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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 10/22/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-13 drawn to Group I were cancelled. Claims 31-43 are new and will be examined along with the elected group.
Status of the Claims
The amendment submitted 10/22/2025 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 14-43 are pending. Claims 1-13 are cancelled. Claims 31-43 are new. Claims 14-43 are examined herein.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: the “21.” in “the second 21. separator” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 14-20, 24-27, 29, 31-32, and 36-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”).
Regarding claims 14-15, Chen discloses a method of forming an electrochemical cell 200, 500, 700 (Figs. 2, 5, 7), the method comprising: disposing an anode material 210, 510, 710 on an anode current collector 220, 520, 720; disposing a cathode material 230, 530, 730 on a cathode current collector (Figs. 2, 5, 7; [0035], [0069], [0082]); disposing a first separator 250a, 550a, 750a onto the anode material ([0035], [0069], [0082]); disposing a second separator 250b, 550b, 550c, 750c onto the cathode material, wherein the second separator is combined with interlayer 260, 560a, 560b, 760 (“conductive material”); and merging a tab to the interlayer 260, 560a, 560b, 760 (which is combined with the second separator) ([0048], [0079], [0083]).
Regarding claim 16, Chen discloses the method of claim 15. Chen further discloses the interlayer includes a semi-solid electrode layer ([0038]-[0040]) that is applied to the second separator ([0067]). This reads on the claimed coating.
Regarding claim 17, Chen discloses the method of claim 14. Chen further discloses the interlayer comprises hard carbon, graphite, carbon black, and/or other carbon-containing materials ([0038], [0040], [0048]-[0049], [0072], [0076], [0079], [0083]).
Regarding claim 18, modified Chen discloses the method of claim 14. Chen further discloses the interlayer comprises lithium iron phosphate (LFP) or another cathode material ([0043], [0076], [0083]).
Regarding claim 19, Chen discloses the method of claim 14. Chen further discloses a current collector of any other layer may extend between the first separator 550a and the second separator 550b to serve as the third separator 550c and the current collector of the other layer may be formed from aluminum, gold, or platinum ([0079]).
Regarding claim 20, Chen discloses the method of claim 14. Due to the interlayer being merged with the second separator, the second separator is deemed to inherently have an electronic conductivity greater than an electronic conductivity of the first separator by a factor of at least about 10, as defined herein. In this respect, MPEP 2112 sets forth the following:
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
“When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
“Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id.
Regarding claim 24, Chen discloses a method of forming an electrochemical cell 200, 500, 700 (Figs. 2, 5, 7), the method comprising: disposing an anode material 210, 510, 710 on an anode current collector 220, 520, 720; disposing a cathode material 230, 530, 730 on a cathode current collector (Figs. 2, 5, 7; [0035], [0069], [0082]); disposing a first separator 250a, 550a, 750a onto the anode material ([0035], [0069], [0082]); disposing a second separator 250b, 550b, 550c, 750c onto the cathode material; and merging a tab to an interlayer 260, 560a, 560b, 760, wherein the interlayer comprises a conductive material ([0048], [0079], [0083]); and disposing the interlayer between the first separator and the second separator (Figs. 2, 5, 7).
Regarding claim 25, Chen discloses the method of claim 24. Chen further discloses the interlayer comprises hard carbon, graphite, carbon black, and/or other carbon-containing materials ([0038], [0040], [0048]-[0049], [0072], [0076], [0079], [0083]).
Regarding claim 26, modified Chen discloses the method of claim 24. Chen further discloses the interlayer comprises lithium iron phosphate (LFP) or another cathode material ([0043], [0076], [0083]).
Regarding claim 27, Chen discloses the method of claim 24. Chen further discloses a current collector of any other layer may extend between the first separator 550a and the second separator 550b to serve as the third separator 550c and the current collector of the other layer may be formed from aluminum, gold, or platinum ([0079]).
Regarding claim 29, Chen discloses the method of claim 24. Chen discloses in Fig. 5 a second interlayer 560b which is disposed on first interlayer 560a.
Regarding claims 31-32, Chen discloses an electrochemical cell 200, 500, 700 (Figs. 2, 5, 7) comprising: an anode comprising anode material 210, 510, 710 disposed on an anode current collector 220, 520, 720; a cathode comprising a cathode material 230, 530, 730 disposed on a cathode current collector (Figs. 2, 5, 7; [0035], [0069], [0082]); a first separator 250a, 550a, 750a disposed on the anode ([0035], [0069], [0082]); a second separator 250b, 550b, 550c, 750c disposed on the cathode, wherein the second separator is combined with interlayer 260, 560a, 560b, 760 (“conductive material”); and a tab merged with the interlayer 260, 560a, 560b, 760 (which is combined with the second separator) ([0048], [0079], [0083]).
Regarding claim 36, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 31. The instant claim recites a product-by-process limitation (“the conductive material is coated onto the second separator”). In this regard, MPEP 2113 sets forth the following: "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). As to the structure implied by the product-by-process limitation, Chen further the interlayer includes a semi-solid electrode layer ([0038]-[0040]) that is applied to the second separator ([0067]).
Regarding claims 37, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 31. Chen further discloses the interlayer comprises hard carbon, graphite, carbon black, and/or other carbon-containing materials ([0038], [0040], [0048]-[0049], [0072], [0076], [0079], [0083]).
Regarding claim 38, modified Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 31. Chen further discloses the interlayer comprises lithium iron phosphate (LFP) or another cathode material ([0043], [0076], [0083]).
Regarding claim 39, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 31. Chen further discloses a current collector of any other layer may extend between the first separator 550a and the second separator 550b to serve as the third separator 550c and the current collector of the other layer may be formed from aluminum, gold, or platinum ([0079]).
Regarding claim 40, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 31. Due to the interlayer being combined with the second separator, the second separator is deemed to inherently have an electronic conductivity greater than an electronic conductivity of the first separator by a factor of at least about 10, as defined herein. See the sections of MPEP 2112 cited above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as anticipated by US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2022/0006157 A1 (“Nakazawa”).
Regarding claim 21, Chen discloses the method of claim 20. It is deemed that the resistance of the second separator is an inherent characteristic and/or property of the specifically disclosed second separator. In this respect, MPEP 2112 sets forth the following:
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
“When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
“Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. Id.
However, even if the resistance is not inherent it would have been obvious over Nakazawa. Nakazawa discloses a separator for electricity storage devices that includes an active layer (Abstract; [0030]-[0033]). The electrical resistivity of the active layer in the planar direction is higher than 10.0 Ωcm and lower than 105 Ωcm. If the electrical resistivity is 10.0 Ωcm or higher, then dissipation of conduction along the planar direction of the separator between the positive and negative electrodes will be eliminated in the range of the working voltage of the electricity storage device, inhibiting thermal runaway, for example, and markedly improving the safety of the device. Establishing an upper limit allows trapped lithium dendrites to diffuse throughout the active layer without locally accumulating, so that the active layer as a whole can be used as a trap for lithium dendrites and dendrites can be efficiently suppressed during overcharge ([0066]). While the Office acknowledges the difference in the claimed resistance (per unit area) and the resistance of Nakazawa (per unit length), it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the resistance as claimed through routine experimentation for the reasons taught by Nakazawa above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2022/0006157 A1 (“Nakazawa”).
Regarding claim 22, Chen discloses the method of claim 14. Chen discloses the second separator includes a ceramic coated separator ([0026]). Chen is silent regarding the second separator including a binder.
Nakazawa discloses a separator for electricity storage devices (Abstract). The separator comprises an insulating layer including inorganic porous layers comprising inorganic particles (thermally conductive particles) and a resin that binds the inorganic particles ([0089]). The insulating layer ensures electrical insulation ([0089]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the inorganic particles and binder as the ceramic layer to ensure electrical insulation as taught by Nakazawa.
Claims 23, 28, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2019/0044196 A1 (“Kang”).
Regarding claims 23, 28, and 34, Chen discloses the method of claims 14 and 24 and the electrochemical cell of claim 32. Chen discloses the anode material can be lithium metal ([0018]) but is silent regarding the anode includes at least one of zinc metal foil, zinc powder, zinc paste, indium-doped zinc metal, or porous zinc metal.
Kang discloses secondary batteries (Abstract) and teaches the anode may include one or more metals such as lithium and zinc ([0013], [0045]). As to the form of the metal, in Example 2 the anode is a lithium metal foil ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a zinc metal foil as the anode because Kang shown lithium metal and zinc metal to be known alternative anode metals and shows the form of the metal (foil) to be known in the art.
Claims 30 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2006/0040181 A1 (“Kim”).
Regarding claims 30 and 41, Chen discloses the method of claim 29 and the electrochemical cell of claim 31. However, Chen does not expressly disclose a conductive layer disposed on the interlayer, wherein the tab is electrically coupled to the interlayer via the conductive layer [claim 30] or the tab includes a coupling material disposed thereon, the coupling material configured to couple the tab to the second separator [claim 41].
Kim discloses an electrode assembly (Abstract). Kim discloses tabs 26 and 27 can be coupled to conductive layers, in this case a positive uncoated portion 21c and a negative uncoated portion 23c, though various methods, including but not limited to using a conductive adhesive (“conductive layer” or “coupling material”) ([0039]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to couple the tab to the first separator via a coupling material disposed on the tab because Kim shows this to be a known method of coupling a tab to a conductive layer from which one would expect predictable results.
For claim 30: In the combination, the conductive adhesive corresponds to the claimed limitation a conductive layer disposed on the interlayer, wherein the tab is electrically coupled to the interlayer via the conductive layer.
Claims 33 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2015/0171398 A1 (“Roumi”).
Regarding claim 33, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 32. Chen discloses the anode material can be lithium metal ([0018]) but is silent regarding the anode includes at least one of graphite, silicon, or hard carbon.
Roumi discloses an electrochemical cell (Abstract) and further discloses when the cell is a lithium ion cell, the active material of the negative electrode is lithium metal, silicon, a silicon alloy, silicon-graphite or graphite ([0065]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to either add graphite or silicon to the anode material or substitute graphite or silicon for the lithium metal as Roumi shows the materials to be equivalent active materials known in the art for the same purpose.
Regarding claim 43, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 41. Chen discloses the separators comprise pores ([0014]) but does not expressly disclose the pores including a source of lithium ions disposed therein.
Roumi discloses an electrochemical cell (Abstract) and further discloses the concept of providing a source of active ions (for example, lithium) in an electronically conducting layer of the separator. The source of active ions is used to provide active ions to the cell, such as to compensate the ion loss or to make Li-ion cells with non-lithiated electrodes ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a source of lithium ions in the pores as claimed because Roumi discloses this can compensate the ion loss or to make Li-ion cells with non-lithiated electrodes.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2022/0200097 A1 (“Lee”).
Regarding claim 35, Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 32. Chen discloses the anode material can be lithium metal ([0018]) but is silent regarding the anode includes an anode current collector without an anode material disposed thereon.
Lee discloses a solid electrolyte membrane for suppressing the growth of lithium dendrites and an all-solid-state battery comprising the same (Abstract). Lee discloses the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal as a negative electrode active material or a current collector with no negative electrode active material ([0015]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the negative electrode of Chen with the negative electrode comprising a current collector with no negative electrode active material as taught by Lee because Lee shows them to be equivalent negative electrode structures known in the art for the same purpose.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”) in view of US 2022/020009 A1 (“Kim”) as applied to claim 41 above, and further in view of US 2016/0211503 A1 (“Schemberg”).
Regarding claim 42, modified Chen discloses the electrochemical cell of claim 41. Kim discloses a conductive adhesive, as discussed above, but is silent regarding its composition (i.e. the coupling material includes a conductive polymer).
Schemberg discloses a securing device for an electrical arrangement (Abstract). an electrical connection element 4 is coupled with a contact element 3 via an electrically conductive adhesive ([0029]). The electrically conductive adhesive can be a material with inherent electrically conductive properties that is based on or formed by a thermosetting material, for example based on a polyaniline (“conductive polymer”) ([0015]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a conductive polymer as the conductive adhesive because Schemberg discloses it is known in the art as a conductive adhesive and one would expect predictable results from its use.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 14-22, 24-27, 29-33, and 36-42 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of copending Application No. 19/183,493 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are obvious over claims 1-22 of the reference application. While the claims in the reference application are silent to the claimed anode and cathode, it would have been obvious to provide an anode and a cathode because an electrochemical cell is a well known use for separators.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 23, 28, and 34 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of copending Application No. 19/183,493 in view of US 2019/0044196 A1 (“Kang”). Kang discloses secondary batteries (Abstract) and teaches the anode may include one or more metals such as lithium and zinc ([0013], [0045]). As to the form of the metal, in Example 2 the anode is a lithium metal foil ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a zinc metal foil as the anode because Kang shown lithium metal and zinc metal to be known alternative anode metals and shows the form of the metal (foil) to be known in the art.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 35 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of copending Application No. 19/183,493 in view of US 2022/020009 A1 (“Lee”). Lee discloses a solid electrolyte membrane for suppressing the growth of lithium dendrites and an all-solid-state battery comprising the same (Abstract). Lee discloses the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal as a negative electrode active material or a current collector with no negative electrode active material ([0015]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the negative electrode of Chen with the negative electrode comprising a current collector with no negative electrode active material as taught by Lee because Lee shows them to be equivalent negative electrode structures known in the art for the same purpose.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 43 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-22 of copending Application No. 19/183,493 in view of US 2015/0171398 A1 (“Roumi”). Roumi discloses an electrochemical cell (Abstract) and further discloses the concept of providing a source of active ions (for example, lithium) in an electronically conducting layer of the separator. The source of active ions is used to provide active ions to the cell, such as to compensate the ion loss or to make Li-ion cells with non-lithiated electrodes ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a source of lithium ions in the pores as claimed because Roumi discloses this can compensate the ion loss or to make Li-ion cells with non-lithiated electrodes.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 14-16, 18, 20-21, 24, 26, 31-33, 36, 38, and 40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are anticipated by or obvious over the claims in the Patent.
Claims 17, 19, 25, 27, 37, and 39 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2 in view of US 2022/0352597 A1 (“Chen”). Chen discloses the interlayer comprises hard carbon, graphite, carbon black, and/or other carbon-containing materials ([0038], [0040], [0048]-[0049], [0072], [0076], [0079], [0083]). Chen further discloses a current collector of any other layer may extend between the first separator 550a and the second separator 550b to serve as the third separator 550c and the current collector of the other layer may be formed from aluminum, gold, or platinum ([0079]). These modifications would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because they amount to combining prior art element known in the art to yield predictable results.
Claim 22 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2 in view of US 2022/0006157 A1 (“Nakazawa”). Nakazawa discloses a separator for electricity storage devices (Abstract). The separator comprises an insulating layer that ensures electrical insulation, the insulating layer including inorganic porous layers comprising inorganic particles and a resin that binds the inorganic particles ([0089]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the insulating layer of Nakazawa to ensure electrical insulation.
Claims 23, 28, and 34 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2 in view of US 2019/0044196 A1 (“Kang”). Kang discloses secondary batteries (Abstract) and teaches the anode may include one or more metals such as lithium and zinc ([0013], [0045]). As to the form of the metal, in Example 2 the anode is a lithium metal foil ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a zinc metal foil as the anode because Kang shown lithium metal and zinc metal to be known alternative anode metals and shows the form of the metal (foil) to be known in the art.
Claims 29-30 and 41-42 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2 in view of US 2016/0211503 A1 (“Schemberg”). Schemberg discloses a securing device for an electrical arrangement (Abstract). an electrical connection element 4 is coupled with a contact element 3 via an electrically conductive adhesive ([0029]). The electrically conductive adhesive can be a material with inherent electrically conductive properties that is based on or formed by a thermosetting material, for example based on a polyaniline (“conductive polymer”) ([0015]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a conductive polymer because Schemberg discloses it is known in the art as a conductive adhesive and one would expect predictable results from its use.
Claim 35 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2 in view of US 2022/020009 A1 (“Lee”). Lee discloses a solid electrolyte membrane for suppressing the growth of lithium dendrites and an all-solid-state battery comprising the same (Abstract). Lee discloses the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal as a negative electrode active material or a current collector with no negative electrode active material ([0015]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the negative electrode of Chen with the negative electrode comprising a current collector with no negative electrode active material as taught by Lee because Lee shows them to be equivalent negative electrode structures known in the art for the same purpose.
Claim 43 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,100,816 B2 in view of US 2015/0171398 A1 (“Roumi”). Roumi discloses an electrochemical cell (Abstract) and further discloses the concept of providing a source of active ions (for example, lithium) in an electronically conducting layer of the separator. The source of active ions is used to provide active ions to the cell, such as to compensate the ion loss or to make Li-ion cells with non-lithiated electrodes ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a source of lithium ions in the pores as claimed because Roumi discloses this can compensate the ion loss or to make Li-ion cells with non-lithiated electrodes.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Scott Carrico whose telephone number is (571)270-5504. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:15AM-5:45PM Eastern.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
Robert Scott Carrico
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/Robert S Carrico/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727