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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/03/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
The amendment/remarks submitted 12/23/2025 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-4 and 6-15 are pending. Claim 5 is cancelled. Claim 15 is new. Claim 1 is amended. Claims 1-4 and 6-15 are examined herein.
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.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 114144909 A (“Liao” – machine translation of record, 10/17/2025, cited herein) in view of US 2013/0266849 A1 (“Hara”) and US 2015/0349327 A1 (“Hwang”).
Regarding claim 1, Liao discloses a secondary battery ([0031]) comprising a negative electrode sheet (“negative electrode plate”) ([0001]). The negative electrode sheet comprises a negative electrode current collector ([0027]) and a negative electrode material layer (“negative electrode active layer”) disposed on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector ([0006], [0027]). The negative electrode material layer comprises a first active layer, the first active layer comprising graphite particles and a silicon-based composite material (“first silicon-carbon composite”) that includes a porous carbon matrix (“porous carbon substrate”) and nano-silicon particles (“silicon-based material”) in the pores of the carbon matrix ([0006]-[0007], [0023]). There is no disclosure of any carbon coating layer on the graphite particles (see [0023]); therefore, it is deemed that the surface of the first graphite does not include a carbon coating layer.
Liao does not expressly disclose a flatness of the first graphite is greater or equal to 2. Applicant’s definition of flatness in the specification as filed at [0045] is noted: “In this application, the flatness is defined as a ratio of a long diameter to a thickness of a particle, where a smallest dimension is a thickness, a largest dimension is the long diameter, and a dimension in the middle is a short diameter. That is, the flatness of the first graphite refers to a ratio of a long diameter to a thickness of a first graphite particle.”
Hara discloses a negative electrode for a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, the negative electrode comprising a negative-electrode active material layer. The negative electrode active material layer includes: flaky graphite particles (“first graphite”) formed by graphitizing needle coke; particulate graphite particles formed by graphitizing coke; and a binder (Abstract). Hara discloses the ratio of the average particle diameter (d) of the flaky graphite particles 7 in the in-plane direction to the average thickness (c) of the flaky graphite particles 7 (d/c), that is, the aspect ratio may be 6 to 80 ([0081]). When the aspect ratio of the flaky graphite particles 7 is too small, the orientation of the flaky graphite particles 7 is reduced. When the aspect ratio is too large, the surfaces of the flaky graphite particles on which the lithium intercalation and deintercalation reaction occurs are reduced ([0082]). If the flaky graphite particles are not oriented, the flaky graphite particles cannot provide a sufficient packing density and therefore cannot provide a thin layer thickness due to its flaky shape ([0135]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Hara, including the aspect ratio of flaky graphite particles, to increase the orientation of the graphite particles and increase the surfaces of the flaky graphite particles on which the lithium intercalation and deintercalation reaction occurs.
Hara discloses the flaky graphite particles are obtained from coal-based (i.e. natural) or petroleum-based (i.e. artificial) needle coke ([0083]). Modified Liao does not expressly disclose the first graphite comprises artificial graphite and natural graphite, wherein a mass percentage of the natural graphite in the first graphite is less than or equal to 20%.
Hwang discloses a lithium secondary battery including a negative electrode which includes a negative active material including graphite having an average lattice distance (d002) in the range of 3.356 to 3.365 Å (Abstract). The graphite includes a blend of a first graphite (natural graphite) and a second graphite (artificial graphite) in a range of 0:100 to 50:50 ([0026]). In Example 6, the natural graphite is present in an amount of 10% (Table 2). Hwang discloses that as the amount of artificial graphite is increased, the increased amount of the lifetime characteristics was increased ([0088]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the graphite blend of natural and artificial graphite taught by Hwang to increase the lifetime characteristics of the battery.
Regarding claim 2, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. As discussed above, Hara discloses the ratio of the average particle diameter (d) of the flaky graphite particles 7 in the in-plane direction to the average thickness (c) of the flaky graphite particles 7 (d/c), that is, the aspect ratio may be 6 to 80 ([0081]). The flatness would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the flatness disclosed by Hara overlaps the flatness as claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). Furthermore, “[t]he normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.” In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See also In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and MPEP 2144.05. Moreover, as discussed above, Hara provides motivation to optimize the flatness ([0082], [0135]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. The flaky graphite particles of Hara are provided in the form of primary particles (Figs. 2, 9, 11).
Regarding claim 4, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. Hara discloses an average thickness of 1 µm to 2 µm and an average particle diameter in the in-plane direction of 9 µm to 18 µm. When the average thickness and the average particle diameter in the in-plane direction of the flaky graphite particles 7 are too small, the voids between the graphite particles will be so small that the distribution of the electrolytic solution may be blocked. When the average thickness and the average particle diameter in the in-plane direction are too large, the voids between the graphite particles will be so large that the graphite packing rate may be reduced, and the interfaces between the graphite particles and the electrolytic solution may be decreased, reducing the reactivity of the lithium intercalation and deintercalation reaction ([0081]). For these reasons, 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 average particle diameter as taught by Hara.
Regarding claim 6, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. Liao discloses the average particle size Dv50 of the silicon-based composite material is 8 µm ([0016]) and the specific surface area of the silicon-based composite material is 1 m2/g ([0017]). See also [0023] of Liao for a discussion of the mass percentage of the silicon-based composite material.
Regarding claim 7, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. Liao discloses the silicon mass content in the silicon-based composite material is 38% to 60% ([0010]). Therefore, the carbon matrix mass content in the silicon-based composite material is 40% to 62%. This is deemed to disclose the claimed range with sufficient specificity so as to anticipate the claimed range. Alternatively, Liao provides motivation to optimize the amount of the silicon and therefore the amount of the carbon matrix. By controlling the silicon mass content in the silicon-based composite material within the above range, the initial efficiency and cycle performance of the electrochemical device can be improved ([0010]). Liao further disclose the porosity of the silicon-based composite material is 30% to 60% ([0012]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. Liao discloses the mass content of silicon in the silicon-based composite material is 38% to 60% ([0010]). It is the opinion of the Office that Liao discloses the claimed range with sufficient specificity to anticipate the claimed range. Alternatively, even if the disclosed range does not anticipate the claimed range, the claimed range would have been obvious. Liao teaches that by controlling the mass content of silicon in the silicon-based composite material within the above range, the initial efficiency and cycle performance of the electrochemical device can be improved ([0010]). 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 mass percentage of silicon in the silicon-based composite material to improve the initial efficiency and cycle performance of the electrochemical device.
Regarding claim 14, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. Liao does not expressly disclose an electric apparatus comprising the secondary battery. However, Liao discloses it is known in the art that lithium-ion batteries are used in electric vehicles and mobile electronic devices ([0002]). 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 the secondary battery in an electric apparatus such as electric vehicle or a mobile electronic device because such a use is known in the art and would yield predictable results in view of Liao.
Regarding claim 15, Liao discloses a secondary battery ([0031]) comprising a negative electrode sheet (“negative electrode plate”) ([0001]). The negative electrode sheet comprises a negative electrode current collector ([0027]) and a negative electrode material layer (“negative electrode active layer”) disposed on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector ([0006], [0027]). The negative electrode material layer comprises a first active layer, the first active layer comprising graphite particles and a silicon-based composite material (“first silicon-carbon composite”) that includes a porous carbon matrix (“porous carbon substrate”) and nano-silicon particles (“silicon-based material”) in the pores of the carbon matrix ([0006]-[0007], [0023]).
Liao does not expressly disclose a flatness of the first graphite is greater or equal to 2. Applicant’s definition of flatness in the specification as filed at [0045] is noted: “In this application, the flatness is defined as a ratio of a long diameter to a thickness of a particle, where a smallest dimension is a thickness, a largest dimension is the long diameter, and a dimension in the middle is a short diameter. That is, the flatness of the first graphite refers to a ratio of a long diameter to a thickness of a first graphite particle.”
Hara discloses a negative electrode for a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, the negative electrode comprising a negative-electrode active material layer. The negative electrode active material layer includes: flaky graphite particles (“first graphite”) formed by graphitizing needle coke; particulate graphite particles formed by graphitizing coke; and a binder (Abstract). Hara discloses the ratio of the average particle diameter (d) of the flaky graphite particles 7 in the in-plane direction to the average thickness (c) of the flaky graphite particles 7 (d/c), that is, the aspect ratio may be 6 to 80 ([0081]). When the aspect ratio of the flaky graphite particles 7 is too small, the orientation of the flaky graphite particles 7 is reduced. When the aspect ratio is too large, the surfaces of the flaky graphite particles on which the lithium intercalation and deintercalation reaction occurs are reduced ([0082]). If the flaky graphite particles are not oriented, the flaky graphite particles cannot provide a sufficient packing density and therefore cannot provide a thin layer thickness due to its flaky shape ([0135]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Hara, including the aspect ratio of flaky graphite particles, to increase the orientation of the graphite particles and increase the surfaces of the flaky graphite particles on which the lithium intercalation and deintercalation reaction occurs.
Hara discloses the flaky graphite particles are obtained from coal-based (i.e. natural) or petroleum-based (i.e. artificial) needle coke ([0083]). Modified Liao does not expressly disclose the first graphite comprises artificial graphite and natural graphite, wherein a mass percentage of the natural graphite in the first graphite is less than or equal to 2%.
Hwang discloses a lithium secondary battery including a negative electrode which includes a negative active material including graphite having an average lattice distance (d002) in the range of 3.356 to 3.365 Å (Abstract). The graphite includes a blend of a first graphite (natural graphite) and a second graphite (artificial graphite) in a range of 0:100 to 50:50 ([0026]). Hwang discloses that as the amount of artificial graphite is increased, the increased amount of the lifetime characteristics was increased ([0088]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the graphite blend of natural and artificial graphite and optimized the ratio thereof as taught by Hwang to increase the lifetime characteristics of the battery.
Claims 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 114144909 A (“Liao” – machine translation of record, 10/17/2025, cited herein) in view of US 2013/0266849 A1 (“Hara”) and US 2015/0349327 A1 (“Hwang”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2024/0372077 A1 (“Jung”).
Regarding claims 9 and 11, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1. Modified Liao does not expressly disclose the negative electrode active layer further comprises a second active layer; the second active layer is disposed on a surface of the first active layer away from the negative electrode current collector; and the second active layer comprises second graphite.
Jung discloses a negative electrode comprising a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the negative electrode current collector (Abstract). The negative electrode active material layer has a lower layer region and an upper layer region (“second active layer”) disposed on the lower layer region (Abstract; [0040]-[0044]). The lower region comprises primary particles of artificial graphite and the upper layer region comprises secondary particles of artificial graphite and a carbon coating layer disposed on the secondary particles (Abstract; [0045]). The upper layer provides improved quick charging performance ([0038], [0047]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the upper layer region of Jung to improve quick charging performance.
Regarding claim 10, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 9. As discussed above, Jung discloses the upper layer region comprises secondary particles of artificial graphite and a carbon coating layer disposed on the secondary particles (Abstract; [0045]). While Jung is silent regarding the thickness of the carbon coating layer is 10 nm to 300 nm, Jung discloses the carbon coating layer is present in an amount of 0.5-10.0 wt %. When this is satisfied, it is possible to improve quick charging performance of artificial graphite, while ensuring capacity per weight of the negative electrode active material particles ([0059]). Jung further discloses the second active material has a D50 of 5-35 µm. When this is satisfied, the second active material may be dispersed homogeneously in slurry for an upper layer, while providing a battery with improved charging performance ([0060]). 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 thickness of the carbon coating layer through routine experimentation in view of the teachings of Jung regarding the weight percentage of the carbon coating layer and particle size of the graphite.
Regarding claim 12, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 9. Jung does not expressly disclose the second graphite satisfies at least one of features (1) and (2) as claimed. Jung discloses the first active material has a D50 of 3-20 µm ([0020]) and the second active material has a D50 of 5-35 µm ([0021]). The ratio of the D50 of the second and first active materials is therefore between 5/20 and 35/3. This overlaps the claimed range (i.e. less than 1). The relative size of the first graphite and second graphite would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the range disclosed by Jung overlaps the range as claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976). Furthermore, “[t]he normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages.” In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See also In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); and MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 13, modified Liao discloses the secondary battery of claim 9. While Jung does not expressly disclose the second active layer further comprises a second silicon-carbon composite, Liao teaches the silicon-carbon composite is provided to improve the energy density and cycle performance of the electrochemical device and reduce the deformation rate of the electrochemical device after multiple cycles ([0004]) and graphite is provided in the same layer to effectively regulate the specific capacity of the negative electrode material layer ([0023]). Therefore, 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 silicon-carbon composite in the second active layer along with the graphite to improve the energy density and cycle performance of the electrochemical device and reduce the deformation rate of the electrochemical device after multiple cycles while regulating the specific capacity of the negative electrode material layer.
Liao discloses the silicon-based composite material is 15% to 60%. The claimed mass percentage of the second silicon-carbon composite in the second active layer would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because the range taught by Liao overlaps the claimed range and Liao discloses the silicon-carbon composite is provided to improve the energy density and cycle performance of the electrochemical device and reduce the deformation rate of the electrochemical device after multiple cycles.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 6-9, filed 03/03/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4 and 6-14 under 35 USC 103, specifically as to Kim, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2015/0349327 A1 (“Hwang”).
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-6PM ET.
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
Prosecution Insights