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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Status of Application
Claims 1-9 are pending. Claims 1-9 are presented for examination.
Claim Objections
1. Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities.
In claim 7, ”wherein the raised portion has” should read “wherein the raised portions have” for consistency, depending from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
5. Claims 1, 3, and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyamae (US 20190372152 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Miyamae discloses a lithium metal secondary battery ([0003]) comprising: a power generation element (electrode group 14, [0110]); and an electrolyte ([0110]), wherein the power generation element includes a positive electrode and a negative electrode ([0114]), the negative electrode includes a base material (conductive sheet 342, [0033] and FIG. 1A) and raised portions (protrusions 3411 and 3412, [0038] FIG. 1A), the base material is electrically conductive ([0079]), the raised portions are electrically insulating (insulative material [0082]), depressed portions (surface roughness [0076]) are formed on a surface (first surface [0076]) of the base material, the raised portions are provided on the surface of the base material, the raised portions protrude outwardly from the surface of the base material (FIG. 1A), where d represents a depth of the depressed portions (roughness Rz of 1 um or less [0076]), h represents a height of the raised portions (first and second average heights as 15 um or more and 120 um or less [0073]), which means the overall d/h is greater than 0 and less than 1/15, or 0.0667, overlapping the claimed range of 0.001≤d/h≤10. For example, when the depth is 1 um ([0076]), and the height is 20 um ([0073]), the relationship of d/h is calculated to 0.05, falling within the range as claimed: 0.001≤d/h≤10. Further, the depth and the height are relative to the surface of the base material (FIG. 1A).
Regarding claim 3, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further discloses an optional negative electrode mixture layer including lithium metal may be disposed on a part of or over the entire surface of the conductive sheet by electrode deposition, vapor deposition, or the like ([0084]), which anticipates that a seed material of lithium metal is placed inside the depressed portions because the entire surface of the conductive sheet necessarily and inherently includes the depressed portions on the surface of the conductive sheet.
Regarding claim 5, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further discloses the raised portions extend linearly when viewed in a plane ([0010] and FIG. 1B).
Regarding claim 6, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further discloses the raised portions are distributed in a dot pattern when viewed in a plane (cross-sectional plane view [0009] and FIGs. 1A and 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
8. Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamae (US 20190372152 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. While Miyamae does not explicitly disclose the raised portions have a tapered shape or an inverted tapered shape when viewed in a cross section, Miyamae further discloses spot-like protrusions including polygon which have a shape such that the ratio of the long side LL of a smallest rectangle that surrounds each of the protrusions to the short side SL of the rectangle (LL/SL) is less than 2 ([0058]) overlappingly encompassing shapes of trapezoid, irregular (pentagon, heptagon, …, etc.), which renders obvious the raised portions having a tapered or inverted tapered shape when viewed in a cross section.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further discloses the power generation element is a wound electrode assembly (wound electrode group 14, [0110] and FIG. 5), the base material has an inner circumferential surface (S1, FIG. 1A) and an outer circumferential surface (S2, FIG. 1A), the inner circumferential surface is positioned on an inner circumferential side of the wound electrode assembly, the outer circumferential surface is a surface opposite to the inner circumferential surface, the raised portions are provided on each of the inner circumferential surface and the outer circumferential surface (FIGs. 1A and 2).
Miyamae further discloses the shapes of the first protrusions 3411 and the second protrusions 3412 may be different from each other ([0037] and FIGs. 1A and 2). Further as set forth in claim 7, the protrusions are obvious to have a tapered or inverted tapered shape when viewed in a cross section. Therefore, it would have been further obvious to have the raised portion on the inner circumferential surface has a tapered shape and the raised portion on the outer circumferential surface has an inverted tapered shape (claim 8); or vice versa, the raised portion on the inner circumferential surface has an inverted tapered shape, and the raised portion on the outer circumferential surface has a tapered shape (claim 9), as being different from each other.
9. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamae (US 20190372152 A1) as applied to claim 1, in view of Son (US 20150280212 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further cites Japanese Patent Application No. 2016-527680 which uses a porous metal current collector in a negative electrode in order to absorb the expansion of the negative electrode which may occur during charge and discharge ([0018]), rendering obvious the base material is porous. {Examiner notes: the disclosed porous negative current collector from the cited Japanese Patent Application No. 2016-527680 is considered as part of Miyamae’s invention disclosure by incorporation.}
Assuming, arguendo, that Miyamae, for some reason, is not considered to render obvious claim 2 as set forth above, the following obviousness rejection is also presented.
Son teaches a lithium electrode comprising a porous metallic current collector, which improves the performances and safety of a lithium secondary battery (Abstract). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a skilled artisan to modify the base material of Miyamae with a porous material in order to improve the performances and safety of a lithium secondary battery.
10. Claim 3 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamae (US 20190372152 A1) as applied to claim 1, in view of Roozeboom (US 20250336976 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further discloses an optional negative electrode mixture layer including lithium metal may be disposed on a part of or over the entire surface of the conductive sheet by electrode deposition, vapor deposition, or the like ([0084]), which anticipates that a seed material of lithium metal is placed inside the depressed portions because the entire surface of the conductive sheet necessarily and inherently includes the depressed portions on the surface of the conductive sheet.
Assuming, arguendo, that Miyamae, for some reason, is not considered to anticipates claim 3 as set forth above, the following obviousness rejection is also presented.
Roozeboom teaches an electrode for a secondary lithium metal battery comprising a current collector 2, an anode metal layer 3 comprising lithium, and at least one graded metal alloy layer (4b) (Abstract), typically lithium metal ([0010]) that extends along the interface between the current collector and the anode metal layer ([0018] and FIG. 1C). Roozeboom further teaches the graded metal alloy layer as a seed layer advantageously mitigate inhomogeneous anode metal plating (in particular during an initial charging cycle and/or during subsequent charging operation during battery operation; and can enable homogeneous anode metal stripping during battery discharge operation, thus advantageously contribute to increasing battery performance, durability, and/or safety, by mitigating formation of isolated anode metal domains (so-called mossy domain structure) and/or by mitigating formation or propagation of so-called dendrites ([0016]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a skilled artisan to modify the base material (conductive sheet 342, [0033] and FIG. 1A) of Miyamae with a seed layer of lithium metal as taught by Roozeboom, in order to improve battery performance, durability, and/or safety.
11. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamae (US 20190372152 A1) as applied to claim 1, in view of Yang (US 20160020461 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Miyamae discloses all of the limitations set forth above. Miyamae further discloses that in order to enable the charge/discharge reaction to occur over the entirety of the electrode group and make it easy to achieve a high battery capacity, a nonaqueous electrolyte may readily penetrate deep into the inside of the electrode group through the region first band-like region in which the protrusions are not disposed ([0064]), which translates to the nonaqueous electrolyte penetrates into the inside of the electrode group through the depressed portions.
While Miyamae further discloses the nonaqueous electrolyte may be a solid electrolyte or gelatinous ([0097]), Miyamae does not explicitly disclose a solid electrolyte and a gelled electrolyte is placed inside the depressed portions.
Yang teaches lithium metal electrode 10A includes a lithium metal layer 12, a current collector layer 14 having a plurality of holes, and an ionic conducting layer 16 ([0053] and FIG. 7C); the ionic conducting layer 16 can be formed away from the holes/opening of the current collector layer 14 ([0052]); and the electrical conductivity of the ionic conducting layer 16 (such as a solid-phase electrolyte, a gel-type electrolyte etc. ) must be good enough in order to maintain or even to improve the electrical conductivity between the lithium metal layer 12 and the current collector layer 14 ([0050]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a skilled artisan to further place some solid electrolyte or gelled electrolyte inside the depressed portions ( holes/opening of the current collector layer in Yang) in order to maintain or improve the electrical conductivity between the lithium metal layer and the current collector layer as taught by Yang, thus achieving a high battery capacity.
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAN LUO whose telephone number is (571)270-5753. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM ET.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached on (571)270-1292. 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. L./Examiner, Art Unit 1751 9/5/2026
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights