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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant election in the reply on 7/16/26 is acknowledged. Nonetheless, the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “a plurality of laminate patterns” and “a plurality of electrode active material patterns”. It is not clear if the laminate patterns and active material patterns are inclusive of the laminate pattern and active material pattern recited in claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eda et al. (JPH11233144, of record, see attached machine translation for citations) in view of Shin ‘987 et al. (US 2011//0135987), or alternatively Eda in view of Shin ‘987 and further in view of Carlson (US 7066971)
As to claim 1, Eda discloses a method for manufacturing an electrode-integrated separator (figs 2-3) for a lithium secondary battery, the method comprising: providing a carrier film 3a having a release layer (carrier film peels off - thus release layer required, para 6-7) disposed thereon (para 16-18, fig 2-3); forming a laminate layer 3, the laminate layer comprising an adhesive layer (para 7-8, 17-19, layer 3 causes bonding via heat) on the release layer of the carrier film (para 16-20, fig 3); forming an electrode active material layer 2b on a metal substrate (para 15) 2a of an electrode current collector 2a (para 15-20, fig 3); laminating the carrier film and the metal substrate so that the adhesive layer and the electrode active material layer contact each other (para 15-20, fig 3); and transferring the laminate layer with the adhesive onto the electrode active material layer (para 18, fig 3, and removing (peeling) the carrier film having the release layer disposed thereon (para 7-8 15-20 fig 2-3).
Eda does not expressly disclose the laminate layer with the adhesive layer is an adhesive pattern layer and a porous layer pattern sequentially stacked with the adhesive layer pattern. Furthermore, Eda does not expressly disclose the electrode active material layer is an electrode active material layer pattern.
Shin ‘987 discloses a method of making a separator-electrode comprising a porous pattern layer 40 (para 13, 36) sequentially stacked with an adhesive pattern layer (addition binder layer of 40 – fig 1a -1h, 3b para 38 , 54; fig 1, para 24-29; patterned layers shown in figs 1a-1h, specifically 1a-1b, 3b). Shin ‘987 further discloses the electrode active material layer 20 is an electrode active material layer pattern (figs 1a-1h, 3b-3d, para 30-41, 48-55)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Eda such that the laminate layer with the adhesive layer is an adhesive pattern layer and a porous layer pattern sequentially stacked with the adhesive layer pattern, the electrode active material layer is an electrode active material layer pattern; and wherein the porous pattern layer and the adhesive pattern layer are transferred in the transferring step, as such improves the arrangement and alignment of the layers as taught by Shin ‘987 above (para 9-11). Additionally, the porous layer pattern prevents a short between the electrode active pattern layers (para 34).
If it is not taken a release layer is inherently disposed upon the carrier layer of Eda, the following rejection is set forth:
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Eda such that a release layer is disposed upon the carrier layer as taught by Carlson (carrier 2, C14, L5 – C15, L9; C21, L45 – C22, L10) as such promotes enhanced release characteristics.
As to claim 2, Eda as modified by Shin ‘987 and Carlson discloses the method comprising the carrier film 40 (Shin ‘987) includes a plurality of laminate patterns including the porous layer pattern and the adhesive layer pattern (as disclosed by Eda and Shin ‘987 above) disposed on the release layer (Carlson), and the metal substrate (Eda discloses metal collector as detailed above, Shin ‘987 current collector metal, para 61) includes a plurality of electrode active material layer patterns disposed thereon (as disclosed by cited portions of Shin ‘987), the laminating is performed under a condition where a center of an adhesive layer unit forming the adhesive layer pattern is positioned coaxially with a center of an electrode active material layer unit forming the electrode active material layer pattern (Shin ‘987, figs 1a-1h, 3d, associated text).
As to claim 5, Carlson discloses the the surface energy of the release layer effects the adhesion to the separator during processing as well as the desired release characteristics (C21, L45-65). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for the release layer to have a surface energy of 15 dyn/cm to 30 dyn/cm as one would have achieved such by performing routine experimentation to achieve only the expected results.
As to claim 11, the adhesive layer pattern includes polyvinylidene fluoride (Eda, para 8).
As to claim 12, Eda as modified by Shin ‘987 discloses the transferring of the porous layer pattern and the adhesive layer pattern onto the electrode active material layer pattern is carried out under heating and pressing (Eda, para 11, 15-18)
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eda, Shin ‘987 and Carlson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aramaki et al (US 20140027643).
As to claim 3, Aramaki discloses: confirming a lamination position of the electrode active material layer pattern, the confirming including visually confirming the lamination position through the carrier film having the release layer disposed thereon and the laminate pattern (para v74-81). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Eda, Shin ‘987 and Carlson by confirming a lamination position of the electrode active material layer pattern before laminating, the confirming including visually confirming the lamination position through the carrier film having the release layer disposed thereon and the laminate pattern as taught by Aramaki above as such enables proper alignment and improves performance (para 80)
As to claim 4, Aramaki discloses the visible light transmittance is a function of material and type of camera. The transmittance effects the ability to detect the alignment, and more than 50% transmittance is preferable. Thus, it would have obvious for the carrier film and the laminate pattern to each have a light transmittance of visible light with a wavelength of 550 nm in a range of 40% or more as such is a design choice that enables optimal detection of alignment.
Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eda, Shin ‘987 and Carlson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shin ‘108 et al (US 20180309108).
As to claims 6, and 8-9, Shin ‘108 discloses an electrode-separator wherein the porous layer includes a polymer binder of polyvinylidene fluoride (para 30) and SrTiO3 inorganic fine particles (para 62) dispersed on the polymer binder (para 7-19. 25, 48).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Eda, Shin ‘987 and Carlson such that the porous layer pattern includes a polyvinylidene fluoride polymer binder and SrTiO3 inorganic fine particles dispersed in the polymer binder as taught by Shin ‘108 above as such increases bonding strength and durability (para 19).
As to claim 7, Shin ‘108 discloses the porous layer pattern includes the inorganic fine particles in a range of 10 to 99% (para 60) by weight based on a total weight of the porous layer, and the porous layer includes the polymer binder in a range of 1 to 90% (para 9) by weight based on the total weight of the porous layer.
As to claim 10, Shin ‘108 discloses the fine particles having a size of between 0.001 µm to 10 µm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ whose telephone number is (571)272-6038. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9-6.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 571-270-5038. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T SCHATZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights