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
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 100385701 B1, a machine translation from Espacenet is used as an English equivalent) in view of Padoy (US 5507965 A).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a material composite to prepare a polymer electrolyte precursor composition capable to form a solid polymer electrolyte ([0001] discloses a polymer electrolyte, [0063]-[0064] discloses a method of manufacturing the polymer electrolyte in embodied example 1, which involves a material composition to prepare a polymer electrolyte precursor composition capable to form a solid polymer electrolyte), wherein the material composition comprises:
a comb branch polymer with pendant functional groups ([0064] discloses a high molecular weight comb-shaped polyethylene oxide having a main chain with acrylic ester groups (pendant functional groups) terminated at the ends of the side chains).
surface modified silica particles ([0064] discloses fumed silica in the polymer electrolyte slurry); and
a polymerizable (C1), or
a crosslinker (C2) capable to react with the pendant functional groups in the cob-branched polymer and formed a crosslinked material ([0064] discloses that the electrolyte slurry contains N,N-m-phenylene bismaleimide, a crosslinker compound capable of reacting with the pendant functional groups in the comb branched polymer to form a crosslinked material, [0043] discloses that the weight % of N,N-m-phenylene bismaleimide is optimized to promote crosslinking with the polymer).
Kim does not explicitly disclose that the silica particles are surface modified silica particles, however use of surface modified silica in polymer electrolytes is known in the art and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
For example, Padoy discloses a solid polymer electrolyte material (Col. 3, lines 40-49 and claim 28 discloses a solid polymer electrolyte material similar to that of Kim comprising polyoxyethylene) comprising fumed silica (Col. 3, lines 51-63 discloses that by adding fumed silica in an amount overlapping the amount of silica used in Kim (see [0064] of Kim), it is possible for the electrolyte to maintain desired viscosity even at high temperatures. Col. 4, lines 10-35 discloses that hydrophobic fumed silicas obtained by chemical modification of their surface by means of silanes (reading on surface modified silica) exhibit superior properties to hydrophilic fumed silica and that “very good results” can be obtained, requiring less silica to obtain the desired effect on viscosity and not exhibiting undesirable traits that were seen when hydrophilic silica was used which caused the polymer to become fragile and sensitive to tearing.
As a result, based on the prior disclosure of Padoy in the art, a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to use a hydrophobic surface modified silica rather than a hydrophilic fumed silica for the fumed silica of Kim. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this to obtain a fumed silica that does not cause fragility issues in the polymer electrolyte and where very good results can be obtained with comparatively less silica use, as taught by Padoy.
Regarding claim 2, modified Kim discloses the material composition of claim 1, wherein the material composition comprises:
a comb-branched polymer with pendant functional groups (see claim 1 rejection above); and
B1) a colloidal silica dispersion comprising a: surface modified silica particles and b: a polymerizable solvent
or
B2) an evaporated product of colloidal silica dispersion and a crosslinker capable to crosslink the comb-branched polymer (claim 1 rejection above and [0064] discloses colloidal silica dispersion and N,N-m-phenylene bismaleimide, a crosslinker capable to crosslink the comb-branched polymer. [0064] also discloses benzoyl peroxide, another crosslinking material capable to crosslink with the comb-branched polymer. [0081] discloses that the slurry is dried, or in other words that it becomes an evaporated product), wherein the silica dispersion comprises surface modified silica particles (see claim 1 rejection above) and a non-polymerizable volatile organic solvent ([0064] discloses acetonitrile, a volatile organic solvent that is non-polymerizable under normal conditions).
Regarding claim 3, modified Kim discloses the material composition of claim 1, wherein the amount of silica particles (B) is from 1 to 30 wt.% based on the weight of the comb-branched polymer (example 1 discloses 1 g of fumed silica compared to 10 g of comb-branched polymer [0064], falling within the claimed ratio).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kim discloses the material composition of claim 1, wherein the average particle size of the silica is between 3 and 50 nm ([0042] discloses a particle size of 1 µm or less, overlapping the claimed range. As a result, it would have been obvious to select a particle size from amongst the overlapping portions of the claimed range because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05(1))).
Regarding claim 5, modified Kim discloses the material composition of claim 4, but does not disclose how the particle size of the silica is measured. However, because the method of measuring particle size does not impact the properties of the particles or the electrolyte, this is reasonably considered to be a product by process limitation and is not given patentable weight. The courts have held that patentability is based on a product itself, even if the prior art product is made by a different process (In re Thorpe, 277 USPQ 964, 1985). Moreover, a product-by-process limitation is held to be obvious if the product is similar to a prior art product (In re Brown, 173, USPQ 685, and In re Fessman, 180 USPQ 324). A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would understand that any method of measuring particle size, so long as it was accurate, could reasonably be used without affecting the properties or characteristics of the silica particles or the polymer electrolyte.
Regarding claim 6, modified Kim discloses a method for preparing a solid polymer electrolyte in a lithium ion battery [0033], the method comprising:
preparing the solid polymer electrolyte with the material composition according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim discloses a polymer electrolyte precursor composition capable to form a solid polymer electrolyte ([0001] of Kim discloses a polymer electrolyte, [0063]-[0064] discloses a method of manufacturing the polymer electrolyte in embodied example 1, which involves a material composition to prepare a polymer electrolyte precursor composition capable to form a solid polymer electrolyte), comprising;
the material composition of claim 1; and
a lithium salt [0050].
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses a preparation method of a solid polymer electrolyte, the method comprising:
Casting the polymer electrolyte precursor composition of claim 7 into an electrode ([0065]-[0066] of Kim); and
polymerizing in-situ the polymer electrolyte composition by heating or irradiation ([0070] discloses an in-situ heating step after the partially assembled battery is put together). The free radical initiator is considered an optimal limitation predicated on the selection of a free radical initiator in claim 7, where the selection of a free radical initiator is considered optional).
Regarding claim 9, modified Kim discloses a method to in-situ prepare a solid polymer electrolyte lithium ion battery, the method comprising:
casting the polymer electrolyte precursor composition of claim 7 onto an electrode ([0065]-[0066] of Kim);
polymerizing in-situ the polymer electrolyte precursor composition ([0070] discloses polymerizing the electrolyte precursor composition after the battery is partially assembled (reading on in-situ)), and
assembling the battery ([0072] discloses finishing steps such as injecting liquid electrolyte and placing the battery inside a case and sealing the case, which can be considered the final steps of assembling the battery).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses a solid polymer electrolyte, comprising:
a crosslinked product of a polymerizable solvent, which is selected from monomers oligomers and/or prepolymers or a crosslinker with a comb-branched polymer ([0064] discloses an electrolyte slurry with polyethylene oxide that has acrylic ester groups at the ends of the side chains, and N,N-m-phenylene bismaleimide, which is capable of crosslinking with the polyethylene oxide);
hydrophobically surface-modified silica particles, which are disposed in the crosslinked product ([0064], see Col. 4, lines 10-34 of Padoy and claim 1 rejection above); wherein the average particle size of the silica is between 3 and 50 nm ([0042] discloses a particle size of 1 µm or less, overlapping the claimed range. As a result, it would have been obvious to select a particle size from amongst the overlapping portions of the claimed range because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05(1))); and
a lithium salt dispersed in the crosslinked product [0050]; or
prepared according to the preparation method of claim 8 (see above).
Regarding claim 11, modified Kim discloses the solid polymer electrolyte of claim 10, wherein the amount of the silica particles (B) is from 1 to 30 wt.% based on the weight of the comb-branched polymer ([0064] of Kim).
Regarding claim 12, modified Kim discloses the solid polymer electrolyte of claim 10, wherein the silica particles are evenly dispersed in the electrolyte ([0064] of Kim discloses that the inorganic filler (fumed silica) is added to the solution and completely dispersed).
Regarding claim 13, modified Kim discloses an electrochemical device comprising the solid polymer electrolyte according to claim 10 ([0069] of Kim).
Regarding claim 14, modified Kim discloses a device, comprising the electrochemical device according to claim 13 ([0127] of Kim).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACKARY R COCHENOUR whose telephone number is (703)756-1480. The examiner can normally be reached 1-9:00PM 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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/ZACKARY RICHARD COCHENOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights