least one of (a) PVDF and (b) a copolymer of vinylidenefluoride monomer and at least one of the following components. This interpretation seems to be supported by the specification in at least paragraph 68.
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.
Claim 5 is 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.
In claim 5, the limitation “the coating layer binder” is indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation is intended to refer to the “first coating layer”, the “second coating layer”, both layers, either of the layers, or another separate layer entirely.
In claim 5, the limitation “the binder present in the first aqueous binder layer and the second aqueous binder layer” is indefinite because it is unclear whether this limitation intends to require that the first and second aqueous binder layers each include the same binder, which conflicts with the claim 1 limitation that “the first particle type binder and the second particle type binder are different from each other”, or merely intends to require that the coating layer binder is the same as or different from the binder in the first aqueous binder layer and same as or different from the binder in the second aqueous binder layer.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20200350546 A1) in view of Hong (US 20160164059 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sung (US 20200350546 A1) teaches a separator for a lithium secondary battery, the separator 100 comprising a porous polymer substrate 10, a first porous coating layer 20 and second porous coating layer 30 which combined form a first coating layer on one surface of the polymer substrate, and another first and second porous coating layer (second coating layer) on the opposite surface (second surface) of the polymer substrate, where the coating layer on each side of the substrate includes inorganic particles (21, 31) and a coating layer binder polymer, where the inorganic particles include aluminum nitride (para 0001, 0019, 0030, 0043, 0055, 0069, 0084, 0087, 0118-0122; Fig. 1). Sung also teaches an adhesive layer on each coating layer surface made of an acrylic or fluorine containing binder dispersed in water (first and second aqueous binder layer), where the binders comprise resin particles (first and second particle-type binders) (para 0085-0086, 0124).
Sung fails to explicitly teach the first particle-type binder and second particle-type binder are different from each other. However, Hong (US 20160164059 A1), in the analogous art of lithium secondary battery separators, teaches a first coating layer 15 contacting a cathode 13 may be made of polyvinylidene fluoride while the second coating layer 16 contacting an anode 12 may be made of an acrylic material, where making the opposite surfaces of the separator have different coatings improves the binding strength between the separator and electrodes, and where a binder (i.e., adhesive) of the cathode and anode may be formed between the electrodes and coating layers and the binders may have the same or similar materials as used for the coating layers in order to improve binding strength (para 0007-0008, 0021, 0025, 0068-0070). 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 the first and second particle type binder materials of Sung with the first and second particle type binder materials of Hong that are different from each other in order to improve binding strength between the separator and electrodes and because this is a substitution of known elements yielding predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the (first and second particle type) binder in each of the adhesive layers may have an average particle diameter of 300 nm, or 0.3 micrometers (0.05 to 0.5 micrometers) (Sung para 0124).
Alternatively, Hong teaches binder polymers may have an average particle diameter of 50 to 500 nm (0.05 to 0.5 micrometers) (para 0063-0064). Therefore, 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 the binder polymers (first and second particle-type binder) used in the adhesive (aqueous binder) layers of Sung with binder polymers having average particle diameters from 50 to 500 nm, as described by Hong, because this is a substitution of known elements yielding predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the adhesive resin particles of at least one of the adhesive/binder layers (first or second particle-type binder) may be a fluorine-containing binder comprising polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) (Sung para 0085-0086).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the adhesive resin particles of at least one of the adhesive/binder layers (first or second particle-type binder) may be an acrylic-containing binder comprising polyacrylonitrile, polyethylhexyl acrylate-co-methyl methacrylate, or polybutylacrylate-co-methyl methacrylate (comprises at least one of polyethylhexyl acrylate. Polybutylacrylate, polyacrylonitrile, a copolymer of ethylhexyl acrylate and methyl methacrylate, and a copolymer of butylacrylate and methyl methacrylate) (Sung para 0085-0086, 0124).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the coating layer binder comprises a binder polymer in an water solvent (aqueous particle-type binder) that may be the same as the binder in the adhesive layers (first and second aqueous binder layer) (Sung para 0117-0124). Alternatively, the coating layer binder is necessarily either the same as or different than each of the binders in the first and second aqueous binder layers.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sung and Hong fails to explicitly teach the separator has a dry adhesive strength of 70 gf/25 mm or more with respect to an electrode. However, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches a similar separator and electrode structure as the instant application, where the separator is pressed to an electrode to adhere them together under heat and pressure (Sung para 0126; Instant application para 8, 128). Similar compositions/structures formed by similar processes must necessarily yield similar results. Therefore, the separator of Sung in view of Hong must necessarily yield a dry adhesive strength of at least 70 gf/25 mm with respect to the electrode. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Sung and Hong fails to explicitly teach the separator has a wet adhesive strength of 10 gf/25 mm or more with respect to an electrode. However, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches a similar separator and electrode structure as the instant application, where the separator is pressed to an electrode to adhere them together under heat and pressure (Sung para 0126; Instant application para 8, 128). Similar compositions/structures formed by similar processes must necessarily yield similar results. Therefore, the separator of Sung in view of Hong must necessarily yield a wet adhesive strength of at least 10 gf/25 mm with respect to the electrode. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sung and Hong fails to explicitly teach an adhesive strength between the porous polymer substrate and at least one of the first coating layer and second coating layer is 60 gf/15 mm or more. However, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches a similar polymer substrate and coating layer structure as the instant application, where the coating layer is applied to the polymer substrate by dip coating a slurry and drying (Sung para 0119, 0122; Instant application para 128). Similar compositions/structures formed by similar processes must necessarily yield similar results. Therefore, the separator of Sung in view of Hong must necessarily yield an adhesive strength of at least 60 gf/15 mm between the porous polymer substrate and at least one of the first and second coating layer. See MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the first and second porous coating layers, which combine to make a first coating layer or a second coating layer, may each have a thickness of 2 micrometers, resulting in a thickness of each coating layer independently being about 4 micrometers (5 micrometers or less) (Sung para 0118-0122).
Alternatively, Sung teaches the first and second porous coating layers, which combine to make a first coating layer and a second coating layer, each have a thickness of 1-20 micrometers and therefore each coating layer independently has a thickness of 2 to 40 micrometers (para 0024). Additionally, Hong teaches the first and second coating layer may each have a thickness from 0.01 to 15 micrometers (para 0056). Though the aforementioned references fail to explicitly teach the first and second coating layer each independently have a thickness of 5 micrometers or less, one skilled in the art would have expected the use of any value within the Sung or Hong range to have yielded similar results. Absent any showing of criticality, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used any values within 2 to 40 micrometers or 0.01 to 15 micrometers, including values within the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success and with predictable results. Please see MPEP 2144.05 (I) for further details.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the adhesive layers (first and second aqueous binder layers) may have a thickness of 1 micrometer (thickness of 2 micrometers or less) on each coating layer (Sung para 0124).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the porous substrate (porous polymer substrate) may have a thickness of 9 micrometers (15 micrometers or less) (Sung para 0091).
Alternatively, Sung teaches the porous substrate has a thickness of 1-100 micrometers (para 0095) and Hong teaches that the porous base/substrate may have a thickness in the range of 5 micrometers to 20 micrometers (para 0059) but fails to explicitly teach a thickness of 15 micrometers or less. However, one skilled in the art would have expected the use of any value within the Sung or Hong range to have yielded similar results. Absent any showing of criticality, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used any values within 1 to 100 micrometers or 5 to 20 micrometers, including values within the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success and with predictable results. Please see MPEP 2144.05 (I) for further details.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Sung and Hong teaches the separator of claim 1, as described above, may be interposed between a cathode and anode of an electrode assembly in an electrochemical device that may be a lithium secondary battery (Sung para 0043, 0106-0107).
Claim(s) 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20200350546 A1) in view of Hong (US 20160164059 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoon (KR 20200107602 A).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sung and Hong fails to explicitly teach the separator has a dry adhesive strength of 70 gf/25 mm or more with respect to an electrode. However, Yoon (KR 20200107602 A), in the analogous art of separators, teaches a separator having a dry adhesion strength of 70 gf/25 mm or more with the anode (an electrode) by bonding the electrode to a separator coating layer in an uncrosslinked state where the separator and electrode are bonded using heating and pressing at 70°C with a pressure of 600 kgf for 1 second and where the coating layer may be formed by combining a crosslinkable binder resin and a non-crosslinkable binder resin (para 0069, 0080, 0105-0107, 0153). Sung seeks to improve peeling resistance of the coating layer and increasing the adhesion between the coating and the electrode, where the electrode and separator are joined at a temperature of 70°C under 600 kgf for 1 second, as in Yoon (para 0081, 0087, 0126). Therefore, 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 the coating layer binder polymer, and associated binder polymer of the adhesive/binder layer, of Sung with the mixed crosslinkable and non-crosslinkable binder resin of Yoon to increase a dry adhesion strength between the separator and electrode to at least 70 gf/25 mm because this is a substitution of known elements yielding predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Sung and Hong fails to explicitly teach the separator has a wet adhesive strength of 10 gf/25 mm or more with respect to an electrode. However, Yoon (KR 20200107602 A), in the analogous art of separators, teaches a separator having a wet adhesion strength of 10 gf/25 mm or more with an electrode by bonding the electrode to a separator coating layer in an uncrosslinked state where the separator and electrode are bonded using heating and pressing at 70°C with a pressure of 600 kgf for 1 second and where the coating layer may be formed by combining a crosslinkable binder resin and a non-crosslinkable binder resin in addition to including a crosslinking agent to perform cross-linking after initial charging in order to improve battery performance (para 0011, 0080, 0099, 0105-0107, 0153). Sung seeks to improve peeling resistance of the coating layer, improve battery performance, and increase the adhesion between the coating and the electrode, where the electrode and separator are joined at a temperature of 70°C under 600 kgf for 1 second, as in Yoon (para 0064, 0081, 0087, 0126). Therefore, 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 the coating layer binder polymer, and associated binder polymer of the adhesive/binder layer, of Sung with the mixed crosslinkable and non-crosslinkable binder resin and crosslinking agent of Yoon to increase a wet adhesion strength between the separator and electrode to at least 10 gf/25 mm because this is a substitution of known elements yielding predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sung (US 20200350546 A1) in view of Hong (US 20160164059 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yun (KR 20200132323 A).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sung and Hong fails to explicitly teach an adhesive strength between the porous polymer substrate and at least one of the first coating layer and second coating layer is 60 gf/15 mm or more. However, Yun (KR 20200132323 A), in the analogous art of separators, teaches the peel strength between the porous polymer substrate and the porous coating layer may be 60 to 70 gf/15mm (60 gf/15 mm or more) to improve ion conductivity without the detachment of inorganic particles within the porous coating layer, where the adhesion is achieved through introduction of anionic functional groups of a fluorinated copolymer which may be vinylidene fluoride based (para 0035, 0086, 0088-0090). Sung teaches the porous coating layers may include a binder polymer that may comprise a polyvinylidene fluoride based copolymer, and where the binder polymer having ion conductivity and high dielectric constant can improve the performance of the electrochemical device (para 0014-0015, 0025). Therefore, 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 the fluorinated binder polymer of Sung with the fluorinated copolymer including anionic functional groups described by Yun in order to improve adhesion between the porous coating layer and porous polymer substrate to 60 gf/15mm or more and increase ion conductivity and dielectric constant to improve performance of the electrochemical device because this is a substitution of known elements yielding predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK S OTT whose telephone number is (571)272-2415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/PATRICK S OTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights