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 § 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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada et al.(US Patent 6,413,675) in view of Nishihata et al.(US Publication 2023/0378537).
Harada et al. discloses a battery made of a laminate of negative electrode/solid electrolyte/gel electrolyte/solid electrolyte/positive electrode. The laminate of negative electrode joined with solid electrolyte and solid electrolyte joined with positive electrode are laminated to the gel electrolyte.(Col. 4, ll. 6-10) The reference does not disclose laminating the solid electrolytes on the electrodes instead coating the electrolyte onto the electrodes.(Col. 6, ll. 25-38). Nishihata et al. discloses that forming a film of the electrolyte and then transferring the formed film onto the electrode is a known alternative method of joining and electrode and electrolyte to coating.([0119],[0127]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to join the negative electrode with its electrolyte and the positive electrode with its electrolyte by laminating a preformed sheet since Nishihata et al. does this is a well-know and conventional alternative to coating it on the electrode.([0119].[0127])
Regarding claim 7, the battery is a solid state battery(Abstract). While it does not explicitly state it is a lithium battery, the prior art it is improving on are lithium ion batteries(Col. 21, ll. 38-Col. 2, ll.23) and that the electrolyte of the invention can be used in a lithium ion battery.(Col. 5, ll. 21-22) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to make a lithium ion battery since Harada et al. appears to be directed to improvement in lithium ion batteries.(Col. Col. 21, ll. 38-Col. 2, ll.23, Col. 5, ll. 21-22)
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada et al. and Nishihata et al. as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Kim et al.(KR 10-2023-0073993)
Regarding claim 1, the references cited above do not disclose an intermediate layer between the negative electrode and the electrolyte. Kim et al. discloses it is known to laminate an intermediate layer to the negative electrode and the electrolyte to improve contact between the electrolyte and the electrode(machine translation, example 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to improve contact between the electrolyte and the electrode as taught by Kim et al.(machine translation, example 6)
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada et al., Nishihata et al., and Kim et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kosaka et al.(US Publication 2016/0380301).
Regarding claim 2 and 3, the references cited do not disclose the relative pressures applied in the laminating steps. Kosaka et al. is directed to a similar process of laminating the electrodes to the electrolytes first and then laminating everything together and discloses the pressure of laminating the negative electrode to the electrolyte is 710 MPa or more and is more than the pressure of laminating everything together([0023];[0024];[030];[0032]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have the lamination pressure of laminating the electrolytes to the electrodes to be more than that of bonding everything together and to have it be more than 710 MPa since Kosaka et al. is directed to a similar type bonding process and discloses these are the pressures needed for this type of bonding.
Regarding claim 4 and 5, the references cited do not disclose the relative pressures applied in the laminating steps. Kosaka et al. is directed to a similar process of laminating the electrodes to the electrolytes first and then laminating everything together and discloses the pressure of laminating the positive electrode to the electrolyte is 630 MPa or more and is more than the pressure of laminating everything together([0023];[0024];[030];[0032]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of filing to have the lamination pressure of laminating the electrolytes to the electrodes to be more than that of bonding everything together and to have it be more than 630 MPa since Kosaka et al. is directed to a similar type bonding process and discloses these are the pressures needed for this type of bonding.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARBARA J MUSSER whose telephone number is (571)272-1222. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:30 M-Th; 7:30-3:30 second Fridays.
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.
BARBARA J. MUSSER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1746
/BARBARA J MUSSER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights