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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-12, and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kwak et al. (US-20170288272-A1).
With regards to claim 1, Kwak teaches a method of making thin film batteries (¶ 0040). In ¶ 0003, Kwak teaches that the electrolyte is a solid state electrolyte. Thus, the method taught by Kwak reads on a method of making solid-state battery cells. Kwak teaches that the method comprises blanket-depositing a cathode material (cathode layer), a solid-state electrolyte, and an anode current collector (ACC) material on a substrate (¶ 0003, ¶ 0036 and Fig. 6). As shown from Fig. 6 to Fig. 7, Kwak teaches laser die patterning the ACC material to define the solid-state battery cells and form an ACC in each of the cells (¶ 0036). As shown in Fig. 7 and explained in ¶ 0038, Kwak explains that the thin film batteries are diced to form the individual batteries. As shown in Fig. 7, the electrolyte and cathode materials are diced through to form a cathode in each cell. This reads on cutting or dicing the solid-state battery cells (thin film batteries) through the electrolyte and the cathode material to form a cathode in each of
PNG
media_image1.png
755
1173
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the solid-state battery cells. Figs. 6-7 are shown below.
With regards to claim 2, Kwak teaches that a selective laser ablation process where the laser patterning process selectively removes some layers (¶ 0032). Kwak teaches that by adjusting the laser process parameters, components of the TFB such as the ACC are selectively removed (¶ 0032). In ¶ 0052, Kwak teaches that controlled conventional laser scribe or laser projection technology may be used for the laser patterning processes (¶ 0052). In ¶ 0006 and ¶ 0053, Kwak discloses a selective laser patterning tool that may be used to carry out this controlled laser patterning. The selective laser patterning tool reads on a programable laser patterning device as it may perform selective laser ablation based on set controls (¶ 0051 - ¶0053). This reads on the ACC material being laser-patterned using a programmable laser patterning device (selective laser patterning tool), and the method further comprising programming the programmable laser patterning device.
PNG
media_image2.png
755
1173
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 5, as shown in Figs. 6 below, a moat is formed in each of the laser patterned battery cells prior to cutting or dicing the battery cells.
With regards to claim 6, Kwak teaches laser cut sidewalls of the ACC. In ¶ 0053, Kwak teaches that laser patterning tool may laser through the substrate (¶ 0053). This reads on cutting or dicing the battery cells comprises cutting or dicing the battery cells through the substrate of every other cell to form ACC edges or sidewalls of the battery cells.
PNG
media_image3.png
625
957
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 7, Kwak teaches encapsulating the battery cells in Fig. 8 after the cutting in Fig. 7 (¶ 0036). As shown in Fig. 8, each of the battery cells is encapsulated with an encapsulant (encapsulating layer), including along the ACC edges or sidewalls. In Fig. 9, Kwak teaches ablating the encapsulation to expose the ACC (¶ 0036). See Fig. 7-9 below.
With regards to claim 8, Kwak teaches that the encapsulant (encapsulating layer) may comprise of multiple layers such as a polymer, dielectric and metal layer (¶ 0036). The dielectric layer reads on an electrical insulation film. In ¶ 0034, Kwak disclose that the polymer may be a parylene, which is exemplified as a moisture barrier material in ¶ 0058 - ¶ 0059 of applicant’s specification. Thus, Kwak teaches that the encapsulant (encapsulating layer) comprises a moisture barrier (parylene) and electrical insulation film (dielectric).
PNG
media_image4.png
625
957
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 9, as shown in Fig. 9, the encapsulant (encapsulation layer) is formed on the exposed ACC and along the ACC side wall. As discussed earlier, Kwak teaches that the encapsulant may comprise a metal layer (¶ 0036). In ¶ 0061 of the specification, applicant discloses that the redistribution layer comprises metal. Thus, the metal layer of the encapsulant (encapsulating layer) taught by Kwak reads on the redistribution layer. This reads on forming a redistribution layer (metal layer) on the exposed ACC and the encapsulant, including along the ACC edge or sidewall. See Fig. 9 below.
with regards to claim 10, as discussed above, Kwak teaches that the redistribution layer comprises a metal which reads on an elemental metal or an alloy thereof (¶ 0036).
With regards to claim 11, Kwak discuses singulating the battery cells (¶ 0036).
PNG
media_image5.png
620
950
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 12, as shown in Fig. 22 above, Kwak teaches wherein cutting or dicing the battery cells forms dual cells or dual rows or columns of cells having exposed ACC edges or sidewalls of the battery cells (¶ 0038). Kwak teaches that singulating the encapsulated battery cells comprises cutting or dicing (laser ablation) the dual cells or dual rows or columns of cells (¶ 0037- ¶ 0036). In ¶ 0047, Kwak teaches that the CCC contact area is made through the substrate. As discussed earlier, Kwak also teaches that the laser patterning tool may laser through the substrate. Kwak also teaches laser cut sidewall of the CCC in ¶ 0036. This reads on cutting or dicing the battery cells forms dual cells or dual rows or columns of cells having exposed ACC edges or sidewalls of the battery cells, and singulating the encapsulated battery cells comprises cutting or dicing the dual cells or dual rows or columns of cells through the substrate to form CCC edges or sidewalls of the battery cells. See Fig. 22 below.
with regards to claim 15, in ¶ 0033, Kwak teaches that the cathode material may comprises LiMnO2 or LFP which reads on the cathode material comprising a lithium metal oxide or lithium metal phosphate.
With regards to claim 16, in ¶ 0033, Kwak teaches that the solid-state electrolyte comprises LiPON. This reads on the solid-state electrolyte comprising lithium phosphorus oxynitride (LiPON), carbon-doped LiPON, or Li2WO4.
With regards to claim 17, in ¶ 0033, Kwak teaches that the ACC may be aluminum which is a conductive metal and therefore reads on the ACC material comprising a conductive metal or graphite.
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20170288272-A1).
With regards to claim 3, in ¶ 0032, Kwak teaches that the laser ablation process is used to pattern the whole blanket substrate into individual dies. As shown in Fig. 22, this forms a first and second row of 6 individual cells each divided by a first plurality of parallel lines along first direction and one line along a second direction. Kwak teaches 12 individual cells in Fig. 22, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to form another row of 6 TFBs cells taught by Kwak as there are no unpredictable results. Through this modification, modified Kwak renders obvious an additional line along the second direction. Thus, modified Kwak renders obvious the programmable laser patterning device (selective laser patterning tool) being programed to form polylines in the ACC material, the polylines comprising a first plurality of parallel lines along a first direction and a second plurality of parallel lines along a second direction, such that the first and second pluralities of parallel lines do not form sharp corners similar to the instant application’s Fig. 5B. See Fig. 22 below.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20170288272-A1) as applied to claim 1 and in view of Oswald et al. (US-20080105303-A1).
PNG
media_image6.png
620
949
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 4, as discussed earlier, Kwak teaches that the ACC material is laser patterned (¶ 0032). In ¶ 0042 Kwak teaches that a UV laser or femtosecond laser such as a 248 nm or 266 nm laser may be utilized. In ¶ 0051, Kwak also teaches that a UV laser or femtosecond laser with laser wavelengths in the range of 200 nm to 400 nm can selectively ablate the electrolyte. Since the range of 200 nm to 400 nm includes the specific examples mentioned for the ACC material laser patterning, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to utilize a laser with laser wavelengths in the range of 200 nm to 400 nm as taught by Kwak for patterning the ACC material as this would predictably achieve the selective laser patterning with no unpredictable results. This range of 200 nm to 400 nm overlaps with the claimed range of 240-1400 nm. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Modified Kwak renders laser patterning the ACC material using light having a wavelength of 240-1400 nm obvious. However, Kwak is silent on the pulse length, pulse frequency and power of the light.
In a similar field of endeavor, Oswald teaches a method of manufacturing a thin film photovoltaic cells (¶ 0005 - ¶ 0006). Oswald discloses laser scribing as a well-known patterning technique in producing these cells (¶ 0017). In ¶ 0018, Oswald teaches forming desired scribes or grooves using a high speed, efficient laser scanning process where the laser is scanned over the substrate during its stages of manufacture in a rapid, controlled manner. Oswald teaches a back contact layer (metal film) that is scribed with a laser to ablate the metal along a pattern of lines (¶ 0040). In ¶ 0039, Oswald teaches that the back contact layer comprises similar materials as the ACC material taught by Kwak. In ¶ 0042, Oswald teaches that the laser used to remove desired sections of the back contact layer can be a UV laser such as a KrF eximer laser operating at 248 nm. This wavelength of 248 falls within the claimed range of 240 - 1400 nm. In ¶ 0043, Oswald goes on to teach that the laser used suitably has a pulse length (pulse width) of about 10 ns to 100 ns which overlaps with the claimed range of 5 fs to 1000 ns. In ¶ 0043, Oswald also teaches a pulse frequency of about 1 kHz (1000 Hz) to about 200 kHz (200000 Hz) which overlaps with the claimed range of 105 – 1014 Hz. In ¶ 0048, Oswald also teaches a suitable power of the beam to scribe the back contact layer is about 10 to 20 W which falls within the claimed range of 10 – 1000 W. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Kwak and Oswald suggest laser patterning a similar metal layer with a UV laser with light having a wavelength of 248 nm. Kwak is silent to the pulse length, pulse frequency and power of the light, however, Oswald teaches these parameters. Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to substitute the UV laser taught by Kwak with the UV laser taught by Oswald as there are no unpredictable results. Through this modification, modified Kwak renders the ACC material being laser-patterned using light having a wavelength of 240-1400 nm, a pulse length of 5 femtoseconds to 1000 ns, a pulse frequency of 105-1014 Hz, and a power of 10-1000 W obvious.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20170288272-A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Huang et al. (US-20140265915-A1).
with regards to claim 13, although Kwak teaches the singulated battery cells, Kwak does not teach stacking and or packaging the singulated battery cells.
In a similar field of endeavor, Huang teaches method of making battery systems (¶ 0006). Huang teaches that a number of thin film batteries may be stacked for assembly into a battery system (¶ 0009). In ¶ 0074, Huang teaches inserting an encapsulated battery system into an enclosure to provide additional protection for the battery (¶ 0074). This reads on packaging the battery.
It would have been obvious to of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to stack the thin film batteries taught by Kwak to form a battery system and to also package the battery system as taught by Huang. This will predictably result in a battery system with additional protection. Through this modification, modified Kwak teaches stacking and/or packaging the singulated battery cells.
PNG
media_image7.png
658
980
media_image7.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 14, as discussed above, modified Kwak teaches stacking the singulated battery cells and packaging the stacked battery cells. As shown below in Fig. 4, below, Huang teaches that the stacked battery cells have all of the ACC edges or sidewalls on a first side of the stacked battery cells and all of the CCC edges or sidewalls on a second side of the stacked battery cells. See Fig. 4 below.
Claim(s) 18 - 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20170288272-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Benson et al. (US-20040023106-A1).
With regards to claim 18, Kwak teaches that the substrate comprises a metal foils, however, Kwak is silent on the thickness of the substrate, prompting one of ordinary skill to look to prior art.
In a similar field of endeavor, Benson teaches a thin film battery that may comprise a thin flexible substrate such as a metal foil (¶ 0085). Benson teaches that the metal foil may have a thickness of 1 - 500 µm (¶ 0085).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to form the substrate taught by Kwak to have a thickness within the range taught by Benson as mere changes in size or relative dimension present a case of prima facie obviousness. See MPEP 2144.04.IV.A. Through this modification, modified Kwak teaches that the substrate comprises a metal foil having a thickness of 1-500µm which overlaps with the claimed range of 10 -100 µm. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
With regards to claim 19, although modified Kwak teaches that the substrate comprises a metal foil, modified Kwak does not teach that the substrate comprises a stainless steel metal foil. However, Benson teaches that the metal foil may be stainless steel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention as effectively filed to substitute the metal foil taught by modified Kwak with the stainless steel metal foil taught by Benson as the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20170288272-A1) in view of Benson et al. (US-20040023106-A1) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Wang et al (US-20210320324-A1).
With regards to claim 20, modified Kwak teaches a stainless steel metal foil as the substrate, however, modified Kwak does not teach forming a diffusion barrier on the metal foil prior to blanket-depositing the cathode material.
In a similar field of endeavor, Wang teaches a method of making a thin film solid state battery (¶ 0006). similar to modified Kwak, Wang teaches that the battery cell may comprise a stainless steel foil (¶ 0015). Wang teaches that the substrate may comprises a barrier covering the metal foil that inhibits the migration of diffusion metal atoms from the substrate into layers of the battery cell as well as preventing metal corrosion (¶ 0015). This barrier reads on a diffusion barrier.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed to form a diffusion barrier as taught by Wang on the surface of the substrate taught by modified Kwak as this would predictably prevent diffusion of metal atoms from the substrate into other layers of the battery cell. Through this modification, modified Kwak renders forming a diffusion barrier on the metal foil prior to blanket-depositing the cathode material obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNSUYADOR YUSIF whose telephone number is (571)272-4531. The examiner can normally be reached 7 am - 5 pm (M-R).
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, Galen H Hauth can be reached at (571) 270-5516. 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.
/HUNSUYADOR MUGEESATU YUSIF/Examiner, Art Unit 1743
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
