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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed on 03/05/2024 is entered and acknowledged by the Examiner. Claims 1-7 have been amended are currently pending in the instant application.
Priority
This application is a 371 of PCT/CN 2022/080110 (filed on 03/10/2022). Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 09/29/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 03/05/2024 and 10/09/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered by the examiner. An initialed copy accompanies this Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 03/05/2024 have been considered.
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 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by an article to “Direct gas phase synthesis of amorphous Si/C nanoparticles as anode material for lithium ion battery” (hereinafter Orthner).
Initially, it should be noted that the Orthner reference is cited in the IDS filed on 03/05/2024 and as “X” reference in the international search report filed on 03/05/2024.
Regarding claims 4-7, Orthner discloses a method for preparing a Si/C composite material as anode (a negative plate of claims 6-7) for lithium ion battery comprises introducing a mixture of monosilane (claimed silicon source) and ethylene (claimed carbon source) with gas flow of argon and follow by nitrogen gas (claimed carrier gas) into a reactor tube (See page 3; 1st paragraph of Experimental Section, left column). The addition of a mixture of monosilane and ethylene with argon gas meets the claimed limitation of simultaneously introducing a silicon source, a carbon source, and a carrier gas into a reaction vessel in proportion as recited in claim 4. The monosilane, ethylene, and argon gas of Orthner meets the claimed silicon source, carbon source, and carrier gas, respectively, as recited in claim 5. Orthner discloses that the reaction is preform at a temperature between 640°C and 1100°C and at atmospheric pressure (1.0 atm) (See page 3; 1st paragraph of Experimental Section, left column). The reaction temperature and reaction pressure of Orthner are within the claimed ranges as required in claim 4.
Orthner further discloses that the reaction will yield amorphous Silicon/carbon-based material with a mean particle size around or below 200 nm useful in lithium ion battery anode (See page 7, 1st full paragraph, left column). When the amorphous Silicon/carbon-based material of Orthner is finish from the thermal reaction and then process into an anode, the subsequence step of forming the anode would be preform at a room temperature and cool the composite material from the reaction temperature of between 640°C and 1100°C to room temperature.
Regarding claim 1, Zhu discloses a method of preparing the Si/C composite having the claimed particle size of around or below 200 nm containing all the claimed components within the claimed reaction parameters (See claims 4-5 above). Therefore, the method of Zhu is expected to yield a composite product a structure as claimed and the structure would the claimed XRD spectrum because the same composite structure should have the same XRD spectrum. Zhu further discloses that the Si/C composite containing carbon concentration (mass of carbon atom) of 6.3 wt% to 14.2 wt% (See page 5, first paragraph, right column).
The reference specifically or inherently meets each of the claimed limitations in their broadest interpretations. The reference is anticipatory.
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.
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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orthner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2019/0140262 A1 (hereinafter Kim).
Zhu is relied upon as set forth above.
With respect to claim 2, Orthner does not disclose the Si/C composite material having an oxygen content of 0.1-20 mass% as recited in the instant claim.
Kim discloses a silicon-carbon composite useful for negative active material in lithium battery (See Abstract). Kim also discloses that the silicon-carbon composite having about 5 wt% to about 9 wt% of oxygen based on a content of the silicon-carbon composite (See [0012]). Kim discloses that the negative active material having excellent cycle-life characteristics (See [0099]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the silicon-carbon composite of Orthner to include about 5 wt% to about 9 wt% of oxygen in order to provide excellent cycle-life characteristics as suggested by Kim. The burden is upon the applicant to prove otherwise. In re Fitzgerald, 205 USPQ 594.
Regarding claim 3, Kim disclose a negative active material particle comprising a silicon-carbon composite mixed with a binder particle (matrix material) (See [0035] and [0036]). The mixture of the silicon-carbon composite with the binder particle would result in the deposit of the composite inside or on the surface of the binder particle as claimed.
In view of the foregoing, the above claims have failed to patentably distinguish over the applied art.
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 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.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure.
WO 2020/129467 A1 (English equivalent is US 2022/0069296 A1) discloses silicon nanoparticle useful in negative electrode active material having 29Si-NMR peak of 50 ppm to -150 ppm (See Abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHANH TUAN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM to 5:00 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/KHANH T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights