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 Interpretation
The Examiner notes that the term “surface density” may also be referred to as “coating weight”, as evidenced by [0054] of the instant specification.
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 3-5 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 3 recites the limitation “wherein: a volume of a hollow part in the hollow particle is 10%-90% of a volume of the hollow particle”.
However, Claim 1 sets forth a plurality of hollow particles and therefore it is unclear which hollow particle of the plurality of hollow particles the limitation is referencing.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “wherein: a volume of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles is 10%-90% of a volume of the at least one hollow particle”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein: a volume of a hollow part in the hollow particle is 10%-50% of a volume of the hollow particle”.
However, Claim 1 sets forth a plurality of hollow particles and therefore it is unclear which hollow particle of the plurality of hollow particles the limitation is referencing.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “wherein: a volume of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles is 10%-50% of a volume of the at least one hollow particle”.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “wherein: a ratio of a diameter of a hollow part in the hollow particle to a diameter of the hollow particle is 10%-90%”.
However, Claim 1 sets forth a plurality of hollow particles and therefore it is unclear which hollow particle of the plurality of hollow particles the limitation is referencing.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “wherein: a ratio of a diameter of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles to a diameter of the at least one hollow particle is 10%-90%”.
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.
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.
Claims 1-11 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabushi et al. (US PGPub 2020/0194781 A1).
Regarding Claims 1-2 and 17, Tabushi discloses in Figs. 1-3 a secondary battery (100) ([0015]), comprising a positive electrode plate (4) ([0021]), comprising:
a current collector (40) and a positive electrode membrane (41) formed on at least one surface of the current collector (40) ([0022]);
wherein:
the positive electrode membrane (41) comprises a first positive electrode active substance layer (42) and a second positive electrode active substance layer (43) ([0023]);
the first positive electrode active substance layer (42) is located between the current collector (40) and the second positive electrode active substance layer (43) ([0023]);
a first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer comprises hollow particles (42) ([0027]-[0028]); and
a second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer (43) ([0030]).
Specifically, Tabushi discloses wherein the second positive electrode active substance material may be chosen to comprise solid particles so long as the second positive electrode active substance layer (43) comprises a specific surface area in the range of 0.8 m2/g to 1.3 m2/g in order to protect the first positive electrode active substance layer (42) from air moisture ([0032], [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the second positive electrode active material substance to be composed of solid particles, such that in the second positive electrode active material substance in the second positive electrode active substance layer, as mass percentage of the solid particles is 100%, as disclosed by Tabushi, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form a second positive electrode active substance layer that protects the first positive electrode active substance layer from air moisture, as desired by Tabushi.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein: a volume of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles is 10%-90% of a volume of the at least one hollow particle ([0029]).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein: a volume of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles is preferably 15%-60% of a volume of the at least one hollow particle ([0029]), which overlaps with the instantly claimed range of 10%-50%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the at least one hollow particle such that the volume of the hollow part of the at least one hollow particle falls within the overlapping portion of the range disclosed by modified Tabushi, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the at least one hollow particle desired by modified Tabushi.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein: a ratio of a diameter of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles to a diameter of the at least one hollow particle is necessarily and inherently greater than 0% and less than 100%, which encompasses the instantly claimed range of 10%-90%.
Moreover, modified Tabushi discloses wherein a volume of a hollow part in at least one of the hollow particles is 10%-90% of a volume of the hollow particle ([0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the at least one hollow particle such that the ratio of the diameter of the hollow part in the at least one hollow particle to the diameter of the at least one hollow particle falls within the encompassing portion of the range disclosed by modified Tabushi, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the at least one hollow particle desired by modified Tabushi.
Regarding Claims 6-7, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the hollow particles and the solid particles are each a lithium metal composite oxide containing at least one element selected from Ni, Co, and Mn, such as lithium nickel cobalt manganate ([0025]-[0026], e.g. [0053]-[0054]).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein a median particle size of the hollow particles is most preferably 2 µm-10 µm ([0028]), which falls within and therefore reads on the instantly claimed range of 0.1 µm-20 µm.
Regarding Claims 9-10, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein a median particle size of the hollow particles is 2 µm-30 µm ([0028]) and wherein the solid particles are similar aggregates to that of the hollow particles ([0032]).
Therefore, modified Tabushi suggests wherein a median particle size of the solid particles is 2 µm-30 µm ([0028], [0032]).
The Examiner notes that when the median particle size of the hollow particles and the median particle size of the solid particles are each 2 µm-30 µm, a ratio of the median particle size of the hollow particles to the median particle size of the solid particles may be 2-50 and further 5-30.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the hollow particles and the solid particles to each have a median particle size in the range disclosed by modified Tabushi, such that the ratio of the median particle size of the hollow particles to the median particle size of the solid particles is 5-30, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the first and second positive electrode active substance layers desired by modified Tabushi.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein a specific surface area of the solid particles is 0.8-1.3 m2/g in order to protect the first positive electrode active substance layer (42) from air moisture ([0030]), which falls within and therefore reads on the instantly claimed range of 0.5-20 m2/g.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein a thickness of the first positive electrode active substance layer (42) is 0.005-0.145 mm ([0024]), which overlaps with the instantly claimed range of 0.04-0.5 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first positive electrode active substance layer to have a thickness in the overlapping portion of the range disclosed by modified Tabushi, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the first positive electrode active substance layer desired by modified Tabushi.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabushi et al. (US PGPub 2020/0194781 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Obara et al. (JP 2011-009203 A, cited on the IDS dated August 11, 2025, see also the provided English translation).
Regarding Claims 9-10, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. In another interpretation, the following is relied upon.
Modified Tabushi further discloses wherein a median particle size of the hollow particles is 2 µm-30 µm ([0028]) and wherein the solid particles are similar aggregates to that of the hollow particles ([0032]).
Therefore, modified Tabushi suggests wherein a median particle size of the solid particles is 2 µm-30 µm ([0028], [0032]).
However, modified Tabushi does not explicitly disclose a median particle size of the solid particles and consequently does not disclose wherein a ratio of the median particle size of the hollow particles to the median particle size of the solid particles is 2-50, and further 5-30.
Obara teaches a positive electrode plate comprising a positive electrode membrane comprising a first positive electrode active substance layer and a second positive electrode active substance layer that improves discharge rate performance of a battery ([0011], [0026]).
Specifically, Obara teaches wherein a median particle size of a first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer is 14 µm to 18 µm ([0012]), which falls within the suitable range of modified Tabushi, and wherein a median particle size of a second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer is 3.5 µm to 7.5 µm ([0012]), which falls within the suggested suitable range of modified Tabushi.
The Examiner notes that when the median particle size of the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer (42) and the median particle size of the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer (43) fall within the ranges taught by Obara, a ratio of the median particle size of the hollow particles to the median particle size of the solid particles may be 2-50 and further 5-30.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the hollow particles of the first positive electrode active substance material of modified Tabushi and the solid particles of the second positive electrode active substance material of modified Tabushi to each have a median particle size in the ranges taught by Obara , such that the ratio of the median particle size of the hollow particles to the median particle size of the solid particles is 5-30, in order to improve discharge rate performance of the secondary battery of modified Tabushi, wherein such fall within the suitable ranges disclosed and suggested by modified Tabushi and therefore the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the positive electrode membrane desired by modified Tabushi.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabushi et al. (US PGPub 2020/0194781 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US PGPub 2021/0399308 A1).
Regarding Claims 12-15, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the first and second positive electrode active substance layers each further comprise a binder ([0024], [0030]).
However, modified Tabushi remains silent regarding a surface density of the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer and a surface density of the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer and consequently does not disclose wherein:
the surface density of the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer is 2-30 mg/cm2, and further 2-20 mg/cm2, and/or
the surface density of the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer is 2-30 mg/cm2, and further 2-20 mg/cm2; and
a ratio of the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer to the surface density of the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer is 0.1-10 and further 1-4.
Kim teaches in Fig. 1 a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode plate (101) comprising a positive electrode membrane (110) comprising a first positive electrode active substance layer (111) comprising a first positive electrode active substance material and a binder and a second positive electrode active substance layer (112) comprising a second positive electrode active substance material and a binder ([0026]-[0027]).
Specifically, Kim teaches wherein a ratio of the surface density (coating weight) of the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer to a surface density (coating weight) of the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer may be greater than 1, such as 3-20, in order to decrease a direct internal resistance (DCIR) of the secondary battery while increasing adhesion at the interface of the first and second positive electrode active substance layers ([0022], [0031), which overlaps with the instantly claimed ranges of 0.1-10 and further 1-4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first and second positive electrode active substance layers of modified Tabushi such that a ratio of a surface density of the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer to a surface density of the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer is in the overlapping portion of the range taught by Kim in order to decrease a direct internal resistance (DCIR) of the secondary battery of modified Tabushi while increasing adhesion at the interface of the first and second positive electrode active substance layers.
Kim further teaches wherein the surface density (coating weight) of the first positive electrode active substance layer (111) may be greater than 0.1 to less than 10 mg/cm2 ([0029]), which overlaps with the instantly claimed ranges of 2-30 mg/cm2 and further 2-20 mg/cm2, and wherein the surface density (coating weight) of the second positive electrode active substance layer (112) may be greater than 2 to less than 25 mg/cm2 ([0029]-[0030]), which falls with the instantly claimed range of 2-30 mg/cm2, and further encompasses the instantly claimed range of 2-20 mg/cm2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first positive electrode active substance material in the first positive electrode active substance layer of modified Tabushi to have a surface density in the overlapping portion of the range taught by Kim and to form the second positive electrode active substance material in the second positive electrode active substance layer of modified Tabushi to have a surface density in the encompassing portion of the range taught by Kim, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully decrease the direct internal resistance (DCIR) of the secondary battery of modified Tabushi while increasing adhesion at the interface of the first and second positive electrode active substance layers, as desired by modified Tabushi.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tabushi et al. (US PGPub 2020/0194781 A1) as applied to Claim 17 above, and further in view of Chang et al. (US PGPub 2013/0244105 A1).
Regarding Claims 18-20, modified Tabushi discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. However, modified Tabushi remains silent regarding an intended use of the secondary battery (100) and therefore such is not particularly limited.
Nonetheless, modified Tabushi does not disclose a battery pack comprising a battery module comprising the secondary battery or an electric apparatus comprising the secondary battery.
Change teaches wherein a secondary battery may be used as a power source in a battery pack comprising a battery module and/or an electric apparatus ([0056]-[0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the secondary battery of modified Tabushi in a battery pack comprising a battery module and/or in an electric apparatus, as taught by Chang, as the intended use of the secondary battery is not particularly limited and therefore the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that the secondary battery would successfully function as a power source in such.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY WYLUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 AM - 3 PM 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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights