DETAILED ACTION
Final
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 04/05/2026 is entered and acknowledged by the Examiner. Claims 1 and 13 have been amended. Claims 4, 5, 10, 12, and 18 have been canceled. Claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, 13-17, and 19 are currently pending in the instant application.
The rejection of claims 1-3, 6-17, and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koyama (WO 2021201003 Al) in view of Lee (US 2015/0364766 A1) is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6-9, 11, 13-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koyama (WO 2021201003 Al) in view of Lee (US 2015/0364766 A1), and further in view of US 2021/0005893 A1 (hereinafter Kim).
Koyama and Lee are relied upon as set forth in the Office action mailed on 10/17/2025 at pages 4-7.
Koyama and Lee did not disclose a feature of “a weight ratio of (i) the cellulose-based compound having a weight average molecular weight of 100,000 g/mol or less and (ii) the conductive polymer is 1:0.25 to 1:2” as required in amended claim 1.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses an electrode active material slurry composition for a lithium ion battery (See [0001]) comprises a cellulose-based compound (CMC) having a weight average molecular weight of 50,000-4,000,000 g/mol and conductive polymers such as PEDOT to improve cycle characteristics (See Abstract; [0023] and [0066]). The lower limit of molecular weight of the cellulose-based compound disclosed by Kim overlaps with the claimed cellulose-based compound having a molecular weight of 100,000 g/mol or less. Kim discloses a weight ratio of conductive polymer PEDOT to cellulose-based compound CMC is 95:5 to 5:95 (See [0085]). Kim also exemplify a mixture including 5.6 grams of CMC and 2.98 grams of EDOT (See [0120]). The weight ratio of CMC:EDOT (or CMC:PEDOT) is within the weight ratio recited in amended claim 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to formulate an electrode slurry composition of Koyama and Lee to have a weight ratio of cellulose to conductive polymer within the range of 95:5 to 5:95 in order to improve cycling characteristics as suggested by Kim.
In view of the foregoing, the above claims have failed to patentably distinguish over the applied art.
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) above have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
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 KHANH TUAN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8082. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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.
/KHANH T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights