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
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 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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KAWAKAMI et al (WO 2020218250).
Claim 1: Kawakami teaches a carbonaceous material having a sulfur element content measured by the NDIR method (“SNDIR”) being 2 % mass or less (translation copy, page 3, 1st paragraph). Kawakami does not measure the sulfur element content by the XPS method (“SXPS”). However, the ratio of SXPS/ SNDIR is expected to fall within the claimed range, i.e. 0.20 to 0.78, because the method of making the carbonaceous of Kawakami is essentially identical to the method exemplified in Example 1 of the instant specification. Compare Example 2 of Kawakami (Translation Copy, page 12, last paragraph and page 13, first paragraph) to Example 1 of the instant specification (pages 40-41, paragraph 0095). Note: Example 2 of Kawakami is identical to Example 1 except in the second carbonization step, the firing temperature is raised to 1200oC (see translation copy, page 13, first paragraph). All steps are identical except that the flow rate of nitrogen in Kawakami is 10L/min as opposed to 5 L/min of the instant disclosure and the initial heating temperature (first carbonization step) is 600oC instead of 400oC. However, the flow rate and the initial heating temperature in Example 1 of Kawakami are the same as those in Example 6 of the instant disclosure (page 42, penultimate paragraph). In addition, in Example 2, the second carbonation step, the firing temperature is set to 1200oC (translation copy, page 13, first paragraph), which is also the same firing temperature of the Example 6 of the instant disclosure. Therefore, it is expected that the ratio of SXPS/ SNDIR of the carbonaceous material of Kawakami falls within the claimed range of 0.20 to 0.78. With regards to the BET specific surface area, as shown in Table 1, the BET specific surface area of the carbonaceous material of Example 2 of Kawakami is 5.93 m2/g (Page 21, Table 1, Example 2) which is well within the claimed range of 40 m2/g or less.
Claim 2: The SNDIR of the carbonaceous material of Kawakami is reported as 1.05 % (Page 21, Table 1, Example 2) which is well within the claimed range of 2.00% by mass or less.
Claim 3: Kawakami does not measure SXPS; however, as discussed in claim 1 above, it is expected that the value of SXPS is within the claimed range because Example 2 of Kawakami is essentially identical to the Example 1 and Example 6 of the instant disclosure.
Claim 4: The carbonaceous material of Kawakami has a BET specific
surface area of 5.93 m2/g (Page 21, Table 1, Example 2) which is well within the claimed range of 1.0 m²/g or more.
Claim 5: The carbonaceous material of Kawakami has a volume-average particle size of 7.64 µm (Page 21, Table 1, Example 2) which is well within the claimed range of 2 µm to 40 µm.
Claim 6: The carbonaceous material of Kawakami has an interplanar
spacing d₀₀₂ of a (002) plane of 3.86 Ao (Page 21, Table 1, Example 2) which is well within the claimed range of 3.75 Å to 3.95 Å.
Claim 7: Kawakami does not report the half-value width of a D band near 1360 cm⁻¹ in a Raman spectrum of the carbonaceous material; however, as discussed in claim 1 above, it is expected that value falls within the claimed range because the method of making the carbonaceous material of Kawakami is essentially identical to the method disclosed in the instant specification. In addition, the BET specific surface area, the volume-average particle size and the interplanar spacing D002 as claimed are all met by the teaching of Kawakami (see claims 4-6 above). Therefore, it is expected that the half-value width of the carbonaceous material of Kawakami falls within the claimed range.
Claim 8: Kawakami reports the true density measured by the butanol method, rBt, (translation copy, page 10); however, Kawakami does not measure the density by the helium method, rHe. However, as discussed in claim 1 above, it is expected that the ratio of rBt /rHe falls within the claimed range because the method of making the carbonaceous material of Kawakami is essentially identical to the method disclosed in the instant specification. In addition, the BET specific surface area, the volume-average particle size and the interplanar spacing D002 as claimed are all met by the teaching of Kawakami (see claims 4-6 above). Therefore, it is expected that the ratio of rBt /rHe falls within the claimed range.
Claims 9 and 10: Kawakami teaches an electrode comprising the carbonaceous material discussed above and a battery comprising the electrode (translation copy, page 8, penultimate full paragraph).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOA (Holly) LE whose telephone number is (571)272-1511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 10:00 am to 7:00 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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
HOA (Holly) LE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/HOA (Holly) LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788