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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-18 are pending and under consideration on the merits.
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s Specification are to the published application US 2024/0243284 A1, unless stated otherwise. Further, it is noted that italicized text in parentheses recited in any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 indicates the element of the claimed invention to which the preceding prior art element corresponds. Additionally, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Claim Objections
Claims 15 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 15, “wherein the electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate and1,3-propane sultone; Wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte” constitutes improper grammar, due to no spacing between “and1,3-propane” and the capitalized W in the middle of the sentence. In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “wherein the electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate and 1,3-propane sultone;
Regarding claim 17, “comprises lithium difluorophosphate; Wherein, based” constitutes improper grammar, due to the capitalized W in the middle of the sentence. In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “comprises lithium difluorophosphate; wherein, based.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-18 are 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 18, “obtained by sintering the negative electrode material layer tested by an X-ray diffractometer” renders each claim indefinite. It is unclear in which order the X-ray diffractometer is used, before or after sintering the negative electrode material layer. For the purposes of examination, claims 1 and 18 are each interpreted as instead reciting “obtained by sintering the negative electrode material layer and testing by an X-ray diffractometer.” Support for this can be seen in at least ¶0083 of Applicant’s Specification.
Claims 2-18 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent upon claim 1 and therefore include, and do not remedy the aforementioned deficiencies.
Appropriate action is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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 1-2, 6, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Mori et al. (US 2008/0057401 A1; “Mori”).
Regarding claim 1, Mori discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (an electrochemical apparatus) [0009] comprising a negative electrode (a negative electrode plate) [0010]. The negative electrode comprises a first layer and a second layer, thereby reading on a negative electrode material layer, as claimed [0010, 0015, 0038]. The first layer comprises a graphitic material as a negative active material (a negative electrode active material, the negative electrode active material comprises graphite) [0010, 0015, 0035, 0038]. The graphitic material may be an artificial graphite or a naturally occurring graphite [0040], e.g. coal, pitch, or semi-cokes [0041-0042].
Mori remains silent regarding (d1/d2 - 1) x 100% ≤ 0.56% and 3.3600 ≤ d1 ≤ 3.3720 are satisfied; and wherein d1 Å is an interplanar spacing of (002) crystal plane of the negative electrode active material obtained by sintering the negative electrode material layer and testing by an X-ray diffractometer, and d2 Å is an interplanar spacing of the (002) crystal plane of the negative electrode active material in the negative electrode material layer tested by the X-ray diffractometer.
However, the negative active material of Mori is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material in Applicant's specification in terms of comprising:
a graphitic material first layer, of which may be an artificial graphite or a naturally occurring graphite, e.g. coal pitch, or semi-cokes, and corresponds with Applicant’s claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material comprising graphite [Claims 1 and 11, Applicant’s Specification ¶0050, 0105],
with a second layer provided thereon [Mori, 0035, 0046], formed from a non-graphitizable graphite, of which is, inter alia petroleum pitch, and is obtained from asphalt [Mori, 0035, 0046-0050, 0067], and corresponds with the claimed and disclosed surface having amorphous carbon [Claim 6, Applicant’s Specification ¶0051, 0106], wherein
Mori discloses a similar method of production, including subjecting the graphitic material to a carbonization step under inert gas, e.g. nitrogen, at 300-700°C, and then increasing the temperature to 900-1500°C for 0-30 hours [Mori, 0044], then a grinding step is performed [Mori, 0045] by means of a ball mill, sand mill, biaxial kneader or the like [Mori, 0066], of which corresponds with the disclosed process of crushing prior to graphitization [Applicant’s Specification ¶0050], then
a further thermal treatment at 2000°C or above is conducted [Mori, 0044], of which corresponds with the disclosed graphitization step [Applicant’s Specification ¶0050], then
the resultant material, of which forms the first layer, undergoes carbonization with the non-graphitizable graphite under inert gas, e.g. nitrogen, at 300-700°C, and then increased temperature to 900-1500°C for 0-30 hours [Mori, 0051], thereby forming the second layer, of which corresponds to the disclosed method of obtaining amorphous carbon the surface of the negative electrode active material [Applicant’s Specification ¶0051], wherein
a mean grain size of 9 μm is exemplified [Mori, 0147], of which corresponds with and is within the disclosed Dv50 of 5-15 μm [Applicant’s Specification ¶0050], and
a ratio of thickness of the first layer to the second layer may be adjusted in order to suppress excessive lowering in capacity and improve cycle performance (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
Given that the negative active material of Mori is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material in terms of the foregoing elements (a)-(g), it stands to reason, and there is a strong expectation, that the negative active material of Mori would have necessarily exhibited (d1/d2 - 1) x 100% ≤ 0.56% and 3.3600 ≤ d1 ≤ 3.3720, as defined by claim 1, absent a showing of factually supported objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112(V); MPEP 2112.01(I) and (II); MPEP 2145; and MPEP 2145(I). "Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 2, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Mori is silent regarding 3.3460 ≤ d2 ≤ 3.3700.
In view of the totality of the foregoing, the negative active material of Mori is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material in terms of the foregoing elements (a)-(g), in ¶23 above. As such it stands to reason, and there is a strong expectation, that the negative active material of Mori would have necessarily exhibited 3.3460 ≤ d2 ≤ 3.3700, as claimed, absent a showing of factually supported objective evidence to the contrary. See ¶21-24 above. See MPEP 2112(V); MPEP 2112.01(I) and (II); MPEP 2145; and MPEP 2145(I).
Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 6 above reads on the surface of the negative electrode active material defined by claim 6. The first layer graphitic material has a second layer provided thereon [Mori, 0035, 0046], formed from a non-graphitizable graphite, of which is, inter alia petroleum pitch, and is obtained from asphalt [0019, 0035, 0046-0052, 0067], thereby reading on a surface of the negative electrode active material has amorphous carbon, as claimed.
Regarding claim 18, Mori discloses electronic instruments, e.g. a video tape recorder, phone, and computer (an electronic apparatus) [0003, 0105], comprising a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (an electrochemical apparatus) [0003, 0009]. The non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery [0009] comprises a negative electrode (a negative electrode plate) [0010], of which further comprises a first layer (a negative electrode material layer) [0010, 0015, 0038], with a graphitic material as a negative active material (a negative electrode active material, the negative electrode active material comprises graphite) [0010, 0015, 0038]. The graphitic material may be an artificial graphite or a naturally occurring graphite [0040], e.g. coal, pitch, or semi-cokes [0041-0042].
Mori remains silent regarding (d1/d2 - 1) x 100% ≤ 0.56% and 3.3600 ≤ d1 ≤ 3.3720 are satisfied; and wherein d1 Å is an interplanar spacing of (002) crystal plane of the negative electrode active material obtained by sintering the negative electrode material layer and testing by an X-ray diffractometer, and d2 Å is an interplanar spacing of the (002) crystal plane of the negative electrode active material in the negative electrode material layer tested by the X-ray diffractometer.
However, the negative active material of Mori is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material in Applicant's specification in terms of comprising:
a graphitic material first layer, of which may be an artificial graphite or a naturally occurring graphite, e.g. coal pitch, or semi-cokes, and corresponds with Applicant’s claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material comprising graphite [Claims 1 and 11, Applicant’s Specification ¶0050, 0105],
with a second layer provided thereon [Mori, 0035, 0046], formed from a non-graphitizable graphite, of which is, inter alia petroleum pitch, and is obtained from asphalt [Mori, 0035, 0046-0050, 0067], and corresponds with the claimed and disclosed surface having amorphous carbon [Claim 6, Applicant’s Specification ¶0051, 0106], wherein
Mori discloses a similar method of production, including subjecting the graphitic material to a carbonization step under inert gas, e.g. nitrogen, at 300-700°C, and then increasing the temperature to 900-1500°C for 0-30 hours [Mori, 0044], then a grinding step is performed [Mori, 0045] by means of a ball mill, sand mill, biaxial kneader or the like [Mori, 0066], of which corresponds with the disclosed process of crushing prior to graphitization [Applicant’s Specification ¶0050], then
a further thermal treatment at 2000°C or above is conducted [Mori, 0044], of which corresponds with the disclosed graphitization step [Applicant’s Specification ¶0050], then
the resultant material, of which forms the first layer, undergoes carbonization with the non-graphitizable graphite under inert gas, e.g. nitrogen, at 300-700°C, and then increased temperature to 900-1500°C for 0-30 hours [Mori, 0051], thereby forming the second layer, of which corresponds to the disclosed method of obtaining amorphous carbon the surface of the negative electrode active material [Applicant’s Specification ¶0051], wherein
a mean grain size of 9 μm is exemplified [Mori, 0147], of which corresponds with and is within the disclosed Dv50 of 5-15 μm [Applicant’s Specification ¶0050], and
a ratio of thickness of the first layer to the second layer may be adjusted in order to suppress excessive lowering in capacity and improve cycle performance (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
Given that the negative active material of Mori is substantially identical or identical to the claimed and disclosed negative electrode active material in terms of the foregoing elements (a)-(g), it stands to reason, and there is a strong expectation, that the negative active material of Mori would have necessarily exhibited (d1/d2 - 1) x 100% ≤ 0.56% and 3.3600 ≤ d1 ≤ 3.3720, as defined by claim 1, absent a showing of factually supported objective evidence to the contrary. See MPEP 2112(V); MPEP 2112.01(I) and (II); MPEP 2145; and MPEP 2145(I). "Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established”. The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this section can be found above.
Claims 3-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori as applied to claims 1 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 above, in view of Song et al. (US 2016/0276657 A1; “Song”).
Regarding claim 3, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1.
Mori remains silent regarding the negative electrode active material comprises primary particles and secondary particles formed by agglomerating the primary particles.
Song is directed towards a negative electrode active material for a secondary lithium battery [0029]. Song teaches that the negative electrode active material comprises an initial natural graphite particle coated with amorphous carbon material and aggregated, bonded, or assembled with an initial artificial graphite particle [0030, 0036]. The amorphous carbon material may be coated in an amount exceeding 0%, but not more than 30%, and specifically in a range 1% to 5% [0038]. When the initial particles are aggregated, bonded, or assembled, they for a physically distinguishable particle of a larger size, a secondary particle [0031-0032, 0035, 0053-0055, 0060-0062].
Mori and Song each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------negative electrode active material comprising graphite. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative active material of Mori so that it comprises initial particles, which are aggregated, bonded, or assembled to form secondary particles, as they are made up of substantially identical or identical material, and in order to exhibit high capacity, high output, high cycle characteristic, and excellent swelling characteristic [Song, 0060]. Additionally, micropores present within the secondary graphite particle can act as a buffer, which can thus provide stronger rollability, thereby resulting in a high density active material layer [Song, 0060].
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the negative active material of modified Mori would comprise initial particles (primary particles), which are aggregated, bonded, or assembled to form secondary particles (secondary particles formed by agglomerating the primary particles).
Regarding claim 4, in view of the rejection of claim 3 above, Song exemplifies that the initial natural graphite particles coated with amorphous carbon material are in an amount 50 wt % [Song, 0091]. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative active material of Mori so that the initial particles are in an amount 50 wt % in order to exhibit superior swelling characteristics [Song, 0091, 0111]. The aforementioned wt % is within the claimed range, 1% to 50%, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 5, in view of the rejection of claim 3 above, Song exemplifies that the secondary particles are in an amount 96 wt % [Song, 0092]. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative active material of Mori so that the secondary particles are in an amount 96 wt % in order to exhibit superior swelling characteristics [Song, 0091, 0111]. The aforementioned wt % is within the claimed range, 50% to 99%, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 7, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 6.
Mori remains silent regarding based on a mass of the negative electrode active material, a mass percentage of the amorphous carbon is 0.1% to 5%.
Song is directed towards a negative electrode active material for a secondary lithium battery [0029]. Song teaches that the negative electrode active material comprises an initial natural graphite particle coated with amorphous carbon material [0030]. The amorphous carbon material may be coated in an amount exceeding 0%, but not more than 30%, and specifically in a range 1% to 5% [0038].
Mori and Song each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention - ------------negative electrode active material comprising graphite with amorphous carbon on the surface. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative active material of Mori so that the second layer is in an amount 1% to 5%, as irreversibility of the graphite edge plane may be reduced as the amount of coated carbon increases, and when the coating amount exceeds 30%, the battery may have inefficient charging and discharging, and thus, may decrease capacity [Song, 0038] (MPEP 2144.05(II)). However, the presence of the amorphous carbon material can suppress deformation of the initial natural graphite particles during rolling and may also prevent direct contact between the initial particles and the electrolyte, thereby suppressing any reaction between the two, and enhance cycle and capacity characteristics of the battery [Song, 0039, 0042].
Claims 8-10, 12, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori as applied to claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 above, in view of Nakazawa et al. (US 2016/0013517 A1; “Nakazawa”).
Regarding claim 8, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1.
Mori remains silent regarding a density of the negative electrode material layer is X g/cc, a porosity of the negative electrode material layer is Y, and Y + 53.47X > 125.
Nakazawa is directed to a nonaqueous electrolyte battery [0017], with a carbonaceous material is used as a negative electrode active material [0291-0296, 0310]. Nakazawa teaches that the carbonaceous material may be, inter alia carbon-coated graphite [0295, 0302], wherein the graphite may be natural graphite and/or artificial graphite [0296, 0300, 0301-0302] and the carbon may be an amorphous carbon [0301-0302]. A tap density of the carbonaceous material is 0.1 g/cm3 to 2 g/cm3 [0336-0338]. An internal porosity of the negative electrode active material is 1% or more, and less than 50% [0357-0358].
When the internal porosity is too small, the liquid amount within the particles is reduced, so that the charge/discharge characteristics tend to become poor, and, when the internal porosity is too large, the amount of gaps between the particles in the resultant electrode is reduced, so that the electrolyte solution tends to be unsatisfactorily diffused [Nakazawa, 0358] (MPEP 2144.05(II)). In addition, substances that mitigate expansion and compression of metal particles capable of alloying with Li, such as amorphous carbon, graphite substances or resin, may be present in the gaps or gaps may be filled therewith [Nakazawa, 0358] (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
Mori and Nakazawa each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------negative electrode material comprising graphite. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative electrode material layer of Mori so that it has a tap density between 0.1 g/cm3 to 2 g/cm3 and an internal porosity of 1% or more, and less than 50%, in order to obtain a high capacity battery and to exhibit excellent charge/discharge characteristics with satisfactorily diffused electrolyte solution [Nakazawa, 0337, 0358].
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the negative electrode material layer of modified Mori would have the tap density between 0.1 g/cm3 to 2 g/cm3 (a density of the negative electrode material layer is X g/cc) and the internal porosity of 1% or more, and less than 50% (a porosity of the negative electrode material layer is Y), therefore, through calculation, Y + 53.47X ≥ 125, wherein Y + 53.47X is between 6.347 and 156.93 (sample calculations, lower bound: 1+53.47*0.1 = 6.347; upper bound: 49.99+53.47*2 = 156.93). The aforementioned calculated range overlaps with the claimed range, ≥ 125, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 9, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1.
Mori remains silent regarding a density of the negative electrode material layer is 1.4 g/cc to 1.75 g/cc.
Nakazawa is directed to a nonaqueous electrolyte battery [0017], with a carbonaceous material is used as a negative electrode active material [0291-0296, 0310]. Nakazawa teaches that the carbonaceous material may be, inter alia carbon-coated graphite [0295, 0302], wherein the graphite may be natural graphite and/or artificial graphite [0296, 0300, 0301-0302] and the carbon may be an amorphous carbon [0301-0302]. A tap density of the carbonaceous material is 0.1 g/cm3 to 2 g/cm3 [0336-0338].
When the tap density is lower than the above range, the packing density of the carbonaceous material used as a negative electrode may be unlikely increased, making it difficult to obtain a battery having a high capacity. On the other hand, when the tap density is higher than the above range, voids between the particles in the electrode may become so small that the conductive properties between the particles are unlikely to be secured, making it difficult to obtain advantageous battery characteristics [0337] (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
Mori and Nakazawa each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------negative electrode material comprising graphite. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative electrode material layer of Mori so that it has a tap density between 0.1 g/cm3 to 2 g/cm3, in order to obtain a high capacity battery [Nakazawa, 0337]. The aforementioned range overlaps with the claimed range, 1.4 g/cc to 1.75 g/cc, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 10, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1.
Mori remains silent regarding the negative electrode plate satisfies at least one of the following characteristics: (d) a conductivity of the negative electrode material layer is greater than or equal to 15 S/cm; or (e) the porosity of the negative electrode material layer is 25% to 50%.
Nakazawa is directed to a nonaqueous electrolyte battery [0017], with a carbonaceous material is used as a negative electrode active material [0291-0296, 0310]. Nakazawa teaches that the carbonaceous material may be, inter alia carbon-coated graphite [0295, 0302], wherein the graphite may be natural graphite and/or artificial graphite [0296, 0300, 0301-0302] and the carbon may be an amorphous carbon [0301-0302]. An internal porosity of the negative electrode active material is 1% or more, and less than 50% [0357-0358].
When the internal porosity is too small, the liquid amount within the particles is reduced, so that the charge/discharge characteristics tend to become poor, and, when the internal porosity is too large, the amount of gaps between the particles in the resultant electrode is reduced, so that the electrolyte solution tends to be unsatisfactorily diffused [Nakazawa, 0358] (MPEP 2144.05(II)). In addition, substances that mitigate expansion and compression of metal particles capable of alloying with Li, such as amorphous carbon, graphite substances or resin, may be present in the gaps or gaps may be filled therewith [Nakazawa, 0358] (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
Mori and Nakazawa each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------negative electrode material comprising graphite. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the negative electrode material layer of Mori so that it has an internal porosity of 1% or more, and less than 50%, in order to exhibit excellent charge/discharge characteristics with satisfactorily diffused electrolyte solution [Nakazawa, 0358] (MPEP 2144.05(II)). The aforementioned range overlaps with the claimed range, 25% to 50%, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 12, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1.
Mori remains silent regarding the electrochemical apparatus satisfies Li - L2< 135 pm, wherein Li is a thickness of the electrochemical apparatus in a fully charged state, and L2 is a thickness of the electrochemical apparatus in a fully discharged state.
Nakazawa is directed to a nonaqueous electrolyte battery [0017], with a carbonaceous material is used as a negative electrode active material [0291-0296, 0310]. Nakazawa teaches that the carbonaceous material may be, inter alia carbon-coated graphite [0295, 0302], wherein the graphite may be natural graphite and/or artificial graphite [0296, 0300, 0301-0302] and the carbon may be an amorphous carbon [0301-0302]. A change of the thickness of the battery after 200 cycles may be measured in order to determine battery expansion [0047, 0535-0538, 0559-0560], wherein thickness is measured in units of μm [0378, 0434, 0442, 0446]. The battery expansion includes expansion due to a change of the thickness of the electrode caused during the cycles [0047]. Nakazawa exemplifies that the battery expansion may be, for example, 74, 52, or 59 μm [0535-0538, Table 7].
Mori and Nakazawa each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------an electrochemical apparatus comprising a graphite negative electrode material. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of Mori so that the battery expansion is, for example, 74, 52, or 59 μm, in order to provide a battery with improved high-temperature storage characteristics and excellent charge/discharge characteristics [Nakazawa, 0061].
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of modified Mori would have a battery expansion of, for example, 74, 52, or 59 μm, all of which are within the claimed range, ≤ 135 μm, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 14, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Mori discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery further comprises an electrolyte (an electrolyte) [0027-0028, 0030, 0053-0059].
Mori remains silent regarding the electrolyte comprises a carboxylate; the carboxylate comprises at least one of ethyl acetate, propyl acetate, propyl propionate, or ethyl propionate; wherein based on a mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of the carboxylate is 5% to 55%.
Nakazawa is directed to a nonaqueous electrolyte battery [0017], with a nonaqueous electrolyte solution [0043-0046, 0148, 0161, 0165, 0193]. Nakazawa teaches that the nonaqueous electrolyte solution includes a linear carboxylate [0189], of which may be, inter alia ethyl acetate [0190-0192], and in an amount 10% by volume to 60% by volume based on the volume of the nonaqueous solvent [0193]. When the amount is within this range, electrical conductivity of the nonaqueous electrolyte solution is improved, thereby improving high current discharge characteristics, additionally, an increase of the negative electrode resistance is suppressed [0193].
Mori and Nakazawa each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------an electrochemical apparatus comprising an electrolyte. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of Mori so that the electrolyte comprises a linear carboxylate, e.g. ethyl acetate, and in an amount 10% by volume to 60% by volume, in order to exhibit improved electrical conductivity, and improved high current discharge characteristics, as well as, so that an increase of the negative electrode resistance is suppressed [Nakazawa, 0193] (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the electrolyte of modified Mori would include a linear carboxylate, e.g. ethyl acetate, and in an amount 10% by volume to 60% by volume, of which, through calculation, would overlap with the claimed range, 5% to 55% mass percentage based on a mass of the electrolyte, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 17, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Mori discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery further comprises an electrolyte (an electrolyte) [0027-0028, 0030, 0053-0059].
Mori remains silent regarding the electrolyte comprises lithium difluorophosphate; wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of lithium difluorophosphate is 0.001% to 0.9%.
Nakazawa is directed to a nonaqueous electrolyte battery [0017], with a nonaqueous electrolyte solution [0043-0046, 0148, 0161, 0165, 0193]. Nakazawa teaches that the nonaqueous electrolyte solution includes a difluorophosphate [0072-0077], of which may be, inter alia lithium difluorophosphate [0077], and in an amount 0.001% by mass or more to 10% by mass or less, most preferably 1% by mass or less, based on the mass of the nonaqueous solvent [0078]. When the amount is within this range, cycle characteristic may be improved, as well as, high-temperature storage characteristics may be improved [0078].
Mori and Nakazawa each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------an electrochemical apparatus comprising an electrolyte. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of Mori so that the electrolyte comprises lithium difluorophosphate in an amount 0.001% by mass or more to 1% by mass or less based on the mass of the nonaqueous solvent, in order to exhibit improved cycle characteristic, and improved high-temperature storage characteristics [Nakazawa, 0078] (MPEP 2144.05(II)).
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the electrolyte of modified Mori would include lithium difluorophosphate in an amount 0.001% by mass or more to 1% by mass or less based on the mass of the nonaqueous solvent, of which overlaps with the claimed range, 0.001% to 0.9% mass percentage based on a mass of the electrolyte, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori as applied to claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 above, in view of Ozaki et al. (US 2010/0178563 A1; “Ozaki”).
Regarding claim 13, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Mori further discloses a positive electrode (a positive electrode plate) [0015, 0030-0034], comprising positive electrode active material layers (the positive electrode plate comprises a positive electrode material layer) [0031, 0033-0034], and a thickness of the negative electrode material layer is in units of μm, and is between 40 μm to 150 μm (a thickness of the negative electrode material layer is d4 μm) [0052].
Mori remains silent regarding a thickness of the positive electrode material layer is d3 μm, wherein 1.2 ≤ d4/d3 ≤ 1.6.
Ozaki is directed to a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery [0018, 0029-0030, 0085] comprising a positive electrode material mixture layer containing a positive electrode active material [0029, 0085-0088], and a composite negative electrode active material with a graphitizable carbon material and a low crystalline carbon material [0018, 0034, 0075]. Ozaki exemplifies that the total thickness of the positive electrode material mixture layers are 55 μm [0114, Example 1], and the total thickness of the negative electrode material mixture layers are 68 μm [0119, Example 1], therefore, through calculation, a ratio of the total thickness of the negative electrode material mixture layers to the total thickness of the positive electrode material mixture layers is 68 μm/55 μm, or 1.24.
Mori and Ozaki each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------an electrochemical apparatus comprising a positive electrode material layer and a negative electrode material layer. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of Mori so that a thickness of the positive electrode material layer is in units of μm, like that of Ozaki, as Ozaki teaches that those are customary units of measuring thickness [Ozaki, 0096, 0114], and in order to be able to compare thickness values. Additionally, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of Mori to have a ratio of the thickness of the negative electrode material layer to the thickness of the positive electrode material layer be 1.24, in order to obtain a battery with a large initial capacity, and that exhibits excellent output characteristics [Ozaki, 0133].
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of modified Mori would have the thickness of the positive electrode material layer is in units of μm (d3 μm), and the ratio of the thickness of the negative electrode material layer to the thickness of the positive electrode material layer be 1.24, of which is within the claimed range, 1.2 ≤ d4/d3 ≤ 1.6, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mori as applied to claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 above, in view of Tokuda et al. (US 2010/0119956 A1; “Tokuda”).
Regarding claim 15, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Mori discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery further comprises an electrolyte (an electrolyte) [0027-0028, 0030, 0053-0059].
Mori remains silent regarding the electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate and1,3-propane sultone; Wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of fluoroethylene carbonate is greater than a mass percentage of 1,3-propane sultone.
Tokuda is directed to a nonaqueous-electrolyte secondary battery comprising a nonaqueous-electrolyte [0022-0032]. The nonaqueous-electrolyte includes a cyclic carbonate [0089], of which is preferably, inter alia fluoroethylene carbonate [0089, 0092], and in an amount 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent [0097], wherein if the content is too low, formation of a negative-electrode coating film is insufficient, thereby making it impossible to impart sufficient battery characteristics [0097]. The nonaqueous-electrolyte additionally includes a sulfur-containing organic solvent, of which is, inter alia 1,3-propanesultone [0114, 0127, 0215, 0692-0693], in an amount 0.01% by mass to 5% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent [0693-0694].
Mori and Tokuda each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------an electrochemical apparatus comprising an electrolyte. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrolyte of Mori so that it comprises fluoroethylene carbonate in an amount 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent and 1,3-propanesultone in an amount 0.01% by mass to 5% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent. The fluoroethylene carbonate forms a protective film on the surface of the negative electrode, thereby protecting its surface [Tokuda, 0092, 0096-0097], while the 1,3-propanesultone helps to improve capacity retentivity and cycle characteristics [Tokuda, 0215, 0692-0693] (MPEP 2144.07).
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the electrolyte of modified Mori would comprise fluoroethylene carbonate in an amount 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent and 1,3-propanesultone in an amount 0.01% by mass to 5% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent, wherein it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a mass percentage of fluoroethylene carbonate be greater than the mass percentage of 1,3-propanesultone, as there are only three options of comparison, having both in a same mass percentage, having fluoroethylene carbonate in a greater mass percentage than 1,3-propanesultone, or having fluoroethylene carbonate in a smaller mass percentage than 1,3-propanesultone (MPEP 2143(I)(E)). Additionally, the mass percentage range of the fluoroethylene carbonate has a higher upper bound than the upper bound of the mass percentage range of 1,3-propanesultone.
Regarding claim 16, Mori discloses the electrochemical apparatus set forth above in the rejection of claim 1. Mori discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery further comprises an electrolyte (an electrolyte) [0027-0028, 0030, 0053-0059].
Mori remains silent regarding the electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate and 1,3-propane sultone; wherein based on a mass of the electrolyte, a mass percentage of fluoroethylene carbonate is 1% to 10%, and a mass percentage of 1,3-propane sultone is 0.1% to 4%.
Tokuda is directed to a nonaqueous-electrolyte secondary battery comprising a nonaqueous-electrolyte [0022-0032]. The nonaqueous-electrolyte includes a cyclic carbonate [0089], of which is preferably, inter alia fluoroethylene carbonate [0089, 0092], and in an amount 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent [0097], wherein if the content is too low, formation of a negative-electrode coating film is insufficient, thereby making it impossible to impart sufficient battery characteristics [0097]. The nonaqueous-electrolyte additionally includes a sulfur-containing organic solvent, of which is, inter alia 1,3-propanesultone [0114, 0127, 0215, 0692-0693], in an amount 0.01% by mass to 5% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent [0693-0694].
Mori and Tokuda each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – ------an electrochemical apparatus comprising an electrolyte. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrolyte of Mori so that it comprises fluoroethylene carbonate in an amount 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent and 1,3-propanesultone in an amount 0.01% by mass to 5% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent. The fluoroethylene carbonate forms a protective film on the surface of the negative electrode, thereby protecting its surface [Tokuda, 0092, 0096-0097], while the 1,3-propanesultone helps to improve capacity retentivity and cycle characteristics [Tokuda, 0215, 0692-0693] (MPEP 2144.07).
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the electrolyte of modified Mori would comprise fluoroethylene carbonate in an amount 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent and 1,3-propanesultone in an amount 0.01% by mass to 5% by mass based on the entire nonaqueous solvent, wherein each range overlaps with its corresponding claimed mass percentage range, fluoroethylene carbonate is 1% to 10% based on a mass of the electrolyte and 1,3-propane sultone is 0.1% to 4% based on a mass of the electrolyte, respectively, thereby rendering each range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Pertinent Prior Art
The following constitutes a list of prior art which are not relied upon herein, but are considered pertinent to the claimed invention and/or written description thereof. The prior art are purposely made of record hereinafter to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, and consideration thereof is respectfully suggested.
Heishi et al., US 2016/0028119 A1 – teaches that amorphous carbon exhibits relatively small volume expansion and, therefore, has high effect of alleviating the volume expansion of the negative electrode as a whole [0069, 0074].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA X. COLTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571)272-8935. 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.
/JENNA X. COLTON/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights