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
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by KUBOTA et al., WO 2022162950 (provided in the IDS filed June 27, 2024).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 19 KUBOTA et al. teach a negative electrode material for a lithium-ion secondary battery wherein the negative electrode material is comprised of graphite particles (abstract) that are stacked, therefore meeting the claim limitations for a sheet ([0023], [0109], [0111], [0120], claim 4). Regarding claims 6, 15 and 20, the average particle diameter is 5 mm to 25 mm with 10 mm to 15 mm particularly preferred ([0038]) which clearly anticipates the claimed particle size range. Regarding claims 7 and 16, The specific surface are of the graphite particles is preferably 2.7 m2/g or more and 0.5 m2/g or less, preferably 1.2 m2/g to 2.2 m2/g ([0031]) which clearly anticipates the claimed surface area range.
Regarding the exothermic peak properties and the corresponding heat release measurements, A1, A2 and A3, of the instant claims (claims 1-6, 10-14, 19 and 20), Applicant is reminded of MPEP 2112.01 II., "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. The negative electrode active material of KUBOTA et al. is the same as the claimed negative electrode material. For this reason, it is the position of the Office that KUBOTA et al. teaches an identical negative electrode active material to the preferred negative electrode active material (in non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) as claimed, therefore the claimed properties are expected to be necessarily present, specifically the first, second and third exothermic peaks under the same conditions as claimed. “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established.” In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
In US 2023/0290934 A1 SUTO et al. teach carbonaceous coated graphite particles that exhibit excellent battery properties when used as a negative electrode material for a lithium ion secondary battery where the particles have a specific surface area of 4.0 to 15.0 m2/g (abstract).
In US 2024/0213474 A1, HE et al teach a negative active material that includes a carbon material (abstract).
In US 2023/0420653 A1, ZHENG et al. teach a negative active material that includes composite particles (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARBARA GILLIAM whose telephone number is (571)272-1330. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM& 2nd Friday 7:00 AM - 3:00 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, Srilakshmi Kumar can be reached at 571-272-7769. 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.
BARBARA L GILLIAM
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
