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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 07/30/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakajima et al. (US 2021/0159480) in view of Ito et al. (JP 2003188055; English translation relied upon, translation obtained from Espacenet).
Regarding Claim 1, Nakajima meets the claimed,
A binder used in a liquid composition ([0014] teaches a liquid composition) containing at least one of a positive electrode active material ([0016] teaches a first electrode material dissolved in the liquid) and a solid electrolyte ([0075] teaches solid electrolyte dissolved in the liquid),
Nakajima does not teach a binder having structural units represented by general formula (I) and (II).
Ito is analogous as it teaches a binder composition for use in capacitor cathodes.
Ito meets the claimed,
the binder comprising: a structural unit (a) represented by general formula (I) below: ([0013]-[0015] teaches a methacrylic monomer that follows Formula 1 that includes n-butyl methacrylate) and a structural unit (b) represented by general formula (II) below: ([0016] teaches an amino group-containing methacrylic monomer with a tertiary amino group includeing dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate) wherein a composition ratio (a:b) of the structural unit (a) represented by the general formula (I) and the structural unit (b) represented by the general formula (II) ranges from "more than 0 mol%: less than 100 mol%" to "100 mol% or less: 0 mol% or more" ([0011] teaches making a copolymer using the two monomers, which means, by definition, they exist in a ratio between 0:100 and 100:0).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to reduce leakage current by reducing the number of impurities after sintering (See Ito [0011]).
Regarding Claim 2, Nakajima meets the claimed,
A liquid composition comprising ([0014] teaches a liquid composition): at least one of a positive electrode active material ([0016] teaches a first electrode material dissolved in the liquid) and a solid electrolyte ([0075] teaches solid electrolyte dissolved in the liquid); the binder according to claim 1; and a solvent ([0016] teaches a first electrode material dissolved in the liquid, which means the liquid is a solvent).
Regarding Claim 3, Nakajima does not teach the binder having a glass transition temperature of -30°C to 70°C.
Ito meets the claimed,
The liquid composition according to claim 2, wherein the binder has a glass transition temperature of -30°C or higher and less than 70°C ([0013]-[0015] teaches a methacrylic monomer that follows Formula 1 that includes n-butyl methacrylate. [0016] teaches an amino group-containing methacrylic monomer with a tertiary amino group includeing dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate. Applicant's specification on Pg. 10, Lines 14-21 teach copolymer comprising the aforementioned monomers. Therefore, it is expected that the binder as taught by the prior art possesses a glass transition temperature within the claimed as per the applicant's own specifications).
Regarding Claim 4, Nakajima meets the claimed,
The liquid composition according to claim 2, wherein the positive electrode active material comprises at least one member selected from the group consisting of lithium-containing transition metal oxides and lithium-containing transition metal phosphate compounds ([0064] teaches a positive electrode active material of a lithium-containing transition metal oxide. [0066] teaches the use of lithium iron phosphate).
Regarding Claim 5, Nakajima meets the claimed,
The liquid composition according to claim 2, wherein the positive electrode active material contains lithium ([0064] teaches a positive electrode active material of a lithium-containing transition metal oxide. [0066] teaches the use of lithium iron phosphate.).
Regarding Claim 6, Nakajima meets the claimed,
The liquid composition according to claim 2, wherein a content of the positive electrode active material is 10% by mass or more ([0046] teaches at least 20% by mass or more of active material in the liquid composition).
Regarding Claim 7, Nakajima meets the claimed,
The liquid composition according to claim 2, wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide solid electrolyte ([0071] teaches a sulfide-based solid electrolyte).
Regarding Claim 8, Nakajima/Ito does not specifically teach a viscosity of 200 mPa•s at 25 °C.
However, Nakajima/Ito meets all other structural elements of the claimed invention and as per MPEP 2112.01, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. .
Regarding Claim 9, Nakajima/Ito does not specifically teach that the composition is an inkjet ink composition. However, the composition as taught is a liquid composition with components meeting the structural elements as claimed, and would therefore likely fit into an inkjet printing device. Therefore, the liquid composition can be considered an inkjet ink composition.
Regarding Claim 10, Nakajima meets the claimed,
A storage container accommodating the liquid composition according to claim 2 ([0137] teaches tank 307A which stores a liquid composition).
Regarding Claim 11, Nakajima meets the claimed,
An electrode production device comprising ([0134]-[0165] teaches a method of producing an electrode including an apparatus to produce an electrode): the storage container according to claim 10 ([0137] teaches tank 307A which stores a liquid composition); and an application unit that applies the liquid composition accommodated in the storage container onto an electrode base ([0137] teaches a liquid discharge head 306A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW Y. HO whose telephone number is (571)842-1342. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 6:00, Mon - Thurs.
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, Xiao S. Zhao can be reached at (571) 270-5343. 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.
/A.Y.H./ Examiner, Art Unit 1744
/MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights