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)(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 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’
Regarding Claim 1,
Li teaches a silicon-based anode electrode plate (Li, “, for example, a lithium alloy and/or a lithium metal. In other variations, the negative solid-state electroactive particles 50 may be silicon-based comprising, for example, silicon, a silicon alloy and/or silicon-graphite mixture. In still other variations, the negative electrode 22”, see [0080]), wherein the silicon-based anode electrode plate comprises a porous current collector and a silicon containing material, the silicon containing material is attached to pores of the porous current collector (Li, “For example, the negative solid-state electroactive particles 50 and the solid-state electrolyte particles 90 (and/or the optional electrically conductive additives and/or optional binders) may be dispersed within the pores of the metal foam 100A.”, see [0084]), and the porous current collector is a porous carbon material (Li, “In one aspect, the porous material may be one of a carbon nanofiber three-dimensional foam, a graphene foam, a carbon cloth, a carbon fiber-embedded carbon nanotubes, and a graphene-nickel foam.”, see [0016])).
Regarding Claim 9,
Li teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising a cathode electrode plate, an electrolyte, and an anode electrode plate, wherein the anode electrode plate is the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 1 (Li, battery, 20, Fig. 1)
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 2,4, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’
Regarding Claim 2,
Li teaches the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein the porosity of the porous current collector is 50-90% (Li, “As illustrated in FIG. 2, the metal foam 100A may be a porous material having a porosity greater than or equal to about 80 vol. % to less than or equal to about 99 vol. %, and in certain aspects, optionally greater than or equal to about 80 vol. % to less than or equal to about 95 vol. %.”, see [0085]),
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 20 vol. % to less than or equal to about 95 vol. %. broadly overlaps the claimed range of 50-90%. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
preferably the pore size of the porous current collector is 50-100 μm (Li, “The pores may have an average diameter greater than or equal to about 2 μm to less than or equal to about 5000 μm, ”, see [0085]),
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 2 μm to less than or equal to about 5000 μm broadly overlaps the claimed range of 50-100 μm. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
and further preferably, the porous current collector is selected from any one or more of carbon fibers, carbon cloth, carbon nanotubes, and foam carbon (Li, “In one aspect, the porous material may be one of a carbon nanofiber three-dimensional foam, a graphene foam, a carbon cloth, a carbon fiber-embedded carbon nanotubes, and a graphene-nickel foam.”, see [0016])).
Regarding Claim 4,
Li teaches the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to any one of claims 1, wherein the thickness of the silicon-based anode electrode plate is 6-200 μm (Li, “In one aspect, each of the one or more electrothermal material foils may have a thickness greater than or equal to about 5 μm to less than or equal to about 200 μm”, see [0008]) ,
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 5 μm to less than or equal to about 200 μm broadly overlaps the claimed range of 6-200 μm. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
preferably the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises an adhesive and a conductive agent (Li, “In certain variations, the negative electrode 22 may further include one or more conductive additives and/or binder materials.”, see [0081]), preferably the adhesive is selected from any one or more of butadiene styrene rubber, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and polyvinyl alcohol (Li, “intermingled with binders, such as polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF), poly(vinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-HFP), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), styrene ethylene butylene styrene copolymer (SEBS), ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber, nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR), styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR),”, see [0082]), and preferably the conductive agent is selected from any one or more of carbon black, single-walled carbon nanotubes, multi-walled carbon nanotubes, and graphene (Li, “Electrically conductive materials may include, for example, carbon-based materials or a conductive polymer. Carbon-based materials may include, for example, particles of graphite, acetylene black (such as KETCHEN™ black or DENKA™ black), carbon fibers and nanotubes,”, see [0082]).
Regarding Claim 12,
Li teaches the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 2, wherein the thickness of the silicon-based anode electrode plate is 6-200 μm (Li, “In one aspect, each of the one or more electrothermal material foils may have a thickness greater than or equal to about 5 μm to less than or equal to about 200 μm”, see [0008]) ,
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 5 μm to less than or equal to about 200 μm broadly overlaps the claimed range of 6-200 μm. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
preferably the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises an adhesive and a conductive agent (Li, “In certain variations, the negative electrode 22 may further include one or more conductive additives and/or binder materials.”, see [0081]), preferably the adhesive is selected from any one or more of butadiene styrene rubber, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and polyvinyl alcohol (Li, “intermingled with binders, such as polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF), poly(vinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-HFP), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), styrene ethylene butylene styrene copolymer (SEBS), ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber, nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR), styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR),”, see [0082]), and preferably the conductive agent is selected from any one or more of carbon black, single-walled carbon nanotubes, multi-walled carbon nanotubes, and graphene (Li, “Electrically conductive materials may include, for example, carbon-based materials or a conductive polymer. Carbon-based materials may include, for example, particles of graphite, acetylene black (such as KETCHEN™ black or DENKA™ black), carbon fibers and nanotubes,”, see [0082]).
Regarding Claim 19,
Modified Li teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising a cathode electrode plate, an electrolyte, and an anode electrode plate, wherein the anode electrode plate is the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 2 (Li, battery, 20, Fig. 1).
Claims 3,11,13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’ in view of ‘Dopamine-grafted heparin as an additive to the commercialized carboxymethyl cellulose/styrene-butadiene rubber binder for practical use of SiOx/graphite composite anode’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ in view of (US-20170155171-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kirchev’ in view of (US-20220123301-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Wang’
Regarding Claim 3,
Li teaches the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 1, preferably the silicon containing material is selected from any one or more of silicon oxide, silicon carbide, micrometer silicon, nanometer silicon, pre-embedded lithium modified silicon oxide, and graphite and silicon oxide mixed mixture, and further preferably, the silicon containing material is the graphite and silicon oxide mixed mixture (Li, “In certain variations, the negative solid-state electroactive particles 50 may be lithium-based including, for example, a lithium alloy and/or a lithium metal. In other variations, the negative solid-state electroactive particles 50 may be silicon-based comprising, for example, silicon, a silicon alloy and/or silicon-graphite mixture.”, see [0080]),
Li does not teach wherein the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises a functional additive, the functional additive is used to bond the porous current collector and the silicon containing material, preferably the mass ratio of the porous current collector to the silicon containing material is 5-15:100, preferably the mass of the functional additive is 0.2-5% of the silicon containing material preferably the mass ratio of the silicon oxide to the graphite in the mixture is 1:1-4, and preferably the functional additive is a dopamine monomer.
Lee teaches wherein the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises a functional additive, the functional additive is used to bond the porous current collector and the silicon containing material (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging. ”, see Abstract), and preferably the functional additive is a dopamine monomer (Lee, “ The binder compositions tested were a 1:2 weight ratio of CMC:SBR and a 0.1:0.9:2 weight ratio of heparin(-dopamine):CMC:SBR”, see Fabrication of the SiOx/Graphite composite electrode) preferably the mass of the functional additive is 0.2-5% of the silicon containing material (Lee, “0.1:0.9:2 weight ratio of heparin(-dopamine):CMC:SBR”, see Methods)(the examiner notes it would have been obvious to modify the range to 0.2% see MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A)).
Lee teaches that this prevents disintegration (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging”, see Abstract)
Modified Li and Lee are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the additive as taught in Lee in order to more effectively hold silicon particles together.
Kirchev teaches preferably the mass ratio of the porous current collector to the silicon containing material is 5-15:100, (Kirschev, “is equal to around 0.12 g/cm.sup.2 (compared to values ranging from 2 to 2.5 g/cm.sup.2 for grid collectors of the prior art) and the ratio of the mass of NAM to the mass of collector is around 7:1,”, see [0111]]).
Kirchev teaches that the mass ratio increases the utilization of the electrode (Kirschev, “Thanks to these particular configurations of electrodes, the utilization factors of the positive and negative active materials are particularly high, of the order of 90%. This is due in part to the low occupation rate of the active materials on the current collectors (expressed in mass of active material per surface unit).”, see [0093]).
Modified Li and Kirchev are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the mass ratio as taught in Kirchev in order to increase the utilization.
Wang teaches preferably the mass ratio of the silicon oxide to the graphite in the mixture is 1:1-4 (Wang “A method for preparing a negative electrode plate includes: mixing a silicon-oxide compound (SiO) with artificial graphite at a mass ratio (shown Table 1),”, see [0095]),
Wang teaches that when the ratio is in this range the energy density is increased (Wang, “when the mass ratio of the silicon-oxygen compound to the graphite in the negative active material is within the specified range, the energy density of the battery is greatly increased while relatively high cycle performance is achieved concurrently.”, see [0040]).
Modified Li and Wang are analogous as they are both of the same field of batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ratio as taught in Li to be within the range as taught in Wang in order to improve the cycling performance.
Regarding Claim 11,
Li does not teach wherein the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises a functional additive, the functional additive is used to bond the porous current collector and the silicon containing material, preferably the mass ratio of the porous current collector to the silicon containing material is 5-15:100, preferably the mass of the functional additive is 0.2-5% of the silicon containing material preferably the mass ratio of the silicon oxide to the graphite in the mixture is 1:1-4, and preferably the functional additive is a dopamine monomer.
Lee teaches wherein the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises a functional additive, the functional additive is used to bond the porous current collector and the silicon containing material (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging. ”, see Abstract), and preferably the functional additive is a dopamine monomer (Lee, “ The binder compositions tested were a 1:2 weight ratio of CMC:SBR and a 0.1:0.9:2 weight ratio of heparin(-dopamine):CMC:SBR”, see Fabrication of the SiOx/Graphite composite electrode) preferably the mass of the functional additive is 0.2-5% of the silicon containing material (Lee, “0.1:0.9:2 weight ratio of heparin(-dopamine):CMC:SBR”, see Methods)(the examiner notes it would have been obvious to modify the range to 0.2%, as they are nearly the same; see MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A)).
Lee teaches that this prevents disintegration (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging”, see Abstract)
Modified Li and Lee are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the additive as taught in Lee in order to more effectively hold silicon particles together.
Kirchev teaches preferably the mass ratio of the porous current collector to the silicon containing material is 5-15:100, (Kirschev, “is equal to around 0.12 g/cm.sup.2 (compared to values ranging from 2 to 2.5 g/cm.sup.2 for grid collectors of the prior art) and the ratio of the mass of NAM to the mass of collector is around 7:1,”, see [0111]]).
Kirchev teaches that the mass ratio increases the utilization of the electrode (Kirschev, “Thanks to these particular configurations of electrodes, the utilization factors of the positive and negative active materials are particularly high, of the order of 90%. This is due in part to the low occupation rate of the active materials on the current collectors (expressed in mass of active material per surface unit).”, see [0093]).
Modified Li and Kirchev are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the mass ratio as taught in Kirchev in order to increase the utilization.
Wang teaches preferably the mass ratio of the silicon oxide to the graphite in the mixture is 1:1-4 (Wang “A method for preparing a negative electrode plate includes: mixing a silicon-oxide compound (SiO) with artificial graphite at a mass ratio (shown Table 1),”, see [0095]),
Wang teaches that when the ratio is in this range the energy density is increased (Wang, “when the mass ratio of the silicon-oxygen compound to the graphite in the negative active material is within the specified range, the energy density of the battery is greatly increased while relatively high cycle performance is achieved concurrently.”, see [0040]).
Modified Li and Wang are analogous as they are both of the same field of batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ratio as taught in Li to be within the range as taught in Wang in order to improve the cycling performance.
Regarding Claim 13,
Modified Li teaches the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 3, wherein the thickness of the silicon-based anode electrode plate is 6-200 um (Li, “In one aspect, each of the one or more electrothermal material foils may have a thickness greater than or equal to about 5 μm to less than or equal to about 200 μm”, see [0008]) ,
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 5 μm to less than or equal to about 200 μm broadly overlaps the claimed range of 6-200 μm. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
preferably the silicon-based anode electrode plate further comprises an adhesive and a conductive agent (Li, “In certain variations, the negative electrode 22 may further include one or more conductive additives and/or binder materials.”, see [0081]), preferably the adhesive is selected from any one or more of butadiene styrene rubber, sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and polyvinyl alcohol (Li, “intermingled with binders, such as polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF), poly(vinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene (PVdF-HFP), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC), styrene ethylene butylene styrene copolymer (SEBS), ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber, nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR), styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR),”, see [0082]), and preferably the conductive agent is selected from any one or more of carbon black, single-walled carbon nanotubes, multi-walled carbon nanotubes, and graphene (Li, “Electrically conductive materials may include, for example, carbon-based materials or a conductive polymer. Carbon-based materials may include, for example, particles of graphite, acetylene black (such as KETCHEN™ black or DENKA™ black), carbon fibers and nanotubes,”, see [0082]).
Regarding Claim 20,
Modified Li teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising a cathode electrode plate, an electrolyte, and an anode electrode plate, wherein the anode electrode plate is the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 3 (Li, battery, 20, Fig. 1).
Claims 5, 8, 14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’ in view of ‘Dopamine-grafted heparin as an additive to the commercialized carboxymethyl cellulose/styrene-butadiene rubber binder for practical use of SiOx/graphite composite anode’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ in view of (US-20080096110-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Bito’
Regarding Claim 5,
Modified Li does not teach wherein the preparation method comprises: Step Si, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector
Lee teaches wherein the preparation method comprises: Step Si, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector (Lee, “ This mixture of solids was combined with enough distilled water and a solution of SBR to make a slurry with the desired viscosity, which was coated onto a Cu foil”, see Methods),
Lee teaches that this prevents disintegration (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging”, see Abstract)
Modified Li and Lee are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the additive as taught in Lee in order to more effectively hold silicon particles together.
The preparation method according to claim 6, wherein in Step S2, the drying temperature is 60-150 C (Lee, “The prepared electrodes were dried under vacuum at 120 °C for 6 h to eliminate residual water.”, see Methods).
Modified Li does not teach Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate.
Bito teaches and Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate (Bito, “ and a dispersing medium, or by injecting the mixture into the pores, and then drying. After that, rolling or pressing may be performed according to need. ”, see [0086]).
Bito teaches that rolling can control the porosity (Bito, “A porous substrate was prepared by rolling a felt available from Kureha Corporation (product name: KURECA felt) so that the felt had a thickness of 300 μm and a porosity of 20%”, see [0115]).
Modified Li and Bito are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to have a rolling step and punching step in order to control the porosity of the anode material which is critical to the operation of the cell.
Regarding Claim 8,
Modified Li teaches the preparation method according to claim 5, wherein in Step S2, the drying temperature is 60-150 C (Lee, “The prepared electrodes were dried under vacuum at 120 °C for 6 h to eliminate residual water.”, see Methods).
Regarding Claim 14,
Modified Li does not teach wherein the preparation method comprises: Step Si, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector
Lee teaches wherein the preparation method comprises: Step Si, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector (Lee, “ This mixture of solids was combined with enough distilled water and a solution of SBR to make a slurry with the desired viscosity, which was coated onto a Cu foil”, see Methods),
Lee teaches that this prevents disintegration (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging”, see Abstract)
Modified Li and Lee are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the additive as taught in Lee in order to more effectively hold silicon particles together.
Modified Li does not teach Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate.
Bito teaches and Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate (Bito, “ and a dispersing medium, or by injecting the mixture into the pores, and then drying. After that, rolling or pressing may be performed according to need. ”, see [0086]).
Bito teaches that rolling can control the porosity (Bito, “A porous substrate was prepared by rolling a felt available from Kureha Corporation (product name: KURECA felt) so that the felt had a thickness of 300 μm and a porosity of 20%”, see [0115]).
Modified Li and Bito are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to have a rolling step and punching step in order to control the porosity of the anode material which is critical to the operation of the cell.
Regarding Claim 16,
Modified Li does not teach wherein the preparation method comprises: Step Si, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector
Lee teaches wherein the preparation method comprises: Step Si, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector (Lee, “ This mixture of solids was combined with enough distilled water and a solution of SBR to make a slurry with the desired viscosity, which was coated onto a Cu foil”, see Methods),
Lee teaches that this prevents disintegration (Lee, “Here, we developed a new polymer binder, by combining dopamine-grafted heparin with the commercial binder carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)/styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), in order to more effectively hold the SiOx particles together and prevent disintegration of the electrode during charging and discharging”, see Abstract)
Modified Li and Lee are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery parts.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cell as taught in Li with the additive as taught in Lee in order to more effectively hold silicon particles together.
Modified Li does not teach , Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate.
Bito teaches and Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate (Bito, “ and a dispersing medium, or by injecting the mixture into the pores, and then drying. After that, rolling or pressing may be performed according to need. ”, see [0086]).
Bito teaches that rolling can control the porosity (Bito, “A porous substrate was prepared by rolling a felt available from Kureha Corporation (product name: KURECA felt) so that the felt had a thickness of 300 μm and a porosity of 20%”, see [0115]).
Modified Li and Bito are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to have a rolling step and punching step in order to control the porosity of the anode material which is critical to the operation of the cell.
Regarding Claim 18,
Modified Li teaches the preparation method according to claim 5, wherein in Step S2, the drying temperature is 60-150 C (Lee, “The prepared electrodes were dried under vacuum at 120 °C for 6 h to eliminate residual water.”, see Methods).
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’ in view of ‘Dopamine-grafted heparin as an additive to the commercialized carboxymethyl cellulose/styrene-butadiene rubber binder for practical use of SiOx/graphite composite anode’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ in view of (US-20080096110-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Bito’ in view of ‘Brush-Like Cobalt Nitride Anchored Carbon Nanofiber Membrane: Current Collector-Catalyst Integrated Cathode for Long Cycle Li–O2 Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yoon’ in view of ‘Mace-like carbon fibers@Fe3O4@carbon composites as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yao’
Regarding Claim 6,
Li does not teach the preparation method according to claim 5, wherein Step S1 comprises performing surface modification treatment on the porous current collector, and preferably the surface modification treatment process comprises: Step S11, performing oxidation treatment on the porous current collector by oxidant solution, to obtain an oxidized current collector; Step S12, washing the oxidized current collector, to obtain a washed current collector; and Step S13, immersing the washed current collector in functional additive solution, to obtain a modified porous current collector; the oxidant solution is nitric acid solution with a concentration of 50-90wt%, preferably the time of the oxidation treatment is 20-60 min, and preferably the residual amount of NO3 in the washed current collector is <50 ppm; preferably the functional additive solution is dopamine monomer solution, preferably the concentration of the dopamine monomer solution is 2-3 g/L, and preferably a solvent in the dopamine monomer solution is Tris-HCl buffer solution; and preferably the immersing time is 10-24 h.
Yoon teaches herein Step S1 comprises performing surface modification treatment on the porous current collector (Yoon, “Here, we report a rational design of air cathode using a cobalt nitride (Co4N) functionalized carbon nanofiber (CNF) membrane as current collector-catalyst integrated air cathode”, see Abstract), and preferably the surface modification treatment process comprises: Step S11, performing oxidation treatment on the porous current collector by oxidant solution, to obtain an oxidized current collector (Yoon, “In order to give hydrophilic nature, a piece of CNF (2 cm × 2 cm) was placed in 70% concentrated nitric acid (HNO3) at 80 °C for 2 h.”, see Methods); Step S12, washing the oxidized current collector, to obtain a washed current collector (Yoon, “ Acid treated CNF was washed with DI water for several times and then dried in a convection oven at 50 °C”, see Methods); and Step S13, immersing the washed current collector in functional additive solution, to obtain a modified porous current collector (Yoon, “Next, 0.291 g of Co-(NO3)2·6H2O, 0.093 g of NH4F, and 0.3 g of urea were dissolved in 20 mL of DI water, and then cleaned CNF was soaked in the mixed solution under stirring at 100 rpm for over 2 h.”, see Methods); the oxidant solution is nitric acid solution with a concentration of 50-90wt% (Yoon, “In order to give hydrophilic nature, a piece of CNF (2 cm × 2 cm) was placed in 70% concentrated nitric acid (HNO3) at 80 °C for 2 h.”, see Methods), preferably the time of the oxidation treatment is 20-60 min, and preferably the residual amount of NO3 in the washed current collector is <50 ppm (The examiner notes that this is 2 hr instead of 20-60 minutes but one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivation to modify the time of the nitrate reaction as a results orientated variable through routine optimization in order to affect the activation of the carbon paper ; see results and discussion; see MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A));(The examiner notes that the low residual NO3 concentration is not explicitly taught but is in inherent feature of several washings and dryings. See MPEP 2112).
Yoon teaches that this method creates highly stable current collectors (Yoon, “CNF papers via hydrothermal growth of Co-(OH)F nanorods followed by nitridation step. Co4N-decorated CNF (Co4N/CNF) cathode exhibited excellent electrochemical performance with outstanding stability for over 177 cycles in Li–O2 ”, see Abstract).
Li and Yoon are analogous as they are both of the same field of batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment as taught in Li to have the steps as taught in Yoon in order to increase the formation and stability of the treated current collector.
Yao teaches preferably the functional additive solution is dopamine monomer solution, preferably the concentration of the dopamine monomer solution is 2-3 g/L (Yao, “ Fifty milligrams of dopamine hydrochloride and 100 mg CF@Fe2O3 were put in 42.5 mL of Tris buffer solution (pH = 8.5)”, see Experimental) (The examiner notes that this is only 1.18g/L but one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivation to modify the concentration as a results orientated variable through routine optimization in order to increase the carbon source; see results and discussion; see MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A)), and preferably a solvent in the dopamine monomer solution is Tris-HCl buffer solution; and preferably the immersing time is 10-24 h (Yao, “to obtain CF@Fe2O3. Fifty milligrams of dopamine hydrochloride and 100 mg CF@Fe2O3 were put in 42.5 mL of Tris buffer solution (pH = 8.5), and the solution was continuously stirred for 18 h at room temperature.”, see Experimental Section).
Yao teaches that this method of can allow for dopamine to be used as an effective carbon source for coating and can lead to increased performance (Yao, “Meanwhile, the thin film can be seen on the surface of the spheres, indicating that CF@Fe2O3 is successfully coated with dopamine as a carbon source.”, see Results and Discussion)(Yao, “In comparison with CF, Fe2O3, and CF@Fe2O3, CF@Fe3O4@C composites exhibit higher electrochemical performance as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries (LIBs), owing to the unique mace-like ordered structure.”, see Abstract)
Modified Li and Yao are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to include dopamine material to help coating the other material and allow for a more stable mixture.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’ in view of ‘Dopamine-grafted heparin as an additive to the commercialized carboxymethyl cellulose/styrene-butadiene rubber binder for practical use of SiOx/graphite composite anode’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ in view of (US-20080096110-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Bito’ in further view of (US-20220102698-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li II’
Regarding Claim 7,
Modified Li teaches the preparation method according to claim 5, wherein in Step S1,
Modified Li does not teach preferably the solid content of the anode electrode slurry is 35-50wt%, and preferably the viscosity of the anode electrode slurry is 3000-7000 mPa.s-1.
Li II teaches a porous current collector is coated simultaneously, preferably the coating speed is 10-50 m/min (Li II, “ primer slurry was evenly applied on two surfaces of the current collector in the reserved extension zone of the composite current collector at a coating speed of 20 m/min”, see [0242]) .
Li II teaches that this coating allows for improved transfer efficiency and even application (Li II, “the conductive primer coating layer improves electron transfer efficiency, and reduces resistance of the electrode plate containing the composite current collector, thereby effectively reducing internal direct current resistance (DCR) of a battery core, improving power performance of the battery core, ”, see [0067]).
Modified Li and Li II are analogous as they are both of the same field battery current colectors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the current collector to include that speed and coating to help coating and improve electron transfer.
Browne teaches the solid content of the anode electrode slurry is 35-50wt%, and preferably the viscosity of the anode electrode slurry is 3000-7000 mPa.s-1 (Browne, “conjugated carbon/NMP slurry may be added and dispersed at, e.g., 1800-2200 rpm for, e.g., another predefined time to achieve a slurry viscosity within 2000-4000 cP and a total solid content of about 30% to 60%.”, see [0038]).
Browne teaches that the viscosity and solid content optimize the properties of the slurry (Browne, “the solids content of the anode slurry is largely dependent on particle size of active material and binder/resin molecular weight and viscosity. The particle size and mixing times may be varied to configure the active material density and/or roughness... thus smoother, more dense active layers, but increased expansion. ”, see [0038])
Modified Li and Brown are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to have the solid content and viscosity as taught in Brown to allow for smoother, more dense, active layers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over(US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’ in view of (US-20220231288-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Tanaami’
Regarding Claim 10,
Modified Li does not teach the lithium-ion battery according to claim 9, wherein a metal crimping sleeve is used to connect a porous current collector of the silicon-based anode electrode plate and a metal wire of the lithium-ion battery
Tanaami teaches wherein a metal crimping sleeve is used to connect a porous current collector of the silicon-based anode electrode plate and a metal wire of the lithium-ion battery (Tanaami, “slurries into the identical current collector or by filling slurries having different concentrations into a plurality of different current collectors and then integrating the current collectors using crimp or the like”, see [0093])
Tanammi teaches that the crimp allows for integration of different regions with varying densities (Tanaami, “slurries into the identical current collector or by filling slurries having different concentrations into a plurality of different current collectors and then integrating the current collectors using crimp or the like”, see [0093]).
Modified Li and Tanammi are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to use a crimp as taught in Tanammi to join the porous current collector of a different density to other higher density parts of the cell.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘Li’ in view of (US-20220231288-A1) in view of ‘Dopamine-grafted heparin as an additive to the commercialized carboxymethyl cellulose/styrene-butadiene rubber binder for practical use of SiOx/graphite composite anode’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ in view of (US-20170155171-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Kirchev’ in view of (US-20220123301-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Wang’ in view of (US-20080096110-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Bito’
Regarding Claim 15,
Modified Li teaches a preparation method for the silicon-based anode electrode plate according to claim 3, wherein the preparation method comprises: Step S1, coating anode electrode slurry comprising a silicon containing material on the surface of a porous current collector (Lee, “ This mixture of solids was combined with enough distilled water and a solution of SBR to make a slurry with the desired viscosity, which was coated onto a Cu foil”, see Methods), to obtain an active current collector;
Modified Li does not teach Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate.
Bito teaches and Step S2, drying, roller-pressing, and plate-punching the active current collector, to obtain the silicon-based anode electrode plate (Bito, “ and a dispersing medium, or by injecting the mixture into the pores, and then drying. After that, rolling or pressing may be performed according to need. ”, see [0086]).
Bito teaches that rolling can control the porosity (Bito, “A porous substrate was prepared by rolling a felt available from Kureha Corporation (product name: KURECA felt) so that the felt had a thickness of 300 μm and a porosity of 20%”, see [0115]).
Modified Li and Bito are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to have a rolling step and punching step in order to control the porosity of the anode material which is critical to the operation of the cell.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220302526-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li’ in view of ‘Dopamine-grafted heparin as an additive to the commercialized carboxymethyl cellulose/styrene-butadiene rubber binder for practical use of SiOx/graphite composite anode’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ in view of (US-20080096110-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Bito’ in view of ‘Brush-Like Cobalt Nitride Anchored Carbon Nanofiber Membrane: Current Collector-Catalyst Integrated Cathode for Long Cycle Li–O2 Batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yoon’ in view of ‘Mace-like carbon fibers@Fe3O4@carbon composites as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yao’ in further view of (US-20220102698-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Li II’
Regarding Claim 17,
Modified Li does not teach the preparation method according to claim 6, wherein in Step S1, the relative surface of the porous current collector is coated simultaneously, preferably the coating speed is 10-50 m/min, preferably the solid content of the anode electrode slurry is 35-SOwt%, and preferably the viscosity of the anode electrode slurry is 3000-7000 mPa.s-1.
Li II teaches a porous current collector is coated simultaneously, preferably the coating speed is 10-50 m/min (Li II, “ primer slurry was evenly applied on two surfaces of the current collector in the reserved extension zone of the composite current collector at a coating speed of 20 m/min”, see [0242]) .
Li II teaches that this coating allows for improved transfer efficiency and even application (Li II, “the conductive primer coating layer improves electron transfer efficiency, and reduces resistance of the electrode plate containing the composite current collector, thereby effectively reducing internal direct current resistance (DCR) of a battery core, improving power performance of the battery core, ”, see [0067]).
Modified Li and Li II are analogous as they are both of the same field battery current colectors.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the current collector to include that speed and coating to help coating and improve electron transfer.
Browne teaches the solid content of the anode electrode slurry is 35-50wt%, and preferably the viscosity of the anode electrode slurry is 3000-7000 mPa.s-1 (Browne, “conjugated carbon/NMP slurry may be added and dispersed at, e.g., 1800-2200 rpm for, e.g., another predefined time to achieve a slurry viscosity within 2000-4000 cP and a total solid content of about 30% to 60%.”, see [0038]).
Browne teaches that the viscosity and solid content optimize the properties of the slurry (Browne, “the solids content of the anode slurry is largely dependent on particle size of active material and binder/resin molecular weight and viscosity. The particle size and mixing times may be varied to configure the active material density and/or roughness... thus smoother, more dense active layers, but increased expansion. ”, see [0038])
Modified Li and Brown are analogous as they are both of the same field of treated anode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the treatment of the material to have the solid content and viscosity as taught in Brown to allow for smoother, more dense, active layers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm.
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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
