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 § 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)(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, 2, 5, and 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mukai et al. (WO2020/105735 (corresponding US PGPub 2022/0020989 used for citation purposes)).
Considering Claim 1, Mukai discloses an electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (electrode for non-aqueous electrolyte batteries [Abstract] that are secondary batteries [0139, 0186]), comprising:
a collector containing a porous metal (collector is preferably porous [0170] and made of aluminum [0059]); and
an organosulfur active material (sulfur-based active material [Abstract] that is sulfur modified polyacrylonitrile [0051]).
Considering Claim 2, Mukai discloses that the porous metal contains aluminum (collector is preferably porous [0170] and made of aluminum [0059]).
Considering Claim 5, Mukai discloses that the organosulfur active material is sulfur-modified polyacrylonitrile (sulfur-based active material [Abstract] that is sulfur modified polyacrylonitrile [0051]).
Considering Claim 7, Mukai discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery [Abstract, 0186, 0248]), comprising:
a positive electrode consisting of the electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1 (electrode used for positive electrode [0072, 0140], see claim 1);
a negative electrode containing a negative electrode active material (negative electrode contains lithium metal active material [0186, 0187, 0241]); and
a non-aqueous electrolyte (non-aqueous electrolyte [Abstract, 0202]).
Considering Claim 8, Mukai discloses that the negative electrode active material of the negative electrode contains a lithium-based metal (negative electrode contains lithium metal active material [0186, 0187, 0241]).
Considering Claim 9, Mukai discloses that the negative electrode consists of lithium-based metal foil (negative electrode is lithium metal foil [0186, 0187, 0241]).
Considering Claim 10, Mukai discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery [Abstract, 0186, 0248]), comprising:
a positive electrode containing a positive electrode containing a positive electrode active material (positive electrode and active material [0189]);
a negative electrode consisting of the electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1 (electrode is used for the negative electrode [0189], see claim 1); and
a non-aqueous electrolyte (non-aqueous electrolyte [Abstract, 0202]).
Considering Claim 11, Mukai discloses an organsulfur active material (sulfur-based active material [Abstract] that is sulfur modified polyacrylonitrile [0051]) for producing an electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (electrode for non-aqueous electrolyte batteries [Abstract] that are secondary batteries [0139, 0186]) comprising a collector containing a porous metal (collector is preferably porous [0170] and made of aluminum [0059]).
Considering Claim 12, Mukai discloses that the organosulfur active material is sulfur-modified polyacrylonitrile (sulfur-based active material [Abstract] that is sulfur modified polyacrylonitrile [0051]).
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 3, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mukai et al. (WO2020/105735 (corresponding US PGPub 2022/0020989 used for citation purposes)).
Considering Claim 3, Mukai discloses that the porosity of the porous current collector may be 1% or more and 95% or less [0170]. Mukai notes that the porosity provides an increased filling density and the coating material can easily permeate into the active material layer [0170]. Therefore, routinely experimenting with and choosing within this range to provide these expected results of 80% or more and 95% or less would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Considering Claim 4, Mukai discloses that the porous current collector can have different forms such as mesh, woven fabric, an embossed body, a punched body, an expanded body, and a foamed body [0170], which come with different pore types and sizes. Mukai notes that the proportional porosity, which ranges from 1% or more and 95% or less for the purposes of increasing the filling density and ensuring that the coating material can easily permeate into the active material layer [0170], so routinely experimenting with and coming up with an average inner diameter from 50 µm to 1,000 µm to achieve such results would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Considering Claim 6, Mukai discloses that the loaded active material depends on the capacity per unit of the electrode [0174], and that the porosity of the current collector may be increase to increase the filling density [0170]. Therefore, routinely experimenting with and coming up with a mass per unit area of from 15 mg/cm2 to 50 mg/cm2 for capacity purposes would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P DOMONE whose telephone number is (571)270-7582. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 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, 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P DOMONE/Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights