DETAILED ACTION
Claims 21-42 are presented for examination.
The instant application is a continuation of application 16/674224, issued as US 12,040,478, issued on July 16, 2024.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A.1 and B.1 in the reply filed on August 17, 2026 is acknowledged.
On further review of the art, the election requirements of Species Sets A and B are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because the limitation “wherein more rigid material comprises copper coated with carbon” should include an article, such as e.g. “wherein the more rigid material comprises copper coated with carbon,” similar to that provided in claim 27.
Claim 32 is objected to because the article in the limitation “a thicker current collector is 6 µm thick or greater” (emphasis added) should be “the” or equivalent, since it depends from claim 31, which claims “an expansion of the anode is more anisotropic with a thicker current collector….” Appropriate correction is respectfully required.
Claim 34 is objected to because the article in the limitation “a thicker current collector is 10 µm thick or greater” (emphasis added) should be “the” or equivalent, since it depends from claim 32, which claims “a thicker current collector is 6 µm thick or greater,” and claim 31, which claims “an expansion of the anode is more anisotropic with a thicker current collector….” Appropriate correction is respectfully required.
Claim 36 is objected to because the article in the limitation “a thicker current collector” (emphasis added) should be “the” or equivalent, since it depends from claim 34, which claims “a thicker current collector is 10 µm thick or greater” (emphasis added), from claim 32, which claims “a thicker current collector is 6 µm thick or greater,” and claim 31, which claims “an expansion of the anode is more anisotropic with a thicker current collector….” Appropriate correction is respectfully required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 25, 28-29, and 33-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The latest set of claims, including newly added claims 21-42, are filed on August 17, 2026, are filed subsequent to the July 15, 2024 initial filing, noting the initially filed claims 1-21 are cancelled.
Regarding claim 25, the limitation “selected from a plurality of different types or options for the copper-based material” in “ the copper-based material is selected from a plurality of different types or options for the copper-based material” does not appear to have support in the initial disclosure.
In the event appropriate support is provided in the initial filing, the examiner respectfully requests that the information be filed with pinpoint citation and associated description.
Regarding claim 28, from which claim 29 depends, the limitation “more rigid material comprises copper coated with carbon.” (emphasis added) does not appear to have support in the initial disclosure, noting that while there does appear to be support for copper coated with carbon (e.g. instant specification, at e.g. ¶0048), there does not appear to be support for it being the claimed “more rigid material.” See also Id, at e.g. ¶0059, which indicates nickel is a “more rigid material,” and further noting that while the rigid property of copper coated with carbon is not expressly taught, it teaches copper is a “less rigid current collector.”
In the event appropriate support is provided in the initial filing, the examiner respectfully requests that the information be filed with pinpoint citation and associated description.
Regarding claim 29, the limitation “an expansion of the anode in lateral directions is less than 0.5% for the copper coated with carbon” (emphasis added) does not appear to have support in the initial disclosure.
In the event appropriate support is provided in the initial filing, the examiner respectfully requests that the information be filed with pinpoint citation and associated description.
Regarding claim 33, from which claims 34-36 depend, the limitation “the lateral expansion of the anode is less than 5% with a 6 µm current collector” (emphasis added) does not appear to have support in the initial disclosure.
In the event appropriate support is provided in the initial filing, the examiner respectfully requests that the information be filed with pinpoint citation and associated description.
Regarding claim 35, from which claims 35-36 depend, the limitation “the lateral expansion of the anode is less than 2% with a 10 µm thick current collector” (emphasis added) does not appear to have support in the initial disclosure.
In the event appropriate support is provided in the initial filing, the examiner respectfully requests that the information be filed with pinpoint citation and associated description.
Regarding claim 38, from which claims 39-42 depend, the limitation “the roughness related features are based on one or more characteristics of particles in the active material” (emphasis added) does not appear to have support in the initial disclosure.
In the event appropriate support is provided in the initial filing, the examiner respectfully requests that the information be filed with pinpoint citation and associated description.
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.
Claims 21-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonhomme et al (US 2018/0198114).
Regarding independent claim 21, Bonhomme teaches a lithium-ion battery, wherein said battery has an anode with a film comprising a pyrolyzed composite of silicon active material, graphite, and polymer carbon, wherein said pyrolyzed composite is engineered so that said silicon active material may expand while maintaining good adhesion and electrical contact with the rest of the electrode via said pyrolyzed polymer, thereby providing for expansion of anode active material and a metal current collector without significant failure of said anode (e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 63-64, 67, 69, 74, 77, 103, 131-132, 153, 181, and 188), said battery comprising:
(i) a cathode (e.g. ¶¶ 0003, 64, 68, 81, and 188);
(ii) a polymer separator sheet and a nonaqueous electrolyte (e.g. ¶¶ 0008-09, 11, 17, 74-75, 160, 162, 170, and 188); and,
(iii) said anode, wherein said anode comprising:
(iii.a) said metal current collector composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon,
wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm;
wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector; and,
wherein said electrode attachment substance layer may be composed of e.g. polyamideimide, polyvinylidene fluoride, or polyacrylic acid,
wherein adhesion between said film containing said Si active material to said current collector may be improved by using said electrode attachment substance layer between said collector and said film and/or a lamination process that adheres film to said collector with said layer; and, said expansion in the x-y plane of said film may be reduced to within a range of about 0% to 10%—as opposed to the thickness direction (e.g. ¶¶ 0006, 11, 18-23, 65-67, 86, 109, 116, 135, 145, 153, and 156 plus e.g. Figures 24-26); and,
(iii.b) said film comprising a composite monolithic carbonaceous structure with said silicon active material, said film adhered to said collector via said layer,
wherein said silicon active material is present in an amount of 50-70 wt% or 60-80 wt%;
wherein said monolithic carbonaceous structure is formed from pyrolyzed polymer precursor material, such as pyrolyzed polyimide, PVDF, or PAI; and,
wherein said pyrolyzed composite of silicon active material and polymer carbon applied on said collector by a method of first pyrolyzing a precursor of said composite to form a solid film and then applying said pyrolyzed solid film to said collector to form said anode by roll-pressing with or without heat
(e.g. ¶¶ 0007, 11, 18-25, 64-66, 69, 71-76, 107, 103-112, 116-117, 127-132, 149-150, 156, and 182 plus e.g. Figures, 1, 10, and 35),reading on “battery,” said battery comprising:
(1) said cathode (e.g. supra), reading on “a cathode;”
(2) said polymer separator sheet and a nonaqueous electrolyte (e.g. supra), reading on “an electrolyte;” and,
(3) said anode (e.g. supra), reading on “an anode,” said anode comprising:
(3a) said metal current collector composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon,
wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm;
wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector; and,
wherein said electrode attachment substance layer may be composed of e.g. polyamideimide, polyvinylidene fluoride, or polyacrylic acid (e.g. supra), said collector with said layer, wherein adhesion between said film containing said Si active material to said current collector may be improved by using said electrode attachment substance layer between said collector and said film and/or a lamination process that adheres film to said collector with said layer; and, said expansion in the x-y plane of said film may be reduced to within a range of about 0% to 10%—as opposed to the thickness direction (e.g. supra), reading on “the anode comprising: a current collector”
(3b) said film comprising a composite monolithic carbonaceous structure with said silicon active material, said film adhered to said collector via said layer, wherein said silicon active material is present in an amount of 50-70 wt% or 60-80 wt%; wherein said monolithic carbonaceous structure is formed from pyrolyzed polymer precursor material, such as pyrolyzed polyimide, PVDF, or PAI; and, wherein said pyrolyzed composite of silicon active material and polymer carbon applied on said collector by a method of first pyrolyzing a precursor of said composite to form said solid film and then applying said pyrolyzed solid film to said collector to form said anode by roll-pressing with or without heat (e.g. supra), reading on “the anode comprises … an active material on a surface of the current collector,”
wherein said metal current collector composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon, wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm; and, wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector, wherein said electrode attachment substance layer may be composed of e.g. polyamideimide, polyvinylidene fluoride, or polyacrylic acid (e.g. supra), said collector with said layer, wherein adhesion between said film containing said Si active material to said current collector may be improved by using said electrode attachment substance layer between said collector and said film and/or a lamination process that adheres film to said collector with said layer; and, said expansion in the x-y plane of said film may be reduced to within said range of about 0% to 10%—as opposed to the thickness direction
(e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitations “one or more characteristics of the current collector ensure meeting particular expansion criteria … the one or more characteristics comprise at least material of the current collector” and “the expansion criteria comprise expanding less in one of x-y directions and z-direction while expanding more in other one of the x-y directions and the z-direction, the x-y directions being parallel to the surface of the current collector and perpendicular to a thickness of the active material.”
However, Bonhomme teaches a substantially identical metal current collector (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0013, 22, 28-35, 39-49, 53, and 56-59), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01;
Alternatively, in the event Bonhomme is interpreted to expand equally in the x-, y-, and z-directions, such an interpretation is sufficiently close to the scope of limitations “less” and “more” in the limitation “the expansion criteria comprise expanding less in one of x-y directions and z-direction while expanding more in other one of the x-y directions and the z-direction, the x-y directions being parallel to the surface of the current collector and perpendicular to a thickness of the active material” since even a scintilla of difference reads on “less” and “more,” to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of said limitation, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claim 22, Bonhomme teaches the battery of claim 21, wherein said film comprising said composite monolithic carbonaceous structure with said silicon active material, said film adhered to said collector via said layer, wherein said silicon active material is present in said amount of 50-70 wt% or 60-80 wt%; and, wherein said monolithic carbonaceous structure is formed from pyrolyzed polymer precursor material, such as pyrolyzed polyimide, PVDF, or PAI (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “the active material comprises a silicon content of 50% or more by weight.”
Regarding claim 23, Bonhomme teaches the battery of claim 21, wherein said metal current collector may be composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon (e.g. supra), reading on “the current collector comprises a copper foil.”
Regarding claims 24-29, Bonhomme teaches the battery of claim 21, wherein said metal current collector may be composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon,
wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm;
wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector; and,
wherein said electrode attachment substance layer may be composed of e.g. polyamideimide, polyvinylidene fluoride, or polyacrylic acid, wherein adhesion between said film containing said Si active material to said current collector may be improved by using said electrode attachment substance layer between said collector and said film and/or a lamination process that adheres film to said collector with said layer; and, said expansion in the x-y plane of said film may be reduced to within said range of about 0% to 10%—as opposed to the thickness direction
(e.g. supra), reading on “the material of the current collector comprises more rigid material…” (claim 26); “the more rigid material comprises nickel” (claim 27); and, “more rigid material comprises copper coated with carbon.” (claim 28), plus establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “an expansion of the anode in lateral directions is less than 0.5% for the copper coated with carbon” (claim 29), but does not expressly teach the limitations “the material of the current collector is configured to ensure that the anode expands less in one of the x-y directions and the z-direction while expanding more in other one of the x-y directions and the z-direction” (claim 24); “an expansion of the anode during operation is configured based on use of copper-based material, and wherein the copper-based material is selected from a plurality of different types or options for the copper-based material” (claim 25); and, “…wherein an expansion of the anode is more anisotropic when the more rigid material is used compared to a current collector comprising less rigid material” (claim 26).
However, Bonhomme teaches a substantially identical metal current collector (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0022, 30-35, 40-46, 48, 53, 56, and 59), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Alternatively, in the event Bonhomme is interpreted to expand equally in the x-, y-, and z-directions, such an interpretation is sufficiently close to the scope of limitations “less” and “more” in the limitation “the expansion criteria comprise expanding less in one of x-y directions and z-direction while expanding more in other one of the x-y directions and the z-direction” since even a scintilla of difference reads on “less” and “more,” to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of said limitation, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claims 30-37, Bonhomme teaches the battery of claim 21, wherein said metal current collector may be composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon,
wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm;
wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector; and,
wherein said electrode attachment substance layer may be composed of e.g. polyamideimide, polyvinylidene fluoride, or polyacrylic acid, wherein adhesion between said film containing said Si active material to said current collector may be improved by using said electrode attachment substance layer between said collector and said film and/or a lamination process that adheres film to said collector with said layer; and, said expansion in the x-y plane of said film may be reduced to within said range of about 0% to 10%—as opposed to the thickness direction
(e.g. supra), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a thicker current collector is 6 µm thick or greater” (claim 32); “a thicker current collector is 10 µm thick or greater” (claim 34); and, “a thicker current collector is 20 µm thick or greater” (claim 36), but does not expressly teach the limitations “the thickness of the current collector is configured to ensure that the anode expands less in one of the x-y directions and the z-direction while expanding more in other one of the x-y directions and the z-direction” (claim 30); “an expansion of the anode is more anisotropic with a thicker current collector, with more anode thickness expansion and less lateral expansion compared to an anode with a thinner current collector” (claim 31); “the lateral expansion of the anode is less than 5% with a 6 µm current collector” (claim 33); “the lateral expansion of the anode is less than 2% with a 10 µm thick current collector” (claim 35); and, “the thickness of the current collector is configured, at least in part, based on the material of the current collector” (claim 37).
However, Bonhomme teaches a substantially identical metal current collector (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0028-35, 39, 49, and 57-59), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Alternatively, in the event Bonhomme is interpreted to expand equally in the x-, y-, and z-directions, such an interpretation is sufficiently close to the scope of limitations “less” and “more” in the limitation “the expansion criteria comprise expanding less in one of x-y directions and z-direction while expanding more in other one of the x-y directions and the z-direction” since even a scintilla of difference reads on “less” and “more,” to establish a prima facie case of obviousness of said limitation, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I).
Regarding claims 38-40, Bonhomme teaches the battery of claim 21, wherein said metal current collector may be composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon,
wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm;
wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector; and,
wherein said electrode attachment substance layer may be composed of e.g. polyamideimide, polyvinylidene fluoride, or polyacrylic acid, wherein adhesion between said film containing said Si active material to said current collector may be improved by using said electrode attachment substance layer between said collector and said film and/or a lamination process that adheres film to said collector with said layer; and, said expansion in the x-y plane of said film may be reduced to within said range of about 0% to 10%—as opposed to the thickness direction
(e.g. supra), reading on “the roughness related features comprise etching features of removed material in the current collector.” (claim 40), but does not expressly teach the limitations “the surface of the current collector comprises roughness related features to account for expansion of the anode in the x-y directions during operation of the battery, and wherein the roughness related features are based on one or more characteristics of particles in the active material” (claim 38) and “the roughness related features are configured based on anisotropic expansion characteristics of the anode” (claim 39).
However, Bonhomme teaches a substantially identical metal current collector (e.g. supra, compared with the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0013, 29, 35, 40-49, 53, and 57-59), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitations, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claims 41-42, Bonhomme teaches the battery of claim 40, wherein said metal current collector may be composed of e.g. copper, aluminum, or nickel, such as a copper foil/sheet collector with an electrode attachment substance layer thereon,
wherein said current collector may be a variety of thicknesses, such as 8 µm, 10 µm, 15 µm, 20 µm, and 21 µm;
wherein said copper foil/sheet current collector may be treated by roughening to improve adhesion of said active material to said collector
(e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitations “the etched features range from 1 to 50 µm across” (claim 41) or “the etched features range from 5 to 50 µm across” (claim 42).
However, differences in shape/proportion do not patentably distinguish the instant invention from the art in the absence of evidence the art would perform differently than the art, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.04(IV) plus e.g. instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0046-47 and 59.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kamath et al (US 2025/0323239);
Canton et al (US 11,728,468);
Browne et al (US 11,450,850);
Brown et al (US 2023/0006198);
Kamath et al (US 2021/0288304), note: abandoned after appeal decision;
Park et al (US 2020/0287202);
Takahata et al (US 2015/0030931); and,
Park et al (US 2014/0166939).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
