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 § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13-15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suenaga et al. (KR 2013/0105362A) provided in the Information Disclosure Statement received November 10, 2026. The English machine translation provided by Applicant has been cited below.
Regarding Claim 1, Suenaga et al. teaches a positive electrode used in a lithium ion secondary battery (pg. 2, para. 12) (i.e. an electrode for a lithium secondary battery comprising an electrode portion) including a positive electrode current collector (Fig. 1, #32), a positive electrode active material layer (Fig. 1, #33) formed on the current collector, a separator sandwiched between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (pg. 8, para. 13) (i.e. an insulating member formed on the electrode layer), an insulation layer coated on a positive electrode material layer such that the insulating layer is formed so as to cover both the upper surface of the positive electrode active material layer (Fig. 1, #36a) and the current collector exposed portion (Fig. 1, #37), such that there is a portion covering the uncoated portion (Fig. 1, #36b) (i.e. a coating member comprising, a first coating region contacting a side surface of the electrode portion, and a second coating region contacting the first coating region and contacting a portion of the insulating layer, as the portion #36a covers the upper surface which contacts a portion of the separator) (pg. 3, para. 6).
Regarding Claim 2, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the insulating layer (i.e. each of the first coating region and the second coating region) comprises a fine particles of inorganic material (i.e. inorganic fine particles) and a polymer material bound with a binder (i.e. a binder resin) (pg. 5, para. 3).
Regarding Claim 3, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the insulating layer of the positive electrode the area region where the porosity was lowered was 7 micrometers (pg. 8, para. 10 and pg. 3, para. 6) (i.e. a thickness of the first coating region measured from the side surface of the electrode portion is within the range of 1 micrometer or more and 100 micrometers or less).
Regarding Claim 4, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the thickness of the part of the insulating layer which covers the positive electrode active material layer is 5-50 micrometers (pg. 5, para. 15) (i.e. a thickness of the second coating region measured from an interface with the insulating layer is within 1 micrometers or more and 500 micrometers or less).
Regarding Claim 6, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches a thickness of the second coating region measured from an interface with the insulating layer, and a length second coating region measured from a tangent of the first coating region and the second coating region are the same and thus, a ratio is equal to 1.0, within the claimed range) (see Annotated Suenaga et al. – Fig. 2 below). Office personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Also, limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. See In re Zletz, 893F.2d 319, 321-22,13 USPQ2d, 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
Annotated Suenaga et al. – Fig. 2
PNG
media_image1.png
364
854
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches a porosity of the insulating layer 40% and 10% (i.e. the coating member has a porosity of 10% or more and 50% or less) (pg. 8, para. 9 and 10).
Regarding Claim 8, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches as a separator a microporous membrane (i.e. insulating layer) has a porosity of 50% (pg. 8, para. 12).
Regarding Claim 9, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches as a separator a microporous membrane (i.e. insulating layer) has a thickness of 25 micrometers (pg. 8, para. 12) (i.e. has a thickness within 10 micrometers or more and 30 micrometers or less).
Regarding Claim 10, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 2 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the inorganic material has an average particle diameter of 0.3 to 1 micrometer (pg. 5, para. 14) (i.e. the inorganic fine particles having a particle size within the claimed range of 10 nm or more and 1 micrometer or less).
Regarding Claim 11, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 2 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the inorganic material include oxide fine particles such as alumina, silica, titanium oxide (i.e. titania), zirconium oxide (i.e. zirconia), boehmite and zeolite (pg. 5, para. 5).
Regarding Claim 13, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 2 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the binder is polyvinylidene fluoride, styrene butadiene rubber, polyvinylpyrrolidone, carboxymethyl cellulose (pg. 5, para. 10).
Regarding Claim 14, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the electrode in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches a lithium ion secondary battery comprising the positive electrode (i.e. a lithium ion secondary battery comprising the electrode of claim 1) and a negative electrode (i.e. a second electrode portion formed on the electrode) (pg. 8, para. 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 14 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the negative electrode prepared by forming a negative electrode active material layer on a copper foil (pg. 8, para. 11) (i.e. a second electrode portion comprises a second electrode layer and a second current collector formed on the second electrode layer).
Regarding Claim 17, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the insulating layer (Fig. 2, #36) (i.e. coating member) has a shape that surrounds a side surface of the electrode portion (Fig. 2, #33, #37) on both an upper and lower side surface and a separator (i.e. insulating layer) is sandwiched between the positive electrode (Fig. 2, #35) and a negative electrode positive electrode and the negative electrode (pg. 8, para. 13), and thus, the insulating layer (i.e. coating member) surrounds part of an upper surface of the separator (i.e. insulating layer) and the side surface of the electrode portion comprises a side surface of the current collector, a side surface of the electrode layer and a side surface of the insulating layer.
Regarding Claim 18, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 17 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches wherein a direction of the first coating region (Fig. 2, #36b) and a direction of the second coating region (Fig. 2, #36a) in a cross section of the coating member form an angle of 90 degrees (see tangent in Annotated Suenaga et al. -- Fig. 2 above).
Regarding Claim 19, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the lithium secondary battery in claim 14 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches a lithium ion secondary battery comprising the positive electrode with the insulating layer (i.e. the electrode is a cathode) and a negative electrode (i.e. a second electrode portion is an anode) (pg. 8, para. 2 and 9).
Claims 1, 14, 16 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2022/0263193).
Regarding Claim 1, Chen et al. teaches an anode for an electrochemical cell (i.e. an electrode) (Para. [0016]) comprising a separator allowing for the transfer of ionic charge carriers between the cathode and anode (Para. [0019]) comprising a lithium containing electrolyte (Para. [0021]) (i.e. for a lithium secondary battery) comprising an anode (i.e. electrode portion) comprising an anode current collector (Fig. 3, #320) (i.e. a current collector) an anode (Fig. 3, #310) disposed on the anode current collector (i.e. electrode layer formed on the current collector), a separator (i.e. insulating layer) disposed between the anode and a cathode (i.e. an insulating layer formed on the electrode layer), and a separator seal (Fig. 3, #355) oriented around an outside edge of the separator (i.e. a coating member comprising a first coating region contacting a side surface of the electrode portion, and a second coating region contacting the first coating region and makes contact with a portion of the insulating layer) (see Fig. 3A and 3, #355 where the upper #355 first coating region is contacting a side surface of the anode #310 and the lower #355 second coating region is contacting the first coating region [see also Fig. 3B wherein the regions of #355 are connected], and the lower #355 is contacting a portion of the separator layer #350, i.e. the insulating layer).
Regarding Claim 14, Chen et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Chen et al. further teaches an electrochemical cell comprising an anode (i.e. the electrode of claim) and a cathode (Para. [0016]) (i.e. and a second electrode portion formed on the electrode) comprising a separator allowing for the transfer of ionic charge carriers between the cathode and anode (Para. [0019]) comprising a lithium containing electrolyte (Para. [0021]) (i.e. the electrochemical cell is a lithium secondary battery).
Regarding Claim 16, Chen et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 14 as explained above.
Chen et al. further teaches the difference in length between the anode and the cathode is at least about 500 micrometers (i.e. 0.5 mm) and no more than about 1 mm (Para. [0046]) (i.e. within the claimed range of a length in an extension direction of the electrode portion is longer than a length in an extension direction of the second electrode portion by 0.2 mm or more and 2 mm or less).
Regarding Claim 20, Chen et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 14 as explained above.
Chen et al. further teaches the anode (i.e. the electrode is an anode) and a cathode (i.e. the second electrode portion is a cathode) (Para. [0016]).
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 5 and 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suenaga et al. (KR 2013/0105362A) provided in the Information Disclosure Statement received November 10, 2026. The English machine translation provided by Applicant has been cited below.
Regarding Claim 5, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches the thickness of the part of the insulating layer which covers the positive electrode active material layer is 5-50 micrometers (pg. 5, para. 15) (i.e. a length second coating region measured from a tangent of the first coating region and the second coating region may be 50 micrometers, overlapping with the claimed range of 50 micrometers or more and 2 mm or less). Office personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Also, limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. See In re Zletz, 893F.2d 319, 321-22,13 USPQ2d, 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989). See also MPEP 2111. 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).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Regarding Claim 12, Suenaga et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 2 as explained above.
Suenaga et al. further teaches in the insulating layer the binder is 1-100 mass parts with respect to 100 mass parts of microparticles / fine-particles (pg. 5, para. 9) (i.e. overlapping with the claimed range as each of the first coating region and the second coating region may contain 100 parts by weight of the inorganic fine particles with respect to 100 parts by weight of the binder resin). 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).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARMINDO CARVALHO JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-5292. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a.m.-5p.m..
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571 272-1481. 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.
/ARMINDO CARVALHO JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights