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 § 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 2-3, 5, and 13-14 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.
Claim 2 recites “the porosity of the macropores is about 20% about 35%” (emphasis added), rendering the claim unclear as to whether ‘a range of about 20-30%’ is intended, ‘individual values of about 20% or about 30%’, or some other variant.
Claim 3 recites “the porosity of the macropores is about 23% about 32%” (emphasis added), rendering the claim unclear as to whether ‘a range of about 23-32%’ is intended, ‘individual values of about 23% or about 32%’, or some other variant.
Claim 5 (dependent on claim 1) recites "the total porosity of the negative active material layer" (emphasis added), rendering claim 6 indefinite as to whether "the total porosity" is intended to refer to the “a porosity of the macropores is about 20% or more” (emphasis added), “a total porosity 100% of the negative active material layer” (emphasis added), or a distinct ‘porosity’ or ‘total porosity’ thereof.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the crystalline carbon". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 is also rejected as depending on claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-7 and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ahn et al (US 9,583,756).
With respect to claims 1-7, Ahn discloses an anode (i.e. claimed “negative electrode”) of a lithium secondary battery (i.e. claimed “rechargeable lithium battery”) (Abstract), wherein fig. 2 depicts the rechargeable lithium battery comprises an “electrode current collector” [21] with a “multi-layered active material layer” [23],[24] formed thereon comprising a “first anode active material layer” [23] contacting the electrode current collector [21] and a “second anode active material layer” [24] on the first anode active material layer [23] (col. 3, lines 17-27); thus the multi-layered active material layer [23],[24] is the claimed “negative active material layer” [23],[24]. Ahn further teaches porosities of the first anode active material layer [23] and the second anode active material layer [24] “are the same 27%” (col. 4, lines 51-53), wherein the first anode active material layer [23] has a pore size in a range of 0.4-3 mm (or an approximate average pore size 1.7 mm) and the second anode active material layer [24] has a pore size in a range of 0.5-3 mm (or an approximate average pore size 2.0 mm); thus Ahn suggests each of the first and second anode active material layers [23],[24] comprise the claimed “macropores with an average size of about 1 mm or more” and a porosity of the macropores is 27% based on a total porosity of the negative active material layer [23],[24].
With respect to claims 11-14, Ahn further discloses that each of the first anode active material layer [23] and the second anode active material layer [24] of the negative active material layer [23],[24] comprises a negative active material of “crystalline carbon, such as natural graphite and artificial graphite” (col. 3, lines 51-54).
With respect to claim 15, Ahn further discloses that the first anode active material layer [23] and the second anode active material layer [24] comprise “different materials” selected from negative active materials such as “natural graphite and artificial graphite” (col. 3, lines 51-54); thus Ahn teaches the first and second anode active materials [23],[24] are respectively either: natural graphite and artificial graphite, or artificial graphite and natural graphite.
With respect to claims 16-18, the reference is discussed above for claim 1 regarding the claimed product of “A negative electrode for a rechargeable lithium battery”. The limitations “the negative electrode is prepared by coating a first active material layer composition on the current collector and drying to prepare a first active material dry layer; coating a second active material layer composition on the first active material dry layer and drying to a second active material dry layer on the first active material layer dry layer; and multiple-pressing the first active material dry layer and the second active material dry layer” (claim 16); “the multiple-pressing is carried out by pressing at least two times” (claim 17); and “the multiple-pressing is carried out by pressing two time to three times” (claim 18) are each product-by-process limitations, and have not been given patentable weight since “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process” (MPEP 2113, I).
With respect to claim 19, Ahn further discloses the rechargeable lithium battery comprises a cathode (i.e. claimed “positive electrode”) comprising a positive active material and a non-aqueous electrolyte (col. 6, lines 66-67; col. 7, lines 1-56).
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.
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 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al (US 9,583,756) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Matsuo et al (US 2023/0290948).
With respect to claims 8-10, the reference is cited as discussed for claim 1. However Ahn is limited in that while fig. 2 shows each of the first anode active material layer [23] and the second anode active material layer [24] have a thickness, a particular thickness for each is not suggested.
Matsuo teaches a secondary battery of lithium for repeatedly charging and discharging (i.e. rechargeable lithium battery) comprising a negative electrode active material layer [24a] having a “negative electrode lower layer” (i.e. first active material layer) [L1] contacting a “negative electrode core body” (i.e. current collector) [24c], and a “negative electrode upper layer” (i.e. second active material layer) [L2] on the first active material layer [L1] (Abstract; fig. 6; para 0018 and 0041), similar to the rechargeable battery of Ahn having the negative active material layer [23],[24] comprising the first anode active material layer [23] and the second anode active material layer [24]. Matsuo further teaches a thickness for the second active material layer [L2] is 44.1 mm or more and a thickness ratio of the first active material layer [L1] to the second active material layer [L2] is 1.13 to 1.18 (para 0047), resulting in a thickness of the first active material layer [L1] being about 49.8 mm or more; it has been held that 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, I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the thicknesses and thickness ratio for the first and second active material layers [L1],[L2] taught by Matsuo as the particular thicknesses for each of the first and second anode active material layers [23],[24] of Ahn since Ahn fails to specify thicknesses for each, and one of ordinary skill would have had a reasonable expectation for success in making the modification since Matsuo has shown similar first and second active material layers [L1],[L2] in the negative active material layer as Ahn for a rechargeable lithium battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A BAND whose telephone number is (571)272-9815. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-5pm EST.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/MICHAEL A BAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights