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 .
Amendments to the specification, drawing, and claims, filed 28 March 2024, have been entered in the above identified application
Claims 1-15 are pending in the application
Double Patenting
Claims 1-12, and 14-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of copending Application No. 18/710,400 (reference application, hereinafter ‘400) in view of Kang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0351177).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, ‘400 claims a negative electrode comprising: a negative electrode current collector; a first negative electrode active material layer present on the negative electrode current collector, wherein the first negative electrode active material layer comprises a first carbon containing active material, a first silicon containing active material, and a first binder; and a second negative electrode active material layer present on the first negative electrode active material layer, wherein the second negative electrode active material layer comprises a second carbon containing active material, a second silicon containing active material, and a second binder (claim 1), wherein the first binder comprises styrene-butadiene rubber (claims 9 and 10).
‘400 does not claim the second binder comprises a copolymer comprising an acrylamide-derived unit, an acrylic acid-derived unit, and an acrylonitrile-derived unit.
Kang teaches a lithium secondary battery, an electrode for the lithium battery, and a binder composition for the electrode (title). The binder composition includes 1% to 60% by weight of the acrylamide-derived unit ([0037], (meth)acrylamide), 1% to 20% by weight of the acrylic acid-derived unit ([0037], unsaturated carboxylic acid-based monomer, which may be acrylic acid, [0047]), and 10% to 97.9% by weight of the acrylonitrile-derived unit ([0037], unit derived from a conjugated diene-based polymer, which may be an acrylonitrile-butadiene copolymer). A composition of the polymer with these amounts of the acrylamide-derived unit, acrylic acid-derived unit, and acrylonitrile-derived unit exhibits higher adhesion and exhibits low resistance ([0011]).
The ranges of the weight percentages of the acrylamide-derived unit, acrylic acid-derived unit, and acrylonitrile-derived unit of Kang overlaps with the claimed ranges of 55% to 80% by weight of the acrylamide-derived unit, 10% to 30% by weight of the acrylic acid-derived unit, and 5% to 20% by weight of the acrylonitrile-derived unit. 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).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the binder with the composition as taught by Kang in the second binder of ‘004. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this composition for the enhanced adhesion and low resistance.
Regarding claim 2, ‘004 claims a ratio of a weight percentage of the first binder to a weight of the first negative electrode active material layer is 1:1 to 15:1 (claim 6, the second binder is 1 wt% to 15 wt% of the second negative electrode active material layer). This overlaps with the claimed ratio of 0.5:1 to 9:1. 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).
‘004 further claims weight percentage of the second binder to a weight of the second negative electrode active material layer is 0.5:1 to 9:1 1:1 to 15:1 (claim 7, the first binder is 1 wt% to 15 wt% of the first negative electrode active material layer). This overlaps with the claimed ratio of 0.5:1 to 9:1. 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).
Regarding claim 3, ‘004 claims the first binder is present in the first negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 1% to 15% by weight (claim 6). This overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5% to 15% by weight. 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).
Regarding claim 4, ‘004 claims the second binder is present in the second negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 1% to 15% by weight (claim 7). This overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5% to 15% by weight. 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).
Regarding claim 5, ‘004 claims a total weight of the first binder and the second binder is 1% to 15% by weight based on a total weight of the first negative electrode active material layer and the second negative electrode active material layer (claim 8). This range overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5% to 15%. 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).
Regarding claim 7, ‘004 claims a thickness ratio of a thickness of the first negative electrode active material layer to a thickness of the second negative electrode active material layer is 1:0.5 to 1:2 (claim 11).
Regarding claim 8, ‘004 claims the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material are present in the first negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 90% to 99% by weight (claim 4). ‘004 further claims a weight ratio of the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material is 85:15 to 99:1 (claim 4). This overlaps with the claimed ratio of 83:17 to 99:1. 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).
Regarding claim 9, ‘004 claims the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material are present in the first negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 90% to 99% by weight (claim 5). ‘004 further claims a weight ratio of the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material is 85:15 to 99:1 (claim 5). This overlaps with the claimed ratio of 83:17 to 99:1. 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).
Regarding claim 10, ‘004 claims the first silicon containing active material comprises a first silicon containing compound represented by a chemical formula of SiOx, where 0<x<2, and a first metal doped in the first silicon containing compound (claim 1), and wherein the first metal comprises at least one kind of metal selected from the group consisting of Li, Mg, Ca, and Al (claim 3).
Regarding claim 11, ‘004 claims the second silicon containing active material comprises a second silicon containing compound represented by a chemical formula of SiOx, where 0<x<2, and a second metal doped in the first silicon containing compound (claim 1), and wherein the second metal comprises at least one kind of metal selected from the group consisting of Li, Mg, Ca, and Al (claim 3).
Regarding claim 12, ‘004 claims a sum of a loading amount of the first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of the second negative electrode active material layer is 4 mAh/cm2 to 8 mAh/cm2 (claim 12).
Regarding claim 14, ‘004 claims the negative electrode of claim 1; a positive electrode facing the negative electrode; a separator interposed between the negative electrode and the positive electrode; and an electrolyte (claim 13).
The limitation “an electrolyte injected in the secondary battery” is a method limitation and does not determine the patentability of the product, unless the process produces unexpected results. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself, unless Applicant presents evidence from which the Examiner could reasonably conclude that the claimed product differs in kind from those of the prior art. MPEP 2113. Furthermore, there does not appear to be a difference between the prior art structure and the structure resulting from the claimed method because ‘004 claims the identical battery structure.
Regarding claim 15, ‘004 claims the positive electrode comprises: a positive electrode current collector; and a positive electrode active material layer present on the positive electrode current collector, wherein the positive electrode active material layer comprises a positive electrode active material comprising a lithium-cobalt containing oxide (claim 14)
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 13 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 9 and 10 of copending Application No. 18/710,400 (reference application, hereinafter ‘400) in view of Kang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0351177), further in view of Lee (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0205064), hereinafter Lee ‘064.
‘400 and Kang are relied upon as described above.
‘400 does not explicitly claim a ratio of a loading amount of first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of second negative electrode active material layer is 1:0.5 to 1:2.
Lee ‘064 teaches a method for preparing an electrode for a lithium secondary battery (title). Lee ‘064 further teaches the negative electrode includes a first negative electrode active material layer and a second negative electrode active material layer ([0019]-[0020]). Lee ‘064 further teaches a ratio of a loading amount of first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of second negative electrode active material layer is 1:0.667 to 1:1 (5:5 to 6:4, [0076]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 1:0.5 to 1:2. 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). This loading ratio allows for decreased migration of the binder ([0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the loading amount ratio of L ‘064 in the negative electrode of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this amount for the decreased migration of the binder.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
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.
Claim 2 is 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 limitation “a ratio of a weight percentage of the first binder to a weight of the first negative electrode active material layer is 0.5:1 to 9:1, and a weight percentage of the second binder to a weight of the second negative electrode active material layer is 0.5:1 to 9:1” in lines 1-4 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if this limitation is saying that the binder is 0.5 weight percent to 9 weight percent of the respective negative electrode active material layer, as seems represented in Applicant’s specification, or if the binder is 33 weight percent to 90 weight percent of the respective negative electrode active material layer, which is what appears to be claimed. For the purpose of examination, this limitation will be understood to mean that the first binder makes up 0.5 weight percent to 9 weight percent of the first negative electrode active material layer, and that the second binder makes up 0.5 weight percent to 9 weight percent of the second negative electrode active material layer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by over Chen (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 112563453). For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 112563453-A.
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a negative electrode that includes a negative electrode current collector and a first negative electrode active material layer present on the negative electrode current collector (abstract). The first negative electrode active material layer includes a first carbon containing active material, a first silicon containing active material (represented by silicon-carbon composite, [0045]), and a first binder (abstract, also referred to as first adhesive, [0029]). The negative electrode further includes a second negative electrode active material layer present on the first negative electrode active material layer (abstract), wherein the second negative electrode active material layer includes a second carbon containing active material, a second silicon containing active material (represented by silicon-carbon composite, [0045]), and a second binder (abstract, also referred to as second adhesive, [0030]).
The first binder comprises styrene-butadiene rubber ([0029], a copolymer of acrylic acid, styrene, and butadiene, which is a modified styrene-butadiene rubber), and the second binder comprises a copolymer comprising an acrylamide-derived unit, an acrylic acid-derived unit, and an acrylonitrile-derived unit ([0031], a copolymer of acrylic acid, acrylonitrile and acrylamide).
Regarding claim 14, Chen further teaches a secondary battery (abstract) that includes the negative electrode of claim 1 ([0050]), a positive electrode facing the negative electrode; a separator interposed between the negative electrode and the positive electrode; and an electrolyte included in the secondary battery ([0051], as the positive electrode must face the negative electrode for electricity to be produced, and as that is shown by Chen, [0085], the positive electrode faces the negative electrode).
The limitation “an electrolyte injected in the secondary battery” is a method limitation and does not determine the patentability of the product, unless the process produces unexpected results. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself, unless Applicant presents evidence from which the Examiner could reasonably conclude that the claimed product differs in kind from those of the prior art. MPEP 2113. Furthermore, there does not appear to be a difference between the prior art structure and the structure resulting from the claimed method because ‘004 claims the identical battery structure.
Regarding claim 15, Chen further teaches the positive electrode includes a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active material layer present on the positive electrode current collector ([0076]). The positive electrode active material layer comprises a positive electrode active material which includes a lithium cobalt containing oxide (lithium cobalt oxide, [0076]).
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.
Claims 1-5, 7 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 112563453). For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 112563453-A.
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a negative electrode that includes a negative electrode current collector and a first negative electrode active material layer present on the negative electrode current collector (abstract). The first negative electrode active material layer includes an active material (graphite, natural graphite, nano-silicon, silicon-carbon composite, silicon-oxygen-carbon composite, hard carbon or soft carbon, [0045]), and a first binder (abstract, also referred to as first adhesive, [0029]). The negative electrode further includes a second negative electrode active material layer present on the first negative electrode active material layer (abstract), wherein the second negative electrode active material layer includes a second carbon containing active material, a second silicon containing active material (graphite, natural graphite, nano-silicon, silicon-carbon composite, silicon-oxygen-carbon composite, hard carbon or soft carbon, [0045]), and a second binder (abstract, also referred to as second adhesive, [0030]).
The first binder comprises styrene-butadiene rubber ([0028], the binder can be a copolymer of several monomers, which include butadiene and styrene), and the second binder comprises a copolymer comprising an acrylamide-derived unit, an acrylic acid-derived unit, and an acrylonitrile-derived unit ([0031], a copolymer of acrylic acid, acrylonitrile and acrylamide).
In the alternative that Chen’s disclosure in par. [0045] does not anticipate the limitations “a first silicon active containing material”, “a first carbon containing active material”, “a second silicon active containing material” and “a second carbon containing active material”, Chen does teach the negative electrode active material can be selected from a group including carbon containing active materials (such as graphite, natural graphite, silicon-carbon composite, silicon-oxygen-carbon composite, hard carbon or soft carbon, [0045]), and silicon containing active materials (nano-silicon, silicon-carbon composite, silicon-oxygen-carbon composite). It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose (MPEP 2144.06.I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to use both a first and second carbon containing active material and a first and second silicon containing active material in the first and second negative electrode active material layers, respectively.
Regarding claims 2-4, Chen further teaches a ratio of a weight percentage of the first binder to a weight of the first negative electrode active material layer is 0.5:1-10:1 ([0040], 0.5-10 wt% of the first negative electrode active material layer), and a weight percentage of the second binder to a weight of the second negative electrode active material layer is 0.5:1-10:1 ([0042], 0.5-10 wt% of the second negative electrode active material layer). Both ratio of a weight percentage of the first binder to a weight of the first negative electrode active material layer overlap with the claimed ratio of 0.5:1 to 9:1. 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)
Similarly, the weight percentage ranges for the first binder and second binder overlap with the claimed ranges of 0.5% to 15% by weight of each the first binder and second binder. 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).
Regarding claim 5, as Chen teaches the weight percentage of the first binder and second binder are each 0.5-10 wt% of their respective negative electrode active material layers ([0040] and [0042]), which will result in a total weight of the first binder and the second binder being 0.5% to 10% by weight based on a total weight of the first negative electrode active material layer and the second negative electrode active material layer. This ranges overlaps with the claimed range of 0.5% to 15% by weight based on a total weight of the first negative electrode active material layer and the second negative electrode active material layer. 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).
Regarding claim 7, Chen further teaches a thickness ratio of the thickness of the first negative electrode active material layer to the thickness of the second negative electrode active material layer is 1:0.25 to 1:4 ([0034]). This range overlaps with the claimed thickness ratio of a thickness of the first negative electrode active material layer to a thickness of the second negative electrode active material layer of 1:0.5 to 1:2. 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).
Regarding claim 14, Chen further teaches a secondary battery (abstract) that includes the negative electrode of claim 1 ([0050]), a positive electrode facing the negative electrode; a separator interposed between the negative electrode and the positive electrode; and an electrolyte included in the secondary battery ([0051], as the positive electrode must face the negative electrode for electricity to be produced, and as that is shown by Chen, [0085], the positive electrode faces the negative electrode).
The limitation “an electrolyte injected in the secondary battery” is a method limitation and does not determine the patentability of the product, unless the process produces unexpected results. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself, unless Applicant presents evidence from which the Examiner could reasonably conclude that the claimed product differs in kind from those of the prior art. MPEP 2113. Furthermore, there does not appear to be a difference between the prior art structure and the structure resulting from the claimed method because ‘004 claims the identical battery structure.
Regarding claim 15, Chen further teaches the positive electrode includes a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active material layer present on the positive electrode current collector ([0076]). The positive electrode active material layer comprises a positive electrode active material which includes a lithium cobalt containing oxide (lithium cobalt oxide, [0076]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 112563453) in view of Kang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0351177). For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 112563453-A.
Chen is relied upon as described above.
Chen does not explicitly teach that the second binder comprises a copolymer comprising 55% to 80% by weight of the acrylamide-derived unit, 10% to 30% by weight of the acrylic acid-derived unit, and 5% to 20% by weight of the acrylonitrile-derived unit.
Kang teaches a lithium secondary battery, an electrode for the lithium battery, and a binder composition for the electrode (title). The binder composition includes 1% to 60% by weight of the acrylamide-derived unit ([0037], (meth)acrylamide), 1% to 20% by weight of the acrylic acid-derived unit ([0037], unsaturated carboxylic acid-based monomer, which may be acrylic acid, [0047]), and 10% to 97.9% by weight of the acrylonitrile-derived unit ([0037], unit derived from a conjugated diene-based polymer, which may be an acrylonitrile-butadiene copolymer). A composition of the polymer with these amounts of the acrylamide-derived unit, acrylic acid-derived unit, and acrylonitrile-derived unit exhibits higher adhesion and exhibits low resistance ([0011]).
The ranges of the weight percentages of the acrylamide-derived unit, acrylic acid-derived unit, and acrylonitrile-derived unit of Kang overlaps with the claimed ranges of 55% to 80% by weight of the acrylamide-derived unit, 10% to 30% by weight of the acrylic acid-derived unit, and 5% to 20% by weight of the acrylonitrile-derived unit. 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).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the composition of the binder as taught by Kang in the second binder of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this composition for the enhanced adhesion and low resistance.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 112563453) in view of Lee (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0365883), hereinafter Lee ‘883. For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 112563453-A.
Chen is relied upon as described above.
Regarding claim 8, Chen further teaches the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material are present in the first negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 70% to 98.5% by weight ([0040]). This range overlaps with the claimed range of 90% to 99% by weight. 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).
Chen does not explicitly teach a weight ratio of the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material is 83:17 to 99:1.
Lee ‘883 teaches a lithium secondary battery (title) with an anode that includes a first anode active material layer and a second anode active material layer formed on the first anode active material layer (abstract). Lee ‘883 further teaches a weight ratio of the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material is 90.5:9.5 to 98:2 ([0052], the ratio of silicon to carbon is 0.02 to 0.095, resulting in the above stated ratios). This range overlaps with the claimed range of 83:17 to 99:1. 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).
When the amount of silicon causes the ratio to fall below this range, the capacity and output is diminished, and when the amount of silicon causes the ratio to fall above this range, suppression for anode expansion may not be sufficiently implemented ([0053]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the weight ratio of carbon to silicon, as taught by Lee ‘883, in the first negative electrode active material layer of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this range for increased capacity and output and sufficient suppression for anode expansion.
Regarding claim 9, Chen further teaches the second carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material are present in the second negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 70% to 98.5% by weight ([0042]). This range overlaps with the claimed range of 90% to 99% by weight. 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).
Chen does not explicitly teach a weight ratio of the second carbon containing active material and the second silicon containing active material is 83:17 to 99:1.
Lee ‘883 teaches a lithium secondary battery (title) with an anode that includes a first anode active material layer and a second anode active material layer formed on the first anode active material layer (abstract). Lee ‘883 further teaches a weight ratio of the first carbon containing active material and the first silicon containing active material is 90.5:9.5 to 98:2 ([0052], the ratio of silicon to carbon is 0.02 to 0.095, resulting in the above stated ratios). This range overlaps with the claimed range of 83:17 to 99:1. 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).
When the amount of silicon causes the ratio to fall below this range, the capacity and output is diminished, and when the amount of silicon causes the ratio to fall above this range, suppression for anode expansion may not be sufficiently implemented ([0053]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the weight ratio of carbon to silicon, as taught by Lee ‘883, in the second negative electrode active material layer of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this range for increased capacity and output and sufficient suppression for anode expansion.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 112563453) in view of Kim (Korean Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0038168). For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 112563453-A and KR-20200038168-A1.
Chen is relied upon as described above.
Regarding claim 10, Chen does not explicitly teach the first silicon containing active material includes a first silicon containing compound represented by a chemical formula of SiOx, where 0<x<2 and a first metal doped in the first silicon containing compound, wherein the first metal comprises at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Li, Mg, Ca, and Al.
Kim teaches a multi-layered anode that includes a first silicon compound and a first carbon compound (graphite, abstract). Kim further teaches that the first silicon containing compound is represented by the chemical formula of SiOx, where 0<x<2 ([0043]) and a first metal doped in doped in the first silicon containing compound, the first metal being at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Li, Mg, Ca, and Al ([0051]). Having this particular first silicon containing compound allows for thermal stability improvement within the electrode ([0048]), and doping the silicon containing compound with one metal from the aforementioned group allows for conversion of the SiOx into an electrochemically inert metal-silicate phase, thereby increasing initial efficiency.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the silicon containing compound, and doping it with the above listed metals, as taught by Kim, in the first negative electrode active material layer of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion for the improved thermal stability and initial efficiency.
Regarding claim 11, Chen does not explicitly teach the second silicon containing active material includes a second silicon containing compound represented by a chemical formula of SiOx, where 0<x<2 and a second metal doped in the second silicon containing compound, wherein the second metal comprises at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Li, Mg, Ca, and Al.
Kim teaches a multi-layered anode that includes a second silicon compound and a second carbon compound (graphite, abstract). Kim further teaches that the second silicon containing compound is represented by the chemical formula of SiOx, where 0<x<2 ([0043]) and a second metal doped in doped in the second silicon containing compound, the second metal being at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Li, Mg, Ca, and Al (([0043] and [0051]). Having this particular second silicon containing compound allows for thermal stability improvement within the electrode ([0048]), and doping the second silicon containing compound with one metal from the aforementioned group allows for conversion of the SiOx into an electrochemically inert metal-silicate phase, thereby increasing initial efficiency.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the second silicon containing compound, and doping it with the above listed metals, as taught by Kim, in the second negative electrode active material layer of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion for the improved thermal stability and initial efficiency.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 112563453) in view of Lee (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0205064), hereinafter Lee ‘064. For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 112563453-A.
Chen is relied upon as described above.
Regarding claim 12, Chen does not explicitly teach a sum of a loading amount of the first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of the second negative electrode active material layer is 4 mAh/cm2 to 8 mAh/cm2.
Lee ‘064 teaches a method for preparing an electrode for a lithium secondary battery (title). Lee ‘064 further teaches the negative electrode includes a first negative electrode active material layer and a second negative electrode active material layer ([0019]-[0020]). Lee ‘064 further teaches a sum of a loading amount of the first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of the second negative electrode active material layer is 3 mAh/cm2 to 6 mAh/cm2, which overlaps with the claimed range of 4 mAh/cm2 to 8 mAh/cm2. 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). The range of 3 mAh/cm2 to 6 mAh/cm2, as taught by Lee ‘064, allows for the benefit of using a first binder in the first negative electrode active material layer and second binder in the negative electrode active material layer to be most beneficial ([0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the sum loading amount, as taught by Lee ‘064, in the negative electrode of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion the increased benefit of using the first and second binders.
Regarding claim 13, Chen does not explicitly teach a ratio of a loading amount of first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of second negative electrode active material layer is 1:0.5 to 1:2.
Lee ‘064 further teaches a ratio of a loading amount of first negative electrode active material layer and a loading amount of second negative electrode active material layer is 1:0.667 to 1:1 (5:5 to 6:4, [0076]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 1:0.5 to 1:2. 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). This loading ratio allows for minimal migration of the binder ([0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the loading amount ratio of L ‘064 in the negative electrode of Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this amount for the decreased migration of the binder.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Myles Alan Lovasz whose telephone number is (571)272-0214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/MAL/
Myles Alan LovaszExaminer, Art Unit 1788 08/26/2026
/ALEXANDRE F FERRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights