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 § 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 1-6 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.
Claim 1 recites “a capacity ratio of the negative electrode layer to the positive electrode layer…” in lines 8-10. However, it is unclear as to what or when values or parameters are used or measured for this calculation/relationship of capacity.
Claim 6 recites “wherein metal sodium precipitates inside the negative electrode layer upon completion of charging of the battery” in lines 2-3. However, it is unclear whether the precipitation occurs after the charging, or if the charging stops when precipitation occurs.
Claims 2-5 are rejected for being dependent thereon.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi (US 2019/0341611) in view of Takeuchi et al. (US 2019/0252682).
Regarding claim 1, Yamauchi discloses a sodium ion secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and an electrolyte ([0059]). The electrode has a positive electrode on one side of the electrolyte, and the other [negative] electrode on the other side of the electrolyte ([0094]). The electrolyte can be a solid electrolyte ([0061], [0068], [0089]-[0091]).
However, Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose a capacity ratio of the negative electrode layer to the positive electrode layer (negative electrode layer/positive electrode layer) being not less than 0.10 and not more than 1.10.
Takeuchi discloses a secondary battery including a positive electrode plate 12 and a negative electrode plate 16 wherein a ratio C/A of the capacity of the negative electrode plate 16 to the capacity C of the positive electrode plate 12 is preferably in a range of 1.0<C/A<1.6 (abstract, [0044]). Takeuchi teaches if the ratio is within the range, the expansion/contraction of the electrodes accompanied by intercalation and deintercalation of the carrier ions can be reduced ([0044]). Takeuchi teaches that this can be applied to sodium batteries ([0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the C/A ratio of positive/negative capacities of Takeuchi with the electrodes of Yamauchi for the purpose of reducing the expansion and contraction of the electrodes.
In addition, it would have been obvious to optimize, by routine experimentation, the capacity ratio of negative/positive (including in the range of not less than 0.10, and not more than 1.10) as taught by Takeuchi in the battery of Yamauchi for the purpose of obtaining the desired balance between expansion/contraction and total capacity of the battery.
Regarding claim 2, modified Yamauchi discloses all of the claim limitations as et forth above. Yamauchi teaches that the positive electrode includes an active material composed of crystals represented by general formula Nax(Ni1-aMa)yP2Oz (where M represents at least one transition metal element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cr, Mn, and Co and the following are satisfied: 0.6≤x≤4, 0.3≤y≤2.7, 0≤a≤0.9, and 6≤z<7.5) ([0022]). Yamauchi provides examples of Na1.33Ni1.67P2O7.33, Na1.82Ni1.39P2O7, Na2NiP2O7, and more (see Tables 1-2, Examples 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, modified Yamauchi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamauchi teaches that the negative electrode can be hard carbon ([0060]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Yamauchi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamauchi teaches a solid electrode including β’’-alumina ([0089]-[0091]), or β-alumina or NASICON ([0052], [0068]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Yamauchi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamauchi teaches that the negative electrode active material is capable of inserting and extracting sodium ions during charge and discharge ([0060]), and therefore the metal sodium is moved [precipitates] in the negative electrode layer upon completion of charging of the battery.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi (US 2019/0341611) in view of Takeuchi et al. (US 2019/0252682), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhu et al. (CN 113793979, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 4, modified Yamauchi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Yamauchi teaches that the positive electrode includes an active material composed of crystals represented by general formula Nax(Ni1-aMa)yP2Oz (where M represents at least one transition metal element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cr, Mn, and Co and the following are satisfied: 0.6≤x≤4, 0.3≤y≤2.7, 0≤a≤0.9, and 6≤z<7.5) ([0022]). Yamauchi provides examples of Na1.33Ni1.67P2O7.33, Na1.82Ni1.39P2O7, Na2NiP2O7, and more (see Tables 1-2, Examples 1-3). Yamauchi teaches that the negative electrode can be hard carbon ([0060]).
However, modified Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose a thickness ratio of the negative electrode layer to the positive electrode layer (negative electrode layer/positive electrode layer) is not less than 0.05 and not more than 0.45.
Zhu discloses a sodium ion secondary battery with a sodium supplement/replenishment source, that replenishes active sodium lost during first charge-discharge process (abstract, [0024]). The replenishment adds sodium to compensate for capacity loss, and results in a battery with superior overall performance, improving the battery's initial coulombic efficiency, cycle performance, and storage performance ([0024]). Zhu teaches the material thickness ratio TN/P is the ratio of thickness of the negative electrode to positive electrode, and is in the range of 0.16-5.72 ([0040]). The material thickness ratio can be 0.16-0.22, 0.22-0.32, 0.32-0.42 and 0.42-0.52 ([0040]). Zhu teaches that by limiting the thickness ratio in this range, the amount of sodium replenished can be controlled, resulting in a sodium-replenished secondary battery with optimal overall performance ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the material thickness ratio of TN/P (including the ranges of 0.16-0.22, 0.22-0.32, 0.32-0.42 and 0.42-0.52) as taught by Zhu with the battery of Yamauchi for the purpose of having a sodium replenishment thereby improving the battery's initial coulombic efficiency, cycle performance, and storage performance.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi (US 2019/0341611) in view of Zhu et al. (CN 113793979, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 7, Yamauchi discloses a sodium ion secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and an electrolyte ([0059]). The electrode has a positive electrode on one side of the electrolyte, and the other electrode on the other side of the electrolyte ([0094]). The electrolyte can be a solid electrolyte ([0061], [0068], [0089]-[0091]). Yamauchi teaches that the positive electrode includes an active material composed of crystals represented by general formula Nax(Ni1-aMa)yP2Oz (where M represents at least one transition metal element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cr, Mn, and Co and the following are satisfied: 0.6≤x≤4, 0.3≤y≤2.7, 0≤a≤0.9, and 6≤z<7.5) ([0022]). Yamauchi provides examples of Na1.33Ni1.67P2O7.33, Na1.82Ni1.39P2O7, Na2NiP2O7, and more (see Tables 1-2, Examples 1-3). Yamauchi teaches that the negative electrode can be hard carbon ([0060]).
However, modified Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose a thickness ratio of the negative electrode layer to the positive electrode layer (negative electrode layer/positive electrode layer) is not less than 0.05 and not more than 0.45.
Zhu discloses a sodium ion secondary battery with a sodium supplement/replenishment source, that replenishes active sodium lost during first charge-discharge process (abstract, [0024]). The replenishment adds sodium to compensate for capacity loss, and results in a battery with superior overall performance, improving the battery's initial coulombic efficiency, cycle performance, and storage performance ([0024]). Zhu teaches the material thickness ratio TN/P is the ratio of thickness of the negative electrode to positive electrode, and is in the range of 0.16-5.72 ([0040]). The material thickness ratio can be 0.16-0.22, 0.22-0.32, 0.32-0.42 and 0.42-0.52 ([0040]). Zhu teaches that by limiting the thickness ratio in this range, the amount of sodium replenished can be controlled, resulting in a sodium-replenished secondary battery with optimal overall performance ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the material thickness ratio of TN/P (including the ranges of 0.16-0.22, 0.22-0.32, 0.32-0.42 and 0.42-0.52) as taught by Zhu with the battery of Yamauchi for the purpose of having a sodium replenishment thereby improving the battery's initial coulombic efficiency, cycle performance, and storage performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BUCHANAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM (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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/JACOB BUCHANAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
