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 .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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 1-6, 8-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US20230207776 A1) in view of Ueda et al. (US20110217576 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 and 13: Liu teaches an electrochemical device, particularly a lithium-ion battery. Liu teaches a wound electrode assembly comprising a positive electrode sheet, a negative electrode sheet, and a separator, wherein the positive and negative electrode sheet and the separator are stacked and wound (jelly-roll electrode assembly comprising a positive electrode plate, a negative electrode plate and a separator disposed between the positive electrode plate and negative electrode plate) (Abstract, Fig. 1, [0004], [0034], [0060]). Liu further teaches that the lithium-ion battery may be used in an electric vehicle (electronic device comprising the electrochemical device) [0003].
Liu also teaches a positive electrode current collector and a protective layer including conductive protective layer dispose on a functional surface of the positive electrode current collector (first layer disposed on a surface of the positive electrode current collector) [0006]. Liu further teaches a positive electrode active layer disposed on a surface of protective layer away from the positive electrode current collector (second layer disposed on a surface of the first layer).
Liu teaches that the conductive protective layer comprises an inorganic filler, a first conductive agent, and a first binder, wherein the inorganic filler is present in an amount of 50-98 wt% (first layer comprising inorganic particle with a mass percentage greater than or equal to 50%) ([0019], [0093], claim 11). Liu further teaches that the positive electrode active layer comprises 93-99 wt% positive electrode active material (second layer comprising a positive electrode layer with a mass percentage greater than 90%) [0093].
Liu teaches a thickness of conductive protective layer (first layer thickness, d1) including a thickness of 1-10µm in the active region. More particularly, Embodiment 1 teaches conductive protective layer having a thickness of 5 µm [0125]. Liu further teaches that the protective layer extends along with the positive electrode current collector and has a length greater than the positive electrode active later in the winding direction (orthographic projection area of the first and second layer on the positive electrode current collector, S1 and S2) (Abstract, [0006], [0059], claim 1).
Liu does not disclose the particular numerical ratios of: d1/S1 ≥ 2 x 10-6 and d1/S2 ≥ 2.5 x 10-6.
However, Liu further teaches that increasing the area occupied by the protective layer, increases protection of the positive electrode current collector and mechanical strength and reduces the risk of contact between the negative electrode active material and the positive electrode current collector. Liu also recognizes the thickness of the conductive protective layer as a result-effective parameter because an excessively thick protective layer adversely affects the battery energy density, while an appropriate protective layer thickness provides protection while reducing its effect on positive electrode performance [0095].
Ueda teaches a substantially cylindrical battery case (packing shell) containing a wound electrode assembly (jelly-roll electrode assembly) comprising a positive electrode sheet, negative electrode sheet and a separator which are spirally wound [0022].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the thickness and coating dimensions of the conductive protective layer and positive electrode active layer according to Liu’s identify electrode design, safety and battery performance considerations, and to combine Ueda’s positive electrode arrangement in Liu’s wound electrode assembly because Uedas teaches that such direct contact electrically connects the battery case and the positive electrode current collector [0042]. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 2 and 14: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 13 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches a conductive protective layer extending over the active layer region and at least one end region of the positive electrode current collector (S1) and a positive electrode active layer provided over the active layer region (S2) [0061].
Liu does not disclose 8x104 mm2 ≤ S1 ≤ 6x105 mm2 and 7x104 mm2 ≤ S2 ≤ 5.5x105 mm2. However, Liu teaches that the length of the respective electrode regions may be designed according to the design requirements of the positive electrode sheet [0070].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the respective coverage areas of the conductive protective layer and positive electrode active layer, according to the desired electrode design, thereby arriving at the claimed ranges through routine optimization. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 3-4 and 15-16: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 13 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches a wound electrode assembly and a conductive protective layer extending beyond the positive electrode active layer (Abstract, claim 1, [0006], [0059]).
Liu does not disclose the relationship of 1 ≤ (S1 – S2)/S3 ≤ 2 and 1.2 ≤ (S1 – S2)/S3 ≤ 2. However, Liu teaches that the lengths and the coverage of the protective layer and active layer regions (S1 and S2) may be selected according to the design requirements of the positive electrode sheet [0070]. The overall dimensions of the wound electrode assembly (S3) , likewise, depend on the selected electrode configuration.
Therefore, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the relative dimensions of the conductive protective layer, positive electrode active layer and the wound electrode assembly according to the desired electrode and battery configuration, thereby arriving at the claimed relationship through routine optimization. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 5-6 and 17-18: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 13 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches a conductive protective layer having a thickness of 1 µm to 10 µm. In particular, Embodiment 1 teaches a conductive protective layer having a thickness of 5 µm.
Thus, Liu teaches a first layer thickness falling within the claimed range of 0.5 µm to 10 µm and 3 µm to 7 µm.
Regarding Claim 8 and 20: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 13 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches that the conductive protective layer comprises an inorganic filler, a fist conductive agent, and a first binder in the amount of 50-98 wt% inorganic filler, 0.5-10 wt% first conductive agent and 1.5-50 wt% first binder (claim 11, [0019], [0093]).
The ranges taught by Liu overlap with the claimed mass ration of (50-95):(0.5-10):(2-49.5).
Regarding Claim 9: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the limitation of claim 1 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches a conductive protective layer comprising LiFePO4 inorganic filler having a D50 particle size of 0.8 µm (Embodiment 1).
Thus, Liu teaches inorganic particles having a media particle size falling within the claimed range of 0.3 µm to 5 µm.
Regarding Claim 10: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the limitation of claim 1 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches that the inorganic filler of conductive protective layer may comprise aluminum oxide (Al2O3) [0013], [0081].
Thus, Liu teaches the claimed inorganic particle material.
Regarding Claim 11: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the limitation of claim 1 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches an inorganic filler having a median particle size od D50 of 0.1 µm to 6 µm [0084].
Liu does not disclose 2.1x10-6 ≤ D0/S2 ≤ 8.6x10-4. However, Liu teaches the particle size D50 of the inorganic filler (D0) as a parameter affecting the battery safety and teaches that a smaller D50 is beneficial for improving safety. Liu further teaches selecting the dimension of the positive electrode region according to the design requirements of the positive electrode [0083].
Therefore, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the inorganic filler particle size and positive electrode active layer dimension (D0 and S2) according to the desired safety and electrode design requirements, thereby arriving at the claimed relationship 2.1x10-6 ≤ D0/S2 ≤ 8.6x10-4 through routine optimization. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 12: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the limitation of claim 1 as discussed above.
Liu further teaches that the first conductive agent of conductive protective layer may comprise a carbon-based conductive material, and Embodiment 1 teaches carbon black as the conductive agent of the conductive protective layer.
Thus, Liu teaches the claimed first conductive agent comprising conductive carbon black, thereby satisfying at least one of the alternatives recited in claim 12.
Claim 7 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US20230207776 A1) and Ueda et al. (US20110217576 A1). as applied to claim 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Motoi et al. (US20150099170 A1).
Regarding Claim 7 and 19: Liu in view of Ueda teaches the electrochemical device of claim 1 and the electronic device of claim 13 as discussed above. Motoi teaches an aluminum foil used as a positive electrode current collector in a lithium-ion battery, wherein the aluminum foil has a thickness of approximately 15 µm [0003].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the approximately 15 µm aluminum foil of Motoi as the positive electrode current collector of Liu because Motoi teaches that an appropriate aluminum foil thickness reduces the occurrence of breaks and cracks while maintaining a suitable volume and weight of the current collector [0049].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHALY M RESTO OQUENDO whose telephone number is (571)895-1575. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/NMRO/ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights