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 § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 14, 16-22, and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanqing Cao et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2015/0086871, here after Cao), further in view of Yuan Yao et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2007/0166899,
here after Yao).
Claims 1-2, 5-6, and 19 are rejected. Cao teaches a method for the preparation
of a composite material comprising at least silicon nanowires and copper, wherein the
copper (catalyst)particles are deposited on a growth support in powder form (graphite sheet powder, or silica particles) [0006, 0007, 0009] by electroless plating [0010] of copper chloride (CuCl, CuCl2) [0115, 0135]. Cao also teaches (B) growing silicon nanowires in a chamber of reactor (CVD), from at least one precursor compound of the silicon nanowires chosen selected from a silane compound [0178], and (C) recovering the product (removing the product from the chamber). Cao does not teach introducing into the chamber of a reactor a solid/solid mixture of CuCl. Yao teaches a method of depositing silicon nanowires on a substrate with CVD, where a copper catalyst is applied by applying CuCl2 in form of solid powder to substrate(silica) [0028, 0024]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Cao where the catalyst (CuCl2) is introduced to the powder substrate in form of solid, because it is suitable way to apply CuCl2 on a substrate for growing SiNW's. Although they do not teach mixing the solid CuCl2 with graphite powder, however since the substrate is in powder form it is to skill of an ordinary person in art to mix the substrate and catalyst first and then load it in CVD chamber to have uniform growth SiNW's.
Claim 3 is rejected as Cao teaches step (B) comprises:
(3) introducing, into the chamber of the reactor, at least one precursor compound
of the silicon nanowires chosen from a silane compound or a mixture of silane compounds,
(4) decreasing the dioxygen content in the chamber of the reactor (partial
pressure of 1-4 torr and hydrogen flow),
(5) applying a thermal treatment at a temperature of 460°C, wherein the order of
Steps (3) to (5) can be the recited order or another order [0178 lines 8-end].
Claim 4 is rejected. Cao teaches the method for the preparation of the composite
material is implemented in a fixed-bed reactor [0091, 0092].
Claim 14 is rejected as Cao teaches the carbon-based material has a mean
particle size from 0.5 um to 50 um [0076 lines 7-10].
Claim 16 is rejected. Cao teaches the copper catalyst(chloride) and the growth
support material(graphite) are used in a mass ratio of 0.12% [0180].
Claim 17 is rejected as Yao teaches the copper halide (cupric chloride) is used
(as raw material) [0028].
Claim 18 is rejected as Yao teaches the copper halide (cupric chloride) is in
powder form [0028].
Claim 20 is rejected as Cao [0178 lines 8-end], and Yao [0029] both Teach the
precursor compound of the silicon nanowires is silane (SiH4).
Claim 21 is rejected as Cao teaches the thermal treatment is performed at a
temperature of 460°C [0178 lines 8-end].
Claim 22 is rejected as Cao teaches the thermal treatment is applied for 45
minutes [0179].
Claim 26 is rejected. Cao and Yao teach the limitation of claim 1, and Cao also
teaches making an electrode including a current collector comprising preparing a
composite material (SiNW's grown on graphite and copper) and covering at least one
surface of the current collector with it [0097] which is an electrode active material [0118
last sentence].
Claim 27 is rejected. Cao and Yao teach the limitation of claim 26, and Cao also
teaches method of making an energy storage device including a cathode, an anode,
and a separator disposed between the cathode and the anode, wherein the anode is
made by process of claim 26 [0094, 0095, claim 53].
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanqing
Cao et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2015/0086871, here after Cao), Yuan Yao et al (U.
S. Patent Application: 2007/0166899, here after Yao), further in view of Makato Okai et
al (U. S. Patent Application: 2017/0309913, here after Okai).
Claim 15 is rejected. Cao teaches making composite particles comprising silicon
nanowires as anode active material for lithium battery anodes, but does not teach the
growth support is silicon nanoparticles. Okai teaches forming silicon nanowires as
anode active material for lithium battery anodes and teaches growing silicon nanowires
on silicon nanoparticles [abstract, 0054, 0038]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of
Cao and Yao, where the support base material is silicon nanoparticles, because it is
suitable base for growing silicon nanowires and forming active material for anode of
lithium batteries.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanqing
Cao et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2015/0086871, here after Cao), Yuan Yao et al (U.
S. Patent Application: 2007/0166899, here after Yao, further in view of Nohira Toshiyuki
et al (Japanese Patent: 2012041235, here after Toshiyuki).
Claim 24 is rejected. Cao teaches using the SiNW's for making electrode for
lithium batterie. Cao does not teach step of washing the composite material obtained at
the end of step (C). Toshiyuki teaches a method of making electrode for lithium
batteries [page 1 TECHNICAL-FIELD] and teaches washing the SiNW's [page 5 last 2
paragraph]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the invention was made to have a method of Cao and Yao, where the silicon
nanowires composite is washed, because it is suitable to wash them prior to use it for
making electrode for lithium batteries.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanqing
Cao et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2015/0086871, here after Cao), Yuan Yao et al (U.
S. Patent Application: 2007/0166899, here after Yao, further in view of Si-Chen Lee et
al (U. S. Patent Application: 2014/0141318, here after Lee).
Claim 25 is rejected. Cao teaches nanowires can be doped [0059 lines 19-23],
but does not teach the introduction, into the reactor, of at least one doping material. Lee
teaches a method of formation doped SiNW's by introducing doping gas to CVD [0033].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
invention was made to have a method of Cao and Yao, where dopped SiNW's are
made by introducing doping gas to CVD chamber, because it is suitable method of
making doped SiNW's.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 15-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over Olga Burchak et al (WO 2021/018598, here after Burchak), further in view of Yuan
Yao et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2007/0166899, here after Yao).
Claims 1-2, and 19 are rejected. Burchak teaches a method for the preparation of
a composite material comprising metalloid (silicon nanowires) and catalyst, comprising
at least the following stages:
(A) introducing into the chamber of a reactor a solid/solid mixture of
a catalyst solid particle (gold nanoparticles) [page 11 lines 5-6], and a growth support in
powder form (polymer fibers) [page 9 second paragraph, lines 22-23, page 11 lines 24-
25, page 17 lines 26-28],
(B) growing silicon nanowires(metalloid) in the chamber of the reactor, from at
least one precursor compound of the silicon nanowires chosen selected from a silane
compound or a mixture of silane compounds [page 13 lines 1-30], and
(C) recovering the product [page 8 lines 9-16]. Burchak teaches the catalyst is
metal such as gold particles, and not copper. Yao teaches a method of depositing silicon nanowires on a substrate, where catalyst is copper rather than gold to reduce the cost [abstract, 0004]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Burchak where the catalyst is copper catalyst rather than gold, because it less expensive. Yao also teaches forming copper catalyst particles from CuCl2 particles [0028]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Burchak and Yao and mix CuCl2 with polymer fiber to form mixture of support and catalyst for formation of SiNW's, because it is suitable precursor for copper catalyst.
Claim 3 is rejected as Burchak teaches step (B) comprises:
(3) introducing, into the chamber of the reactor, at least one precursor compound
of the silicon nanowires chosen from a silane compound or a mixture of silane compounds,
(4) decreasing the dioxygen content in the chamber of the reactor (vacuumed
and N2),
(5) applying a thermal treatment at a temperature of 430°C, wherein the order of
Steps (3) to (5) can be the recited order or another order [page 33 lines 26-end].
Claims 5-6 are rejected as Burchak teaches the growth support is carbonaceous
polymer fibers [page 33 line14, page 10 lines 22-28].
Claim 15 is rejected as Burchak teaches growing on silicon nanoparticles [page
39 last line].
Claim 16 is rejected. Burchak teaches the catalyst and the growth support
material is used in a mass ratio of 0.01% [page 15 lines 23-26].
Claim 17 is rejected as Yao teaches the copper halide (cupric chloride) is used
(as raw material) [0028].
Claim 18 is rejected as Yao teaches the copper halide (cupric chloride) is in
powder form [0028].
Claim 20 is rejected as Burchak teaches [page 13], and Yao [0029] both Teach
the precursor compound of the silicon nanowires comprising silane.
Claim 21 is rejected as Burchak teaches the thermal treatment is performed at a
temperature of 430°C [page 33 lines 26-end].
Claim 22 is rejected as Burchak teaches the thermal treatment is applied for 60
minutes [page 33 lines 26-end].
Claim 23 is rejected as Burchak teaches a post-treatment step in order to
transform (also) organics resulting from the precursor compound of the silicon
nanowires into carbon materials [page 33 lines 9-15].
Claim 24 is rejected as Burchak teaches washing the composite material
obtained [page 18 lines 15-18].
Claim 25 is rejected as Burchak teaches introducing a doping material into the
reactor [page 114 last 3 lines].
Claim 26 is rejected. Burchak teaches making an electrode including a current
collector comprising preparing a composite and covering at least one surface of the
current collector with it which is an electrode active material [claim 15].
Claim 27 is rejected. Burchak teaches method of making an energy storage
device including a cathode, an anode, and a separator disposed between the cathode
and the anode, wherein the anode is made by process of claim 26 [preparation of a coil
cell, page 41, page 42].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/09/25, with respect to 35 U.S.C 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C 112(b) of claims 1-6, and 14-27 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/09/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Cao teaches CuCl and CuCl2 as precursors in plating bath for formation of copper catalyst nanoparticles and Cao does not teach copper halide as catalyst for growth of silicon nanowires. The examiner disagrees, in fact both of Cao [0007], and Yao [0024] teach growing silicon nanowires on silicon dioxide(silica) substrate with copper particle catalyst and Yao also teaches decomposition of CuCl2 and form copper catalyst particles on the substrate [0028]. Therefore, in both Cao and Yao copper chloride results in formation of copper particles, and an ordinary skill in art would substitute dry mixing of CuCl substituted for wet process of Cao with expectation of success.
The applicant argues Burchak teaches catalyst is metal(gold) nanoparticles, and not CuCl, however Yao also teaches catalysts are metal particles (Cu) obtained from CuCl [0028].
The applicant further argues regarding combination of Burchak and Yao that Yao is related to flat substrate (although paragraphs 0024-0025 do not teach the substrate is flat) and not in powder form, however change in shape is a choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed substrate was significant [MPEP 2144.IV.B].
The applicant further argues regarding combination of Burchak and Yao that Yao is related to flat substrate (although paragraphs 0024-0025 do not teach the substrate is flat) and not in powder form. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Burchak teaches the substrate is in form of particles(fibers).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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.
/TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718