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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Electrochemistry Communications” (cited NPL – to Xue et al.).
With respect to claim 1, Xue teaches a lithium-ion battery component (page 87) comprising:
an electrode having a current collector and an electrode sheet laminated thereon
including conducting agents/(Super P Li) and a polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder/(oligomers) (section 3. “Results and discussion) mechanically binding the conducting agents in a sterically stabilized dispersion configured to permit volume expansion of the electrode sheet during charge of the electrode (section 3. “Results and discussion – pages 88-89) and facilitate volume contraction of the electrode sheet during discharge of the electrode (page 89). Since the prior art of Xue et al. teaches the instantly claimed binder, active material, and current collector, then it would be expected that the combination would perform as instantly claimed.
With respect to claim 2, Xue teaches wherein a B group in the polar
cross-linkable B-A-B binder is selected from one of acrylate (page 88 – left column) and epoxy.
With respect to claim 3, Xue teaches wherein an A group in the
polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder is selected from one of urethane (page 88 – left column), epoxy, and glycol.
With respect to claim 4, Xue teaches wherein the conducting
agents include carbon black/(Super P Li – which comprises carbon black) (page 87) and carbon nanotubes.
With respect to claim 5, Xue teaches wherein the electrode sheet
includes active materials/(NMC) (page 87).
With respect to claim 6, Xue teaches wherein the active materials
include lithium (page 87).
With respect to claim 7, Xue teaches wherein the active materials
include graphite (MCMB = mesocarbon microbeads which comprises graphite spherical synthetic material) (page 89).
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 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Electrochemistry Communications” (cited NPL – to Xue et al.), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Loveridge et al. (US 20120094178 A1).
With respect to claim 8, Xue discloses all claim limitations as set forth above but fails to teach wherein the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder has a viscosity of at least 500 centipoise at 25 degrees Celsius. Loveridge teaches compositions for secondary battery cells wherein the binder solution used therein has a viscosity in the range of 800 to 3000 mPa/s (para. [0056]), which falls within the instantly claimed range of at least 500 centipoise at 25 degrees Celsius, in order to provide an electrode mixture that can be easily applied to a current collector (para. [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to have the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder in Xue et al. comprise a viscosity in the range of 800 to 3000 mPa/s, as taught by Loveridge, in order to provide an electrode mixture that can be easily applied to a current collector.
With respect to claim 9, Xue discloses all claim limitations as set forth above but fails to teach wherein the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder has a molecular weight of at least 200 grams per mol. Loveridge teaches compositions for secondary battery cells wherein the electrode material comprises a binder that has a molecular weight of 300,000 to 3000,000 (para. [0062]), which falls within the instantly claimed range of at least 200 grams per mol, in order to provide an optimal molecular weight for an ideal solubility in the solvent used for preparing the electrode material (para. [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to have the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder in Xue et al. comprise a molecular weight of 300,000 to 3000,000, which falls within the instantly claimed range of at least 200 grams per mol, as taught by Loveridge, in order to provide an optimal molecular weight for an ideal solubility in the solvent used for preparing the electrode material.
Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Electrochemistry Communications” (cited NPL – to Xue et al.) in view of TW I628838 B (to Okada et al.) – translation attached and relied upon below.
With respect to claim 10, Xue teaches a method comprising:
mixing a gel-oligomer with conducting agents such that a sterically dispersed
mixture forms (page 87);
adding electrode active materials to the sterically dispersed mixture to form a self-
supporting electrode film (page 87). Xue teaches applying the slurry of active material, conductive material, and biner as a laminate to the current collector (page 87) but fails to teach roll-pressing the self-supporting electrode film with a current collector to form a laminated electrode. Okada et al. teaches coating active material onto a current collector, and then roll pressing the two layers in order to form a press-rolled electrode to match the shape of the target battery (page 35, lines 20-33).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to roll-press the combination of active material layer laminated to the current collector in the battery cell of Xue et al., as taught by Okada, in order to form a press-rolled electrode to match the shape of the target battery.
With respect to claim 11, Xue teaches wherein the gel-oligomer is a polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder (page 88 – left column, section 3).
With respect to claim 12, Xue teaches wherein a B group of the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder is selected from one of acrylate (page 88 – left column, section 3) and epoxy.
With respect to claim 13, Xue teaches wherein an A group in the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder is selected from one of urethane (page 88 – left column, section 3), epoxy, and glycol.
With respect to claim 14, Xue teaches lithium-ion battery comprising:
a separator (page 88 – left column, lines 1-8); and
a pair of electrodes sandwiching the separator (i.e. full cell) (page 88 – left column, lines 1-8), at least one of the electrodes including an electrode sheet, laminated with a current collector (page 88, left column, section 3.), having dispersed conducting agents sterically stabilized by a polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder mechanically binding the dispersed conducting agents (pages 87-88).
With respect to claim 15, Xue teaches wherein a B group in the polar cross-
linkable B-A-B binder is selected from one of acrylate (page 88 – left column, section 3) and epoxy.
With respect to claim 16, Xue teaches wherein an A group in the polar cross-
linkable B-A-B binder is selected from one of urethane (page 88 – left column, section 3), epoxy, and glycol.
With respect to claim 17, Xue teaches wherein the conducting agents include
carbon black/(Super P Li – which comprises carbon black) (page 87) and carbon nanotubes.
With respect to claim 18, Xue teaches wherein the electrode sheet includes
active materials/(NMC) (page 87).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Electrochemistry Communications” (cited NPL – to Xue et al.), as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Loveridge et al. (US 20120094178 A1).
With respect to claim 19, Xue discloses all claim limitations as set forth above but fails to teach wherein the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder has a viscosity of at least 500 centipoise at 25 degrees Celsius. Loveridge teaches compositions for secondary battery cells wherein the binder solution used therein has a viscosity in the range of 800 to 3000 mPa/s (para. [0056]), which falls within the instantly claimed range of at least 500 centipoise at 25 degrees Celsius, in order to provide an electrode mixture that can be easily applied to a current collector (para. [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to have the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder in Xue et al. comprise a viscosity in the range of 800 to 3000 mPa/s, as taught by Loveridge, in order to provide an electrode mixture that can be easily applied to a current collector.
With respect to claim 20, Xue discloses all claim limitations as set forth above but fails to teach wherein the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder has a molecular weight of at least 200 grams per mol. Loveridge teaches compositions for secondary battery cells wherein the electrode material comprises a binder that has a molecular weight of 300,000 to 3000,000 (para. [0062]), which falls within the instantly claimed range of at least 200 grams per mol, in order to provide an optimal molecular weight for an ideal solubility in the solvent used for preparing the electrode material (para. [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to have the polar cross-linkable B-A-B binder in Xue et al. comprise a molecular weight of 300,000 to 3000,000, which falls within the instantly claimed range of at least 200 grams per mol, as taught by Loveridge, in order to provide an optimal molecular weight for an ideal solubility in the solvent used for preparing the electrode material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITY V CHANDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/KAITY V CHANDLER/ 9/28/2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
