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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/05/2024, 06/30/2025 and 09/30/2025. The submission was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 06/05/2024. These drawings were acceptable.
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 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kylyvnyk et al. (US 20130273407 A1, cited in IDS) hereinafter referred to as KYLYVNYK and further in view of Gaben et al. (US 9660252 B2) hereinafter referred to as GABEN. In regard to Claim 1, KYLYVNYK teaches an electrode assembly for a lithium secondary battery [a lithium-based electrochemical cell (Fig. 1; p. 2, [0013], lines 5-6)], the electrode assembly comprising: a cathode-insulating layer composite [a photograph of the positive electrode with a heat-resistant coating applied (Fig. 6b; p. 2, [0020], lines 22-24)] including a cathode [positive electrode, 114 (p. 3, [0036], lines 2-3)] and a first insulating layer disposed on the cathode [a heat-resistant coating, 114c, (p. 3, [0036], lines 3)]; and an anode-insulating layer composite [a photograph of the negative electrode with a heat-resistant coating applied (Fig. 1; p. 2, [0017], lines 14-15)] including an anode [a negative electrode, 112 (p. 3, [0036], lines 2-3)] and a second insulating layer disposed on the anode [includes a heat-resistant coating, 114c (p. 3, [0036], lines 2-3)], wherein the first or second insulating layer is a porous insulating layer [the heat-resistant coating may be sufficiently porous or solid to allow lithium ions to pass therethrough (p. 3, [0035], lines 59-61)] including polymer particles [the coating powered may also include a binder material that includes polymers (p. 4, [0046])] or ceramic particles [the ceramic material of the dry coating powder (p. 4, [0043])] and wherein a ratio of a sum of thicknesses of the first and second insulating layers to a total of thicknesses of the cathode-insulating layer composite and the anode-insulating layer composite is 19% to 30% [where the coating has a thickness of about 15 μM and the underlying active layer has a thickness of about 60 μM (p.5, [0059], lines 44-45)] as such the ratio would be 25 %. It is noted that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
KYLYVNYK does not teach a zeta potential of the particles in the insulating layer.
GABEN does teach and has an absolute value of zeta potential of 25 mV or more, [the zeta potential of the nanoparticle suspension that comprises the insulation layer is less than 40 mV and more particularly between 25 and 40 mV (col. 11, lines 38-39)]. GABEN further teaches that [the suspension is stable above 40 mV and very stable above 60 mV and when the zeta potential is less than 20 mV particle clusters can develop (col. 10, lines 53-57)]. It is noted that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Further KYLYVNYK and GABEN are considered analogous in the art as both inventions are directed towards an insulating layer of nanoparticles (ceramic or polymer) disposed on an electrode for use in a battery.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the range zeta parameters of particles taught by GABEN to the electrode assembly of KYLYVNYK to ensure stability and dispersion of the insulating particles of the heat-protecting layer.
Regarding Claim 2, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches wherein: each of the first and second insulating layers has a thickness of 5 μM or more [the heat resistant coating 112c, 114c, 118c should be sufficiently thick to avoid a short circuit in cell, 100, to allow Li+ ions to pass with minimal resistance and an exemplary coating may be as thin as 1 μM to 30 μM and an exemplary coating may be as thin as 10 μM (p. 5, [0057], lines 20-23)],
KYLYVNYK does not explicitly teach and the sum of thicknesses of the first and second insulating layers is 33 to 55 μM.
KYLYVNYK does teach that [the positive electrode included a 15 μM thick heat-resistant ceramic coating (p. 7, [0087], lines 59-61)] and [an exemplary coating of the insulating layers may be as thick as 25 μM (p. 5, [0057], lines 26-27)]. Further, KYLYVNYK teaches that [the heat resistant-coating 112c, 114c, should be sufficiently thick to avoid a short circuit in the cell while being sufficiently thin to allow Li+ ions to pass there-through with minimal resistance (p. 5, [0057], lines 15-18)]. Thus, a coating of 25 μM as taught would be sufficiently thick to prevent short circuit and thin enough to allow the passage of Li+ ions if the thickness of the positive heat-resistant layer is 15 μM. Thus, the sum of the layers would be 40 μM
A skilled artisan would find it obvious to try choosing the most optimal thickness of the negative electrode heat-resistant layer given the thickness of the positive heat-resistant layer for the best insulating properties for the electrode assembly.
Regarding Claim 3, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches wherein the first and second insulating layers are in direct contact with each other [the negative electrode was formed on top of the heat-resistant coating applied to the positive electrode (p. 8, [0092], 45-47)].
Regarding Claim 4, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches wherein: the electrode assembly for a lithium secondary battery does not include a separate separator where [the separator, 118, may be excluded from the cell if the heat-resistant coatings on the electrodes are sufficiently thick (p. 5, [0058], 33-35)].
Regarding Claim 6, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches wherein: the first insulating layer has a thickness of 10 to 20 μM [the positive electrode included a 15 μM thick heat-resistant ceramic coating (p. 7, [0087], lines 59-61)], and the second insulating layer has a thickness of 20 to 35 μM [the insulating layers may be as thick as 25 μM (p. 5, [0057], lines 26-27)].
Regarding Claim 8, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches wherein: the first and second insulating layers have a composition identical to each other in particular, [negative and positive electrodes the ceramic material in coating layers 112c and 114c is AL2O3 (pgs. 5-6, [0061])].
Regarding Claim 10, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches wherein: the ceramic particles comprise at least one selected from the group consisting of boehmite, aluminum oxide (Al2O3), titanium oxide (TiO2), iron oxide, silicon oxide, zirconium oxide (ZrO2), cobalt oxide, tin oxide (SnO2), nickel oxide, zinc oxide, vanadium oxide, and manganese oxide [inorganic oxides: SnO2, ZrO2, Al2O3, TiO2. KYLYVNYK further teaches exemplary ceramic materials include the inorganic oxides: CaO, Li2O, CeO2, GeO2, Y2O3, P2O5, inorganic carbides, inorganic nitrides, double-inorganic oxides: SrTiO3, BaTiO3 and may also be phosphate-based, silicate-based, or sulphide-based (p. 4, [0043])].
A skilled artisan would find it obvious to substitute the ceramic particles that are similar in formula as they are functional equivalents (e.g. vanadium oxide V2O5 and the taught phosphorous pentoxide P2O5).
Regarding Claim 13, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the lithium secondary battery according to claim 12 see above rejection, wherein: the lithium secondary battery has a resistance value of 108 ohm or more [the heat-resistant coating also exhibited strong electrical resistance and was measured exceeding 200 MOhm] or 2 x 108 ohm (p. 7, [0076], lines 25-29).
Modified KYLYVNYK does not explicitly teach when a voltage of 50V is applied between the cathode and the anode but because KYLYVNYK discloses the same material and thickness as that claimed, it is considered having the same properties (same composition and thickness), including resistance and it would be obvious to a skilled artisan that you would observe a same resistance value with a same applied voltage. Regarding composition claims, if the composition is the same, it must have the same properties (see MPEP § 2112.01, II).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine that a voltage of 50 V would result in the same range of resistance given the same material characteristics (composition and thickness).
Claims 5, 7, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Umehara (US 20160190533 A1) hereinafter referred to as UMEHARA.
Regarding Claim 5, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches and the first and second insulating layers are disposed so as to face each other [the heat-protection layers of the negative and positive electrodes, 112c and 114c, respectively are applied on the right side of the negative electrode, 112, that faces the positive electrode, 114, and the coating 114c is applied on the left side so it faces the negative electrode (Fig. 1; p. 3, [0037], lines 16-19). Further the electrode assembly does not need the separator, and the insulating layers would be disposed on each other (p. 5, [0058], 33-35)].
KYLYVNYK, modified by GABEN, does not explicitly teach a lamination of the layers. KYLVNYK does teach using [a suitable adhesive or binder and mechanical fixation to combine the active layer and conductive layer of the negative electrode (p.2, [0030], lines 25-27)].
UMEHARA teaches the limitation wherein: the cathode-insulating layer composite and the anode-insulating layer composite are laminated [the positive electrode sheet, 10, and negative electrode sheet, 20, with both surfaces on which the insulating layer, 30, is arranged are laminated and wound (Figs. 1-2; p. 2, [0024], lines 24-26)].
Further UMEHARA is considered analogous in the art to KYLYVNYK and GABEN as all three inventions are directed towards an electrode body with an insulating layer composed of ceramic or polymer particles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the known technique of lamination as taught by UMEHARA to the electrode assembly of modified KYLVNYK to ensure consistent binding of the layers.
Regarding Claim 7, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK teaches the composition of both electrode layers further include a binder [the coating powder may also include a binder material (p. 4, [0046], lines 59-60)].
KYLYVNYK, modified by GABEN, does not explicitly teach different compositions of the insulating layers. [Only the alternatives to the ceramic particle used (p. 4, [0043])].
In the same field of invention UMEHARA teaches the limitation wherein: each of the first and second insulating layers independently includes the polymer particles or ceramic particles [a first insulating layer, 31, made of ceramic particles (p. 3, [0036], lines 23-24) and a second insulating layer made of solely resin particles (p. 3, [0035], lines 18-19)]. UMEHARA further teaches that the purpose of the second insulating layer is to [function as a shutdown layer to interrupt the path of lithium ions by the melting of resin particles when the electrode body is heated to a high temperature (p. 3, [0035]) and the strength provided by the ceramic particles aids in suppressing the crushing or deformation of the electrode body when a load is applied (p. 3, [0036], lines 25-28)].
A skilled artisan would then find it obvious to combine the multiple composition layers of UMEHARA with the electrode assembly of modified KYLVNYK to reduce the flow of lithium ions by the resin particles when melting occurs if the electrode body reaches a temperature that is too high and include the ceramic particles to increase the strength of the assembly when under mechanical load.
Regarding Claim 9, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
KYLYVNYK, modified by GABEN, does not explicitly teach the polymer particles of the insulation layer. KYLVNYK does teach the polymer particles that can be included as an [exemplary binder materials in the coating powder include polymers such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polyvinylidene fluoride, polyphenylene sulfide, PEOM and other ductile materials and mixtures thereof (p. 4, [0046])].
UMEHARA teaches wherein: the polymer particles include at least one selected from the group consisting of polyethylene oxide, polyphenylene sulfide, polymethyl(meth)acrylate, polystyrene, polyvinyl chloride, polycarbonate, polysulfone, polyethersulfone, polyetherimide, polyphenylsulfone, polyamideimide, polyimide, polybenzimidazole, polyether ketone, polyphthalamide, polybutylene terephthalate, and polyethylene terephthalate [the resin particles of the insulation layer are thermoplastic resin particles such as polyethylene particles (p3 2; [0032])]. UMEHARA further teaches the use of other [fluorinated polymers as a binder (p. 2, [0027])].
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate any of the thermoplastic particles used as a binder in the ceramic insulating layer of modified KYLYVNYK into the resin insulating layer of UMEHARA as the melting temperatures, particle formation, and thermoelectric properties would be well known to a skilled artisan.
Regarding Claim 11, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches a method of manufacturing the electrode assembly for a lithium secondary battery the method comprising (S1) forming a first insulating layer on a cathode to form a cathode-insulating layer composite; (S2) forming a second insulating layer on an anode to form an anode-insulating layer composite [in step, 202, of method, 200 a negative electrode or positive electrode are selected, may vary in size shape and material (Fig. 2; p. 3, [0039]) then in step 208 of method 200 the powder gas-mixture of the ceramic heat-resistant layer is directed through a nozzle and toward the substrate at high speed to form a heat-resistant coating on the substrate (Fig. 2; p. 5, [0053])].
KYLYVNYK does not teach a zeta potential of the particles in the insulating layer or a process of laminating the electrode layers.
GABEN does teach and has an absolute value of zeta potential of 25 mV or more [the zeta potential of the nanoparticle suspension that comprises the insulation layer is less than 40 mV and more particularly between 25 and 40 mV (col. 11, lines 38-39)]. It is noted that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
UMEHARA does teach and (S3) laminating the cathode-insulating layer composite and the anode-insulating layer composite [the positive electrode sheet, 10, and negative electrode sheet, 20, with both surfaces on which the insulating layer, 30, is arranged are laminated and wound (Figs. 1-2; p. 2, [0024], lines 24-26)], wherein the first or second insulating layer includes polymer particles or ceramic particles [a first insulating layer, 31, made of ceramic particles (p. 3, [0036], lines 23-24) and a second insulating layer made of solely resin particles (p. 3, [0035], lines 18-19)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the construction of the electrode body of KYLYVNYK with the zeta parameters of GABEN and the multi-layered insulating and laminated layers of UMEHARA to produce an electrode that has improved strength and performance characteristics of the electrochemical cell.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of YU et al. (US 20150380706 A1) hereinafter referred to as YU.
Regarding Claim 12, KYLYVNYK modified by GABEN teaches a lithium secondary battery [a non-aqueous, lithium-based, electrochemical cell which may be used in a rechargeable battery of a hybrid electric vehicle (Fig. 1; p. 2, [0028], lines 51-54)] comprising: an electrolyte [cell, 100, also contains an electrolyte, 116 (Fig. 1; p. 2, [0029], line 10)]; and the electrode assembly of claim 1 see claim 1 rejection above.
Modified KYLYVNYK does not explicitly teach a case or housing thereof but does teach that the electrode assembly [cell 100 may be used in a rechargeable battery of a hybrid electric vehicle or an electric vehicle (p. 2, [0028], lines 52-56)].
In the same field of invention YU teaches a battery case [the electrode assembly may be further embedded in a battery case together with a non-aqueous electrolyte solution which is impregnated into the electrode assembly, to manufacture a lithium secondary battery (p. 3, [0052])].
YU is considered analogous in the art as it is directed towards an electrode assembly containing an electrode with insulating polymer particles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a battery case as taught by YU for the electrode assembly as taught by KYLYNVK modified by GABEN for the secondary battery cell for use in a hybrid electric vehicle’s rechargeable battery.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zarbov et al. (Methodology for selection of charging agents for electrophoretic deposition of ceramic particles; Journal of Materials Science 39 (2004) 813-817) and Nagaura (WO 2014175213 A1, cited in IDS).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WAYNE WALTER VIGIL JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7652. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at (571) 270-7457. 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.
/WAYNE WALTER VIGIL/
/JACOB T MINSKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights