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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 1, 3-9 and 18 in the reply filed on 07/02/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 2 and 10-17 stand withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected film, laminate and method there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/02/2026.
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 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2015083389 (hereinafter referred to as ‘389) in view of Hiroshi et al. (JP2009242631).
Regarding claims 1 and 5-6, ‘389 teaches discloses a positive electrode which occludes and releases lithium, a negative electrode which occludes and releases lithium, a nonaqueous electrolytic solution containing a lithium salt, and a separator sandwiched between the positive
electrode and the negative electrode are mixed with lithium ion 2. In the secondary battery, the separator includes a first separator layer and a second separator layer, the second separator layer includes inorganic particles, and the second separator layer includes inorganic particles. The coverage ratio of the separator layer to the surface is 30% or more and 90% or less (claim 1), wherein the resin component is a polyolefin (claim 3) and wherein the resin component is polypropylene (claim 4). ‘389 teaches discloses that the second separator layer containing polypropylene film and titanium oxide was formed (example 1) and that specific examples include alumina (Al2O3) and titanium oxide particles. ‘389 is silent regarding the claim X1T and average roughness and properties. However, Hiroshi et al. teaches a film which contains polyolefin resin and inorganic particles, has a puncture strength of 2.4 N / 20 um or more, a porosity of 50% or more and 90% or less, a shrinkage ratio in the width direction at 140 C. of 33% or less(claim 1), wherein the content of the inorganic particles is 30% by mass or more and 70% by mass or less(claim 4) and wherein the polyolefin resin contains polypropylene in a proportion of 1% by mass to 50% by mass(claim 8) in order to improve strength and reduce shrinkage in a particular direction. Therefore, the claimed X1T at 1% at the claimed temperature is taught in the claimed range and Hiroshi et al. teach biaxially stretching with more stretching in one direction than the other and therefore possesses the claimed shrinkage ratio at the claimed temperature in the X1 direction. Hiroshi et al. also teaches the inorganic particles being silicon oxide(claim 6). Examples of the inorganic particles include oxide ceramics such as alumina, silica (silicon oxide), titania, zirconia, magnesia, ceria, yttria, zinc oxide, iron oxide, and nitride such as silicon nitride, titanium nitride, and boron nitride. Ceramics, silicon carbide, calcium carbonate, aluminum sulfate, aluminum hydroxide, potassium titanate, talc, kaolin clay, kaolinite, halloysite, pyrophyllite, montmorillonite, sericite, mica, amicite, bentonite, asbestos, zeolite And ceramics such as calcium silicate, magnesium silicate, diatomaceous earth, and silica sand, and glass fiber. These can be used alone or in combination of two or more. Among these, silica, alumina, and titanium are more preferable from the viewpoint of electrochemical stability. Silica is particularly preferable(paragraph 0015). It is noted that Hiroshi et al. also teaches motivation to have a smooth surface (i.e. lower average roughness) in order to long term reliability and therefore it would have been obvious to arrive at the claimed average roughness. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the X1T and average roughness as taught by Hiroshi et al. in ‘389 in order to improve strength and reduce shrinkage in a particular direction and long term reliability and arrive at the claimed invention.
Claims 3-4, 7-8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2015083389 (hereinafter referred to as ‘389) in view of Hiroshi et al. (JP2009242631) in view of Shinji et al. (JP2000302887).
Regarding claims 3-4, 7 and 18, The previous combination is silent regarding the claimed dimensions of the particles. However, Shinji et al. teaches particle aspect ratio in the claimed range oriented as claimed and the length of the short side is in the claimed range in order to decrease shrinkage [pg. 2]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the claimed dimensions as taught by Shinji et al. in the previous combination in order to decrease shrinkage and arrive at the claimed invention. The claimed properties of light transmittance are inherent to the previous combination given the claimed type of metal particles and aspect ratio are taught.
Regarding claim 8, the previous combination is silent regarding the claimed peak melting temperature. However, Shinji et al. teaches peak melting temperature of polypropylene film is in the claimed range according to the claimed DSC measurement in order to provide heat resistance [pg. 2]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the peak melting temperature of Shinji et al. in order to provide heat resistance and arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2015083389 (hereinafter referred to as ‘389) in view of Hiroshi et al. (JP2009242631) in view of Chen et al. (CN 109971076).
Regarding claim 9, the previous combination is silent regarding the claimed* value. However, Chen et al. teaches b* value of polypropylene in the claimed range in order to improve yellowing resistance. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the b* value of as taught by Chen et al. in the previous combination in order to improve yellowing resistance and arrive at the claimed invention.
Prior Art Not Used but Relevant
CN 106795302 teaches polypropylene film with shrinkage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN MCKINNON whose telephone number is (571)272-6116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday generally 8:00am-5:00pm 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/Shawn Mckinnon/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights