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 § 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 2, 3, 5, and 8-12 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.
Regarding claim 2, the term “a softening temperature” is not clear. In particular, softening, unlike melting, is something that occurs over a range of temperatures. Moreover, in thermoplastic materials, some degree of softening occurs at any elevated temperature, even those below Tg and/or mp. Clarification is needed.
Regarding claim 3, the mixing step and forming step can occur separately, in which case they do not occur simultaneously. Alternatively, they can occur simultaneously, in which case they do not occur separately. Thus, it is unclear what is meant by “at least one of simultaneously and separately”.
Regarding claim 5 the recitation “nitrile rubbers such as NBR, HNBR” is unclear as to whether the claim is meant to be limited only to NBR and HNBR, or if the claim is intended to allow any nitrile rubber with NBR and HNBR just being examples. If the latter, than “such as NBR, HNBR” should be removed. If the former, then “nitrile rubbers such as” should be removed.
Regarding claim 8, there is no antecedent basis for “the surface of the tab intended to face the negative electrode”. Additionally, it is noted that the claim should include transition language such as “wherein” or the like.
Claim 9 is indefinite because it is unclear if the claim requires porosity less than 10% or if it requires the narrower range of less than 5%. Claims 10-12 depend from claim 9 and are thus indefinite for this same reason.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0299461 to Kim (“Kim”) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0061176 to Bruckner (“Bruckner”) in combination. Regarding claim 1, 3, 5, and 8, Kim discloses a ceramic coating for tab portions of a positive electrode current collector of not coated by positive electrode active material and facing an opposed negative electrode in a lithium ion battery in order to protect against unwanted short circuiting between the two electrodes. Kim at paragraphs [0007] and [0008]. The ceramic includes a polymer binder and ceramic particles where the layer is deposited by dissolving/blending those materials with a solvent and applying to the portions of the current collector.
Bruckner discloses that such solvent-based approaches to coating portions of electrode current collectors with particular material have the downside of using noxious solvent and requiring the cost/time of drying. Bruckner at paragraphs [0001]-[0005]. To cure this problem, Koo discloses mixing the particles to be deposited on the current collector with a PTFE polymer, milling the mixture to fibrillate the PTFE, then rolling/calendaring the fibrillated mixture to form a film. The film is then applied to a current collector.
Further regarding claim 2, Bruckner discloses that the film-forming step may be carried out at elevated temperature between 50-150 degrees, which will soften the PTFE at least to some degree compared to performing the process at room temperature.
Further regarding claim 4 the insulating ceramic particles of Koo can be in some embodiments alumina (aluminum oxide) or magnesia (magnesium oxide).
Further regarding claim 6, Bruckner discloses that its film is formed with polymer content of 5-10% and remaining content coating particles. Kim discloses a ratio of ceramic particle to binder of 95:5. Thus, because both of these rangers are encompassed by the claimed range, the Office finds the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have had reason to experiment within that range to arrive at a robust insulating ceramic coating via a dry process.
Further regarding claim 7, Bruckner discloses optionally providing additives, including liquid additives that would act to lubricate the system.
Further regarding claim 9 and 11, Neither Kim nor Bruckner disclose a porosity of the film created. Nonetheless, because the purpose of the film is to provide electrical insulation, the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention would have had reason to provide a porosity sufficiently low to ensure the film is electrically insulating against contact with the negative electrode, thereby rendering the claimed range obvious absent a showing of unexpected results.
Further regarding claim 10, Kim discloses a thickness of the ceramic insulating layer is from 1-100 microns.
Further regarding claim 12, although neither Kim nor Bruckner disclose providing a stack of cells to create a module, the Office notes that duplication of cells and placing them in stack form to increase capacity of a battery module for a given application is ubiquitous way of applying multiple lithium ion battery cell units and thus obvious.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT P MCCONNELL whose telephone number is (571)270-7531. The examiner can normally be reached 9am to 5pm M-F.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
/WYATT P MCCONNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights