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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 06/02/2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because: English translation of “Office Action of China counterpart Application” dated July 01, 2023 p1-p8 was not provided.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Specification (para. 0005, 0006, 0030, 0042) discloses an electrode sheet satisfying and equation 1.0×10-3≤(|La1-La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50)≤3.0×10-3 and 1.2×10-3≤(|La1-La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50)≤2.5×10-3 where in La1, La2 and Lax have a unit of nm and Dv50 has a unit of µm. Therefore, the ranges as claimed should have a unit of µm-1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 5 be found allowable, claim 6 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 1 and 2 objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1 and 2 recites an electrode sheet satisfying an equation
1.0×10-3≤(|La1 La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50)≤3.0×10-3 and 1.2×10-3≤(|La1-La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50)≤2.5×10-3 where in La1, La2 and Lax have a unit of nm and Dv50 has a unit of µm. Therefore, the ranges as claimed should have a unit of µm-1 . Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-10, 13-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US PG Pub. 2019/0348667 A1) in view of Pan (CN115472829B, for purpose of prior art discussion refer to English language translation document US PG Pub. US 2024/0262692 A1) and Spahr (US PG Pub. 2015/0079477 A1).
Regarding claim 1 and 2, Kang discloses negative electrode sheet, comprising: a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector, the negative electrode active material layer comprising a negative electrode active material, wherein the negative electrode active material comprises graphite (para. 0006). Kang further discloses Dv50 of the negative electrode active material is 3-25 μm, preferably 4-15 μm (para. 0033, 0043). Kang further discloses XRD analysis of the negative electrode layer coated on the current collector to form negative electrode sheet (plate) to determined VOI (para. 0081, 0094) of the negative electrode sheet. Kang discloses VOI of the negative electrode layer on the negative electrode sheet is 1.5-100, preferably 1.5-50 (para. 0041).
Kang further discloses when VOI of the negative electrode layer is too large, indicating the active material tends to be arranged in parallel to current collector, the effective ion-intercalatable end faces on the negative electrode layer is less, that is, the number of active reaction sites is relatively small, the charge exchange rate is affected, thus the demand for fast charging cannot be met (para. 0024) and if VOI of the negative electrode layer is too small, indicating that the active material tends to be disorderly arranged, and the adhesion of the negative electrode layer is bad and powders tend to fall off from layer, the electrode plate tends to wrinkle during cycle test, resulting in the deteriorated reaction interface, so that the cycle performance of the battery is deteriorated (para. 0024). Kang further discloses D50 is too large, the solid phase diffusion is difficult, thus the fast charge function cannot be satisfied (para. 0024) and if Dv50 is too small, the adhesion of the negative electrode layer is relatively small, powders tend to fall off from layer, the conductance of electrons is affected, thus the battery kinetic performance will be impaired (para. 0024). Kang establishes Dv50 and VOI as result-effective variables for improving battery performance and fast charging. Therefore, it would obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in a desire to control VOI and Dv50, in an attempt to achieve a desired fast charging and battery performance.
Kang discloses the higher degree of graphitization of the negative electrode active material means that the crystal structure is closer to the complete layered structure of the ideal graphite, and has fewer defects (para. 0027) and the crystallinity of the electrode active material to depend on the degree of graphitization (para. 0028). Kang discloses when the degree of graphitization is too large, the particles tend to be flat, and the structure of pores is too dense, which is not conducive to the infiltration of electrolyte and significantly reduces the cycle performance of the battery and when the degree of graphitization is too small, the crystals tend to have amorphous structure with many defects, and the negative electrode active material has lower capacity per gram, which is disadvantageous for designing a battery with high energy density (para. 0028).
Kang optimizes crystallinity by measuring the parameter d002 (para. 0092) which is the layer spacing in crystal structure of the negative electrode active material expressed in nanometer and related to degree of graphitization G by the equation G=(0.344-d002)/(0.344-0.3354) (para. 0092). Applicant in the instant specification (para. 0046) discloses La1 and La2 of the negative electrode sheet may be controlled by graphitizing the negative electrode active material under different conditions such as temperature, time, and pressure and the value of La1 and La2 shows a measure of crystallinity.
Kang establishes degree of graphitization which effects the crystal structure as result-effective variables for improving cycle performance of the battery. Therefore, it would obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in a desire to control VOI, Dv50, La1 and La2 in an attempt to achieve a desired fast charging and battery performance.
Kang fails to disclose La1 and La2 thereby failing to disclose the negative electrode sheet satisfies an equation as follows: 1.0×10-3≤(|La1-La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50)≤3.0×10-3.
Pan discloses negative electrode active material comprising of graphite (para. 0012) and a negative electrode sheet comprising the negative electrode active material which is coated on a copper foil and compacted (para. 0020, 0089-0090). Pan further discloses a crystal size La1 (La) of negative electrode active material in an a-axis direction, obtained by XRD, of the negative electrode material and meets the following condition: 40 nm≤La1≤150 nm (para. 0036). This was computed by Scherrer equation (para. 0097) similar to applicant’s calculation as disclosed in the instant specification (para. 0146) so crystal size La1 disclosed by Pan obtained by XRD measurement would read on claimed La1 which is an average crystal size in an a-axis direction. Though Pan specifies La1 is a property of negative electrode active material, applicants’ specification establishes the values of La1 and La2 would be same for the electrode sheet as that of the negative electrode active material by disclosing La1 and La2 of the negative electrode sheet may be controlled by graphitizing the negative electrode active material under different conditions such as temperature, time, and pressure in instant specification (para. 0046). Therefore, Pan’s negative electrode sheet would possess the same La1 value as its negative electrode active material.
Pan discloses when the negative electrode material has the characteristics of small crystal particle size, lithium ions can be intercalated and desorbed in many channels with short paths, and the rate capability of a battery including the negative electrode material can be significantly improved (para. 0038). Pan further discloses when the crystal size of the negative electrode active material has the characteristics of small crystal particle size, lithium ions can be intercalated and desorbed in many channels with short paths, and the rate capability of a battery including the negative electrode material can be significantly improved (para. 0038). Pan establishes La1 as result-effective variables for improving rate capability of a battery. Therefore, it would obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in a desire to control La1, in an attempt to achieve a better battery rate capability.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the negative electrode sheet of Kang to include negative electrode active material having La1 as taught by Pan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the negative electrode sheet of Kang to significantly improve the rate capability.
Kang and Pan fail to disclose La2 thereby failing to disclose the negative electrode sheet satisfies an equation as follows: 1.0×10-3≤(|La1-La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50)≤3.0×10-3; in the equation.
Spahr discloses a negative electrode active material for negative electrodes in lithium-ion battery comprising of graphite (para. 0012, 0014). Spahr further discloses La2 (La) of the negative electrode active material measured by Raman spectroscopy in the range of 5 to 100 nm (para. 0026). The Raman probe volume would include more than one crystallite and the value obtained would be an aggregate response rather than a single crystal response therefor the Spahr’s disclosed La2 would be an average crystal size in the a-axis direction. Spahr further discloses the negative electrode active material exhibits an improved irreversible capacity, reversible discharge capacity or cycle life compared to the untreated material (para. 0010). As discussed above applicants’ specification establishes the values of La1 and La2 would be same for the electrode sheet as that of the negative electrode active material by disclosing La1 and La2 of the negative electrode sheet may be controlled by graphitizing the negative electrode active material under different conditions such as temperature, time, and pressure in instant specification (para. 0046). Therefore, an electrode sheet made with negative electrode active material would have to possess the same La2 value as the negative electrode active material. Spahr disclosed method lowers the crystallite size La2 (La) without substantially affecting the crystallite size Lc (para. 0016) and further discloses such a surface-modified graphite having excellent properties, for example exhibiting an improved irreversible capacity, reversible discharge capacity or cycle life compared to the untreated material (para. 0010). Spahr establishes La2 as result-effective variable for improved irreversible capacity, reversible discharge capacity. Therefore, it would obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that in a desire to control La2, in an attempt to achieve a better battery irreversible capacity, reversible discharge capacity or cycle life.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the modified negative electrode sheet of Kang to include negative electrode active material having La2 as taught by Spahr. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the negative electrode sheet of Kang to improve irreversible capacity, reversible discharge capacity or cycle life.
The combination of Kang, Pan and Spahr each discloses the constituent parameter (La1, La2, VOI, and Dv50) and the desire to control the parameters of the equation claimed in claim 1 and 2 as discussed above. Though none of the reference recites the equation, each parameter is in the claimed range as disclosed by the applicant’s instant specification (para. 0007 – 0013), and further as discussed above the combination of Kang, Pan and Spahr it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have routinely optimized La1, La2, VOI, and Dv50, and such optimization would have involved selection of a suitable value from the known range of a known result effective variable. Such that they would have arrived at the claimed ranges for (|La1-La2|/Lax)/(VOI×DV50).
Regrading claim 3, Kang fails to disclose La2 and as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Pan discloses La1 is 40 nm≤La1≤150 nm (para. 0036) overlapping with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05)
Regrading claim 4, Kang fails to disclose La2 and as discussed above with respect to claim 1. Sphar discloses La2 in the range of 5 to 100 nm (para. 0026) overlapping with the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05)
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Kang fails to disclose La1 and La2 as discussed above with respect to claims 1, 3 and 4, Pan and Spahr discloses the claimed ranges for La1 and La2.
Regarding claim 7 and 8, Kang discloses negative electrode sheet as discussed with respect to claim 1 having a VOI is 1.5-100 (para. 0041) overlapping with the claimed range of VOI is 10 to 35 and 11 to 15.
Regrading claim 9 and 10, Kang discloses negative electrode active material having Dv50 the negative electrode active material is 3-25 μm (para. 0043) overlapping with the claimed range of 5 to 20 μm and 8 to 15 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 (MPEP 2144.05)
Regarding claim 13 and 14, As discussed with respect to claim 1 and 2, the combination of Kang, Pan and Spahr discloses a negative electrode sheet as claimed. Kang discloses a secondary battery (para. 0051) which comprises of positive electrode sheet (para. 0054), negative electrode sheet (para. 0051) and an electrolyte (para. 0051).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kang, Pan, and Spahr discloses the negative electrode sheet and secondary battery as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 3.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kang, Pan, and Spahr discloses the negative electrode sheet and secondary battery as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 4.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kang, Pan, and Spahr discloses the negative electrode sheet and secondary battery as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 7.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kang, Pan, and Spahr discloses the negative electrode sheet and secondary battery as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 9.
Regarding claim 20, Kang discloses an electrical device (new energy vehicles) that composes of secondary battery (para. 0003) and the combination of Kang, Pan, and Saphr discloses the negative electrode sheet and secondary battery as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 13.
Claims 11, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US PG Pub. 2019/0348667 A1) in view of Pan ( CN115472829B, for purpose of prior art discussion refer to English language translation document US PG Pub. US 2024/0262692 A1) and Spahr (US 2015/0079477 A1) as applied to claim 1-10, 13-18 and 20 above, and further in view of Feng (US PG Pub. 2021/0351405).
Kang, Pan and Sphar are relied upon as discussed above.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Kang fails to disclose the porosity of the negative electrode sheet.
Feng discloses negative electrode active material comprised of graphite (para. 0032) and an anode active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the anode current collector which may be copper or nickel foil (para. 0044). Feng discloses the negative electrode active layer on the anode has a porosity of about 31% to about 41% (para. 0066), since the current collector are solid metals and do not contribute to the porosity of the negative electrode sheet, the porosity disclosed by Feng would essentially read on the claimed porosity of the negative electrode sheet. Feng further discloses the porosity in such a range allows the electrolyte to penetrate the surface of the graphite layer more easily, such that the lithium ions can directly reach the surface of graphite to complete lithium intercalation, which greatly shortens the transmission path of the lithium ions, enables the SEI film to be in a proper range, and reduces excessive lithium ion loss. With a too large porosity, although the dynamic performance has been improved to some extent, the cycle life is greatly reduced since more SEI films are formed and more lithium ions are consumed (para. 0142).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for the modified negative electrode sheet of Kang to include negative electrode active material having porosity as taught by Feng. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the negative electrode sheet of Kang to reduce excessive lithium ion loss.
Regarding claim 19, As discussed above for claim 1 and 11, the combination of Kang, Pan, Saphr and Feng would disclose a secondary battery, comprising: a positive electrode sheet, a negative electrode sheet, and an electrolyte, wherein the negative electrode sheet is the negative electrode sheet according to claim 11.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISWARYA MATHEW whose telephone number is (571)272-9515. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, ALICIA CHEVALIER can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/I.M./
Iswarya MathewExaminer, Art Unit 1788
08/17/2026
/ALEXANDRE F FERRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights