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 § 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 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuya et al. (WO 2022/195942 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Matsuya teaches a zinc secondary battery comprising a sealed container with a battery unit cell containing a positive electrode plate, negative electrode plate, a separator between the positive and negative electrode plates, an electrolyte, and the negative electrode active material includes at least one selected from the group consisting of zinc, zinc oxide, zinc alloys, and zinc compounds (Paragraphs [0002] and [0012]). Matsuya teaches the negative electrode current collector may be a copper metal material such as a copper foil, expanded metal, or perforated metal (Paragraph [0020]). Matsuya teaches a separator that is a liquid-retaining member made of a nonwoven material (Paragraph [0021]) further covered by a LDH separator of a microporous membrane material (Paragraphs [0022] and [0039]).
Matsuya teaches a thickness “A” of the porous substrate used as a separator to have a value between 5 and 100 µm, particularly between 5 and 40 µm (Paragraph [0023]), and a thickness “B” of the nonwoven fabric enclosing either electrode plate as an additional separator layer (Paragraph [0029]) to have a value between 100 to 200 µm, particularly between 20 and 60 µm (Paragraph [0021]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the numerical teachings of Matsuya and arrive at an A/B value that would anticipate and render obvious the claimed range of the instant application, such as A = 25 and B = 50 to arrive at A/B = 0.48.
Regarding Claim 4, Matsuya teaches a thickness “A” of the porous substrate used as a separator to have a value between 5 and 100 µm (Paragraph [0023]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to pick any part of the claimed range of the instant application, since a prima facie case of obviousness exists in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art”. See re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Regarding Claim 5, Matsuya teaches the negative electrode current collector may be a copper metal material such as a copper foil, expanded metal, or perforated metal (Paragraph [0020]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuya et al. (WO 2022/195942 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Ogawa et al. (JP 6999283 B2).
Regarding Claim 2, Matsuya does not teach the separator composite in which the nonwoven fabric comprises a plurality of nonwoven fabrics and the microporous film comprises a plurality of microporous films. Ogawa teaches Separator A made of A1, A2, and A3, in which each of A1, A2, and A3 is a different configuration or type of polyolefin nonwoven fabric (Paragraph [0076]) combined with Separator B made of B1, B2, and B3 in which each of B1, B2, and B3 is a different configuration or type of hydrophilic microporous membrane (Paragraph [0077]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-layered nonwoven and microporous separator materials of Ogawa with the zinc battery configuration of Matsuya in order arrive at the claimed invention and gain benefits of the adaptation, such as exhibiting advantageous effects to battery lifespan and discharge as taught by Ogawa (Paragraphs [0084], [0085], and [0088]). See re Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., 485 F.3d 1157, 82 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuya et al. (WO 2022/195942 A1) and Ogawa et al. (JP 6999283 B2) as applied to Claim 2 above, and further in view of Endo et al. (US 2020/0350617 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Matsuya teaches the nonwoven fabric separator may cover or enclose either the negative or positive electrode plates (Paragraph [0029]); that is, the nonwoven fabric separator may directly interface with either electrode plate while the other electrode plate interfaces with the microporous membrane separator. Matsuya does not teach repeat units of a first nonwoven fabric, a first microporous film, a second nonwoven fabric, and a second microporous film. Endo teaches a separator made of a porous film or nonwoven fabric, and a structure in which two or more of the separator materials are stacked (Paragraph [0116]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of any sequence of nonwoven fabric and microporous film layers in relation to the electrode plates from Matsuya with the repeat units of Endo in order to arrive at the claimed invention and gain benefits of the adaptation, such as preventing short circuit of a current due to contact between both the electrodes and allow ion transfer as taught by both Matsuya (Paragraph [0003]) and Endo (Paragraph [0116]). See re Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., 485 F.3d 1157, 82 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Vivian Cheng whose telephone number is (571)270-1930. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 7:30am-5pm ET, Fri 7:30am-12pm 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, Frank Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/V.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1781
/FRANK J VINEIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights