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 § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1—2, 5—7, 9—12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu, et al. (JP 2019/091793 A).
Regarding claim 1, Umezu, et al. teaches a negative electrode plate (paragraph 0010), comprising a negative electrode active material layer (paragraph 0010) and the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode active material (paragraph 0010).
Umezu, et al. do not specifically teach an active specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer is greater than or equal to K•25 cm2/g, wherein K represents a correction parameter, K = 15 μm/Dv50, and Dv50 represents a median particle size of the negative electrode active material. Umezu, et al. does teach an active specific surface area range of 4 m2/g or more (paragraph 0010) and the same species as the applicant (paragraph 0029, 0040, 0041, 0108, 0110). Species in Umezu, et al. are a graphite-based material with average particle diameters of 1 – 10 μm (paragraph 0029) or a silicon-based material with an average diameter of 0.9 μm (paragraph 0110). Turning to applicant’s specification, [see paragraph 0012], graphite-based material with Dv50 of 10 μm – 30 μm or silicon material with Dv50 of 100 nm – 20 μm may be used. Based on Umezu, et al. overlap with the diameter and same species, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to arrive at the active specific surface area as claimed.
Prior art which teaches a range within, overlapping, or touching the claimed range anticipates if the prior art range does not substantially deviate from the claimed range. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (anticipation found even where prior art range was not identical to claimed ranges); see also MPEP 2144.05 and MPEP 2131.03.
Regarding claim 2 and 14, examiner notes thermal decomposition is a property of the negative electrode plate. Applicants identify several species which may be used (see paragraph 0012, 0013, 0017, 0018, 0019). Umezu, et al. teach those same materials (see Umezu, et al., paragraph 0029, 0040, 0041, 0048, 0108, and 0110) as that which applicant calls out in their specification. Species in Umezu, et al. for the negative electrode plate comprises: a graphite-based material with average particle diameters of 1 – 10 μm (paragraph 0029) or a silicon-based material with an average diameter of 0.9 μm (paragraph 0110); a binder including polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), fluororubber, styrene-butadiene copolymer, or acrylic polymer (paragraph 0040); a conductive filler including Ketjen black, acetylene black, graphite, carbon nanotubes, or mixtures of two or more of these (paragraph 0041); and a negative electrode current collector wherein may include copper foil or aluminum foil (paragraph 0048). Turning to applicant’s specification the negative electrode plate comprises: a graphite-based material with Dv50 of 10 μm – 30 μm or silicon material with Dv50 of 100 nm – 20 μm may be used [see paragraph 0012]; a long-range fiber includes long-range conductive carbon (carbon nanotubes and carbon nanofiber), long-range ceramic fiber, or long-range polymer fiber [see paragraph 0013]; a conductive agent wherein may include at least one selected from the group consisting of conductive carbon black, conductive graphite, graphene, and acetylene black [see paragraph 0017]; a binder wherein may include polyvinylidene fluoride, a vinylidene fluoride-fluorinated olefin copolymer, polyacrylonitrile, polymethyl acrylate, polytetrafluoroethylene, styrene-butadiene rubber, and fluorinated rubber [see paragraph 0018]; and a negative electrode current collector wherein may include copper foil, aluminum foil, or aluminum alloy foil [see paragraph 0019]. Based on the same species with an overlap with the diameter, Umezu, et al. renders obvious the derivative thermogravimetric curve of a thermogravimetric curve of the negative electrode plate as claimed.
Regarding claim 5, Umezu, et al. further teaches the negative electrode active material comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of graphite, hard carbon, and a silicon material (paragraph 0029, 0108, 0110).
Regarding claim 6, Umezu, et al. further teaches the negative electrode active material layer further comprises a long-range fiber, and the long-range fiber comprises a long-range conductive carbon (paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 7, Umezu, et al. further teaches the long-range conductive carbon comprises carbon nanotubes (paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 9, Umezu, et al. further teaches a mass percentage of the long-range fiber that partially overlaps ranges from 0.2% to 1.5% based on a total mass of the negative electrode active material layer (paragraph 0041; examiner notes Umezu, et al. teaches preferably 20 parts by mass or less and more preferably 1 to 15 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of the negative electrode active material).
Prior art which teaches a range within, overlapping, or touching the claimed range anticipates if the prior art range does not substantially deviate from the claimed range. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (anticipation found even where prior art range was not identical to claimed ranges); see also MPEP 2144.05 and MPEP 2131.03.
Regarding claim 10, Umezu, et al. further teaches the negative electrode active material layer further comprises a conductive agent; and the conductive agent comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of conductive carbon black, conductive graphite, and acetylene black (paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 11, Umezu, et al. further teaches the negative electrode active material layer further comprises a binder; and the binder comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of polyvinylidene fluoride, a vinylidene fluoride-fluorinated olefin copolymer, polyacrylonitrile, polymethyl acrylate, polytetrafluoroethylene, styrene-butadiene rubber, and fluorinated rubber (paragraph 0040).
Regarding claim 12, examiner notes electrochemical reaction activation energy Ea is a property of the negative electrode plate. Applicants identify several species which may be used (see paragraph 0012, 0013, 0017, 0018, 0019). Umezu, et al. teaches the negative electrode plate with the same species as the applicant. Species in Umezu, et al. for the negative electrode plate comprises: a graphite-based material with average particle diameters of 1 – 10 μm (paragraph 0029) or a silicon-based material with an average diameter of 0.9 μm (paragraph 0110); a binder including polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), fluororubber, styrene-butadiene copolymer, or acrylic polymer (paragraph 0040); a conductive filler including Ketjen black, acetylene black, graphite, carbon nanotubes, or mixtures of two or more of these (paragraph 0041); and a negative electrode current collector wherein may include copper foil or aluminum foil (paragraph 0048). Turning to applicant’s specification the negative electrode plate comprises: a graphite-based material with Dv50 of 10 μm – 30 μm or silicon material with Dv50 of 100 nm – 20 μm may be used [see paragraph 0012]; a long-range fiber includes long-range conductive carbon (carbon nanotubes and carbon nanofiber), long-range ceramic fiber, or long-range polymer fiber [see paragraph 0013]; a conductive agent wherein may include at least one selected from the group consisting of conductive carbon black, conductive graphite, graphene, and acetylene black [see paragraph 0017]; a binder wherein may include polyvinylidene fluoride, a vinylidene fluoride-fluorinated olefin copolymer, polyacrylonitrile, polymethyl acrylate, polytetrafluoroethylene, styrene-butadiene rubber, and fluorinated rubber [see paragraph 0018]; and a negative electrode current collector wherein may include copper foil, aluminum foil, or aluminum alloy foil [see paragraph 0019]. Based on the same species with an overlap with the diameter, Umezu, et al. renders obvious electrochemical reaction activation energy Ea of the negative electrode plate as claimed.
Claim(s) 3—4 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu, et al. (JP 2019/091793 A) in view of Tang, et al. (CN 111384395 A).
Regarding claim 3—4 and 15, Umezu, et al. render obvious the features of claim 1. Umezu, et al. teach a graphite-based material with average particle diameters of 1 – 10 μm (paragraph 0029) but does not teach Dv50.
Tang, et al. teaches a negative electrode plate a median particle size partially overlaps 100 nm ≤ Dv50 ≤ 30 μm (paragraph 0025 and 0047). Tang, et al. teaches a negative electrode plate wherein the graphite-based median particle size Dv50 of the secondary particles of the negative electrode active material is 7 μm to 30 μm (paragraph 0024—0025) that overlaps with the average particle diameter in Umezu, et al. and both are directed to negative electrode plate material.
Prior art which teaches a range within, overlapping, or touching the claimed range anticipates if the prior art range does not substantially deviate from the claimed range. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (anticipation found even where prior art range was not identical to claimed ranges); see also MPEP 2144.05 and MPEP 2131.03.
Umezu, et al. and Tang, et al. teach negative electrodes, overlapping particle size, graphite-based material, binder (polyvinylidene fluoride, polytetrafluoroethylene, styrene-butadiene rubber), conductive material (graphite, carbon black, acetylene black, carbon black, graphene, carbon nanotubes), and current collector (copper foil). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the negative electrode plate taught by Umezu, et al. with Dv50 dimension taught by Tang, et al. to create a median particle size Dv50 as claimed.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu, et al. (JP 2019/091793 A) in view of Ito, et al. (WO 2021/241748A1).
Regarding claim 8, Umezu, et al. render obvious the features of claim 1. However, Umezu, et al. does not teach a length of the long-range fiber.
Ito, et al. teaches the negative electrode plate wherein a length of the long-range fiber that partially overlaps ranges from 1 μm to 1 mm (paragraph 0009 and 0104; examiner notes Ito, et al. teaches the long-range fiber length is at least half the length of the composite particles Dv50 of 2.0 μm or more and 30.0 μm)
Prior art which teaches a range within, overlapping, or touching the claimed range anticipates if the prior art range does not substantially deviate from the claimed range. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (anticipation found even where prior art range was not identical to claimed ranges); see also MPEP 2144.05 and MPEP 2131.03.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the negative electrode plate taught by Umezu, et al. with the long-range fiber length taught by Ito, et al. as both the primary and secondary references are within the art of negative electrode materials.
Claim(s) 17—20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu, et al. (JP 2019/091793 A) in view of Hou, et al. (CN 104393238 A).
Regarding claim 17, Umezu, et al. further teaches a method of preparing the negative electrode plate wherein the method comprising: applying a slurry of a negative electrode active material layer onto at least one surface of a negative electrode current collector (paragraph 0054), followed by drying (paragraph 0055) and cold pressing (paragraph 0058), to produce an initial electrode plate. Umezu, et al. render obvious the features of claim 1. However, Umezu, et al. does not teach a modification treatment on the initial electrode plate.
Hou, et al. teaches a modification treatment on the initial electrode plate to obtain the silicon -based negative electrode plate; wherein the modification treatment comprises a heat treatment (paragraph 0011 and 0024).
Umezu, et al. and Hou, et al. teaches a negative electrode, silicon-based material, binder (polyvinylidene fluoride, polyacrylic acid, polytetrafluoroethylene), conductive agent (carbon black, acetylene black, carbon nanotubes), and current collector (copper foil). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the negative electrode plate taught by Umezu, et al. with the modification treatment taught by Hou, et al. to perform a heat treatment on the initial electrode plate to obtain the negative electrode plate as claimed.
Regarding claim 18, examiner notes that claim further specifies the modification treatment including the plasma treatment and not the heat treatment and as such, it remains rejected.
Regarding claim 19, Hou, et al. further teaches the modification treatment comprises the heat treatment; the heat treatment includes: placing the initial electrode plate in a vacuum or inert gas environment for heat treatment for 1 min to 60 min at a temperature within a range of 200°C to 350°C (paragraph 0011, 0020; examiner notes Hou, et al. heat treatment used inert gas, temperature range of 50 to 600°C, and time of 0.02 to 6 hours).
Regarding claim 20, examiner notes that claim further specifies the modification treatment including the laser treatment and not the heat treatment and as such, it remains rejected.
Claim(s) 13 and 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu, et al. (JP 2019/091793 A).
Regarding claim 13, Umezu, et al. teaches an electrochemical apparatus (paragraph 0001), comprises a negative electrode plate (paragraph 0010), the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode active material layer (paragraph 0010), the negative electrode active material layer comprises a negative electrode active material (paragraph 0010).
Umezu, et al. do not specifically teach an active specific surface area of the negative electrode active material layer is greater than or equal to K•25 cm2/g, wherein K represents a correction parameter, K = 15 μm/Dv50, and Dv50 represents a median particle size of the negative electrode active material. Umezu, et al. does teach an active specific surface area range of 4 m2/g or more (paragraph 0010) and the same species as the applicant (paragraph 0029, 0040, 0041, 0108, 0110). Species in Umezu, et al. are a graphite-based material with average particle diameters of 1 – 10 μm (paragraph 0029) or a silicon-based material with an average diameter of 0.9 μm (paragraph 0110). Turning to applicant’s specification, [see paragraph 0012], graphite-based material with Dv50 of 10 μm – 30 μm or silicon material with Dv50 of 100 nm – 20 μm may be used. Based on Umezu, et al. overlap with the diameter and same species, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to arrive at the active specific surface area as claimed.
Prior art which teaches a range within, overlapping, or touching the claimed range anticipates if the prior art range does not substantially deviate from the claimed range. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (anticipation found even where prior art range was not identical to claimed ranges); see also MPEP 2144.05 and MPEP 2131.03.
Regarding claim 16, Umezu, et al. further teaches an electronic device, comprising the electrochemical apparatus (paragraph 0010 and 0049).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ono, et al. (JP 2014/116159 A) teaches a negative electrode comprising a negative active material for a lithium battery (abstract). Specifically, Ono, et al. teaches a thermogravimetric test of the negative active material under nitrogen atmosphere with a step increase of 10°C from 40°C to 540°C after a heat treatment for 1 hour under a condition of a temperature of 130°C and a nitrogen atmosphere which meet claims 2 and 14 scope (paragraph 0026, claim 1).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ono, et al. (JP 2017/069041 A) teaches a negative electrode comprising a negative active material for a lithium battery (paragraph 0009—0010). Specifically, Ono, et al. teaches electrode material wherein an electrochemical reaction activation energy Ea is 70kj/mol or less (claim 3) which meet claim 12 scope of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELVIN MITCHELL FRAZIER whose telephone number is (571)270-5955. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Maria Veronica D Ewald can be reached at (571) 272-8519. 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.
/K.M.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights