DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of Application
This is a Non-final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 06/01/2026. Claims 1, 6, 22, and 24 are currently amended. Claims 5 and 10-15 remain withdrawn. Claims 1-4, 6-8, and 16-25 are pending review in this action.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections in the previous Office Action are withdrawn. New grounds of rejection are presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s request for reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office Action is persuasive, and therefore, the finality of that action is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 13-14, filed 06/01/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 25 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Tatsuno does not teach the specific structural units required by claim 25. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Yoshitake (US 6,933,071 B1).
Applicant argues (p. 12-13) Kashiwagi fails to teach wherein “at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer is distributed in the pores of the substrate” as required by amended claims 1, 22, and 24 because Kashiwagi teaches lyophilic polymer in a coating formed on the surface of the substrate.
This argument is moot as the new ground of rejection relies on Yun to teach the newly added limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, and 16-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 22, and 24 recite “at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer is distributed in the pores of the substrate,” but the instant specification only describes the lyophilic polymer as being positioned at the pores (see [0025], [0141], [0264], and [0268] of published application US 2025/0372815 A1)
Claims 2-3, 6-8, 16-21, 23, and 25 are rejected for depending on rejected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A, the rejections below refer to the machine translation mailed 04/01/2026) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1) and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1; previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Kashiwagi discloses battery cell ([0001]; wound electrode group [0045]), comprising an electrode assembly and an electrolyte ([0013]), wherein the electrode assembly comprises a first electrode plate (positive electrode, [0013]), a second electrode plate (negative electrode, [0013]), and a separator ([0013]), the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate have opposite polarities (positive and negative, [0013]), the separator is disposed between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate ([0013]), the separator comprises a substrate (microporous film, [0022]) and a lyophilic polymer (lithium-ion conductive resin film is adhered to at least one surface of the electrodes or the separator, [0013]; lithium-ion conductive resin film contains HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE copolymer, [0015]), the substrate has pores within the substrate (microporous film, [0022]), the lyophilic polymer comprises a fluorinated polymer (HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE copolymer, [0015]), and the fluorinated polymer is a copolymer comprising at least two structural units represented by formula (AI-3), (AI-6), and (AI-7) (HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE, [0015]).
Kashiwagi teaches the substrate is a microporous film made of polyolefins such as polyethylene and polypropylene ([0022]) and wherein the lyophilic polymer is distributed in a coating on at least one surface of the substrate ([0025]-[0026]), but does not disclose wherein at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer is distributed in the pores of the substrate.
Yun teaches a separator comprising a substrate (porous polyolefin, [0078]) and a polymer (fluorine-based ionomer, [0023]), the substrate has pores within the substrate (first pores, [0021]), and the polymer is distributed in a coating on at least one surface of the substrate and in the pores of the substrate ([0023]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified Kashiwagi by distributing at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer in the pores of the substrate because Yun teaches that doing so allows for adequate ionn conductivity while improving safety ([0033]).
Kashiwagi does not disclose wherein the battery cell satisfies the following formula:
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
, with a unit of g/μm3; and
p1 represents a porosity of the first electrode plate;
v1 represents a total volume of the first electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p2 represents a porosity of the second electrode plate; and
v2 represents a total volume of the second electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p3 represents a porosity of the separator;
v3 represents a total volume of the separator, with a unit of μm3; and
y represents mass of a free electrolyte solution in the battery cell, with a unit of g.
Tanjo teaches a battery cell (secondary battery 1, FIG. 1, [0019]) comprising an electrode assembly (power generating element 4, FIG. 2, [0020]) and an electrolyte (nonaqueous electrolyte, [0018]), wherein the electrode assembly (4) comprises a first electrode plate (positive electrode plate 42, FIG. 2, [0020]), a second electrode plate (negative electrode plate 41, FIG. 2, [0020]), and a separator (43, FIG. 2, [0020]), the first electrode plate (42) and the second electrode plate (41) have opposite polarities, and the separator (43) is disposed between the first electrode plate (42) and the second electrode plate (41).
Tanjo teaches wherein an amount of the free electrolyte solution (extra electrolyte, [0034]) in the battery cell is related to a total pore volume of the electrode assembly (the ratio between the total volume of electrolyte solution, including extra electrolyte solution, to the total pore volume of the electrode assembly, should be greater than 1 and at most 1.7 [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi and Yun such that the battery cell satisfies the formula
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
,
with a unit of g/μm3 because Tanjo teaches that the battery cell should include enough free electrolyte to sufficiently supply ions to the electrode assembly but not so much as to decrease the efficiency of the battery ([0034]).
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi and Yun to satisfy the formula
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
,
with a unit of g/μm3 since it has been held that discovering optimum values of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art; hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to adjust the amount of free electrolyte relative to the pore volume of the electrolyte assembly to ensure that the battery cell has adequate free electrolyte to supply ions to the electrode assembly but not enough to decrease the efficiency of the battery.
Regarding claim 2, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo does not teach wherein
0.01
%
≤
y
(
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
)
≤
20
, with a unit of unit of g/μm3.
However, Tanjo teaches wherein an amount of the free electrolyte solution (extra electrolyte, [0034]) in the battery cell is related to a total pore volume of the electrode assembly (the ratio between the total volume of electrolyte solution, including extra electrolyte solution, to the total pore volume of the electrode assembly, should be greater than 1 and at most 1.7 [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo such that the battery cell satisfies the formula
0.01
%
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
20
because Tanjo teaches that the battery cell should include enough free electrolyte to sufficiently supply ions to the electrode assembly but not so much as to decrease the efficiency of the battery ([0034]).
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo to satisfy the formula
0.01
%
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
20
since it has been held that discovering optimum values of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art; hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to adjust the amount of free electrolyte relative to the pore volume of the electrolyte assembly to ensure that the battery cell has adequate free electrolyte to supply ions to the electrode assembly but not enough to decrease the efficiency of the battery.
Regarding claim 3, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo does not teach wherein the battery cell further satisfies the following formula:
100
%
≤
y
+
m
1
-
m
2
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
200
, with a unit of unit of g/μm3 and, wherein
m1 represents mass of the electrode assembly before drying, with a unit of g; and
m2 represents mass of the electrode assembly after drying, with a unit of g.
However, the instant specification teaches that the numerator y+m2-m1 can be considered as the total amount of the electrolyte solution in the battery cell (see [0101] of the originally filed specification).
Tanjo teaches wherein a total amount of the electrolyte solution in the battery cell is related to a total pore volume of the electrode assembly (the ratio between the total volume of electrolyte solution, including extra electrolyte solution, to the total pore volume of the electrode assembly, should be greater than 1 and at most 1.7 [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo such that the battery cell satisfies the formula
100
%
≤
y
+
m
1
-
m
2
(
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
)
≤
200
because Tanjo teaches that the battery cell should include enough total electrolyte to fill the electrode assembly and enough free electrolyte to sufficiently supply ions to the electrode assembly, but not so much free electrolyte as to decrease the efficiency of the battery ([0034]).
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo to satisfy the formula
100
%
≤
y
+
m
1
-
m
2
(
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
)
≤
200
since it has been held that discovering optimum values of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art; hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to adjust the amount of free electrolyte relative to the pore volume of the electrolyte assembly to ensure that the battery cell has adequate free electrolyte to supply ions to the electrode assembly but not enough to decrease the efficiency of the battery.
Regarding claim 6, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches (see Kashiwagi) wherein the separator further comprises a coating (resin film, [0023]) disposed on at least one surface of the substrate; and the lyophilic polymer is distributed in the coating ([0025]-[0026]).
Regarding claim 17, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches a battery (Kashiwagi: [0047]), comprising the battery cell according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches an electrical apparatus (Kashiwagi: [0055]), comprising the battery according to claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches wherein the lyophilic polymer comprises at least one fluorinated polymer selected from a polyvinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer (PVDF-HFP) (Kashiwagi: [0015]).
Regarding claim 20, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches wherein the fluorinated polymer is derived from at least two monomers selected from vinylidene fluoride (VDF), tetrafluoroethylene (TFE), and hexafluoropropylene (HFP) (Kashiwagi: [0015]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1) and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of Lee (US 2025/0132340 A1; previously cited).
Regarding claim 4, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo does not teach wherein the amount of a free electrolyte solution per unit capacity of the battery cell is b, with a unit of mg/Ah, and 0≤b≤1400.
Lee teaches a battery cell (electrochemical device, [0006]) comprising an electrolyte ([0029]), wherein the amount of a free electrolyte solution per unit capacity of the battery cell is b, with a unit of mg/Ah, and 0≤b≤1100 (total electrolyte solution injected, which would include free and adsorbed electrolyte solution, is less than 1.1 g/Ah, [0094]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo such that an amount of a free electrolyte solution per unit capacity of the battery cell is b, with a unit of mg/Ah, and 0≤b≤1100, which would read on the claimed range of 0≤b≤1400, because Lee teaches that using small amounts of electrolyte solution improves energy density ([0095]).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1) and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of Wakizaka (US 2012/0189897 A1; previously cited) and Zhang (US 2016/0164060 A1; previously cited).
Regarding claim 7, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches wherein the lyophilic polymer comprises a fluorinated polymer (Kashiwagi: [0026]), but does not disclose wherein a crystallinity of the fluorinated polymer measured by differential scanning calorimetry is Xc1, 0<Xc1≤30%; and a melting temperature of the fluorinated polymer is Tm1, with a unit of °C, and 0<Tm1≤140.
Wakizaka teaches a battery cell ([0166]), comprising an electrolyte ([0168]) and a lyophilic polymer (polymer particle B shows swellability to the electrolytic solution, [0048]) wherein a crystallinity of the polymer measured by differential scanning calorimetry is Xc1, 0<Xc1≤30% (overlapping range of 0≤Xc1≤40%, [0049]; crystallinity of a polymer is a material property so should not vary depending on the method of measurement). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to use a fluorinated polymer wherein a crystallinity of the polymer measured by differential scanning calorimetry is Xc1, 0<Xc1≤40%, overlapping the claimed range of 0<Xc1≤30% in the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo, because Wakizaka teaches that doing so increases the affinity of the polymer to the electrolyte, thereby improving oxidation resistance and inhibiting cycle deterioration ([0049]).
Zhang teaches a battery cell ([0054]) comprising an electrolyte ([0057]) and a separator ([0054]), the separator comprises a lyophilic polymer (separator includes a porous substrate and a coating layer formed from PVDF, [0054]; PVDF particles swell in electrolyte, [0073]), wherein the lyophilic polymer comprises a fluorinated polymer (PVDF, [0072]), and a melting temperature of the fluorinated polymer is Tm1, with a unit of °C, and 0<Tm1≤100 ([0072]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to use a fluorinated polymer with wherein a melting temperature of the fluorinated polymer is Tm1, with a unit of °C, and 0<Tm1≤100, reading on the claimed range of 0<Tm1≤140, in the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun, Tanjo, and Wakizaka because Zhang teaches that doing so improves adhesion of the polymer coating to a porous substrate or adhesion of the polymer to a battery electrode ([0072]).
Regarding claim 8, Kashiwagi in view of Yun, Tanjo, Wakizaka, and Zhang does not disclose wherein a glass transition temperature of the fluorinated polymer is Tg1, with a unit of °C, and -150≤Tg1≤60.
However, Wakizaka teaches the battery cell as discussed in claim 7, and further teaches wherein a glass transition temperature of the fluorinated polymer is Tg1, with a unit of °C, and -150≤Tg1≤60 (overlapping range of -80≤Tg1≤15, [0048]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to use a fluorinated polymer wherein a glass transition temperature of the fluorinated polymer is Tg1, with a unit of °C, and -80≤Tg1≤60, falling within the claimed range of -150≤Tg1≤60, because Wakizaka teaches that doing so improves the flexibility of the polymer, thereby preventing cracks in the substrate on which the polymer is applied ([0048]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1) and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of Zhang (US 2016/0164060 A1; previously cited).
Regarding claim 16, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo does not teach wherein a molecular weight of the lyophilic polymer is in a range from 1.2×105g/mol to 1×106g/mol.
Zhang teaches a battery cell ([0054]) comprising an electrolyte ([0057]) and a separator ([0054]), the separator comprises a lyophilic polymer (separator includes a porous substrate and a coating layer formed from PVDF, [0054]; PVDF particles swell in electrolyte, [0073]), wherein a molecular weight of the lyophilic polymer is in a range from 1.2×105g/mol to 1×106g/mol (overlapping range of >300,000, [0098]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to modify the lyophilic polymer of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo to have a molecular weight in a range from 1.2×105g/mol to 1×106g/mol because Zhang teaches that it is known in the art to include a lyophilic polymer with a molecular weight of >300,000 in the separator of a battery cell ([0098]).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1) and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of in view of Katsuda (US 2015/0240039 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tanjo teaches wherein the fluorinated polymer is a copolymer of vinylidene fluoride (VDF), hexafluoropropylene (HFP), and tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) and that the content of HFP should be between 3 to 20 mol%, (Kashiwagi: [0015]), but does not disclose wherein based on a total mass of VDF, HFP, and TFE, a mass percentage of VDF is 80%, a mass percentage of HFP is 15%, and a mass percentage of TFE is 5%.
Katsuda teaches a battery cell, comprising a separator ([0041]), the separator comprises a lyophilic polymer (protective layer on surface of separator, [0041]; protective layer includes polymer of VDF-TFE-HFP, [0107]), the lyophilic polymer comprises a fluorinated polymer ([0107]), wherein the fluorinated polymer is a copolymer of vinylidene fluoride (VDF), hexafluoropropylene (HFP), and tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) ([0107]), wherein based on a total mass of VDF, HFP, and TFE, a mass percentage of VDF is 80-98%, a mass percentage of HFP is 2-25%, and a mass percentage of TFE is 2-20% ([0107]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have used a copolymer wherein based on a total mass of VDF, HFP, and TFE, a mass percentage of VDF is 80%, a mass percentage of HFP is 15%, and a mass percentage of TFE is 5% because Katsuda teaches that such a copolymer is suitable for use in a battery separator ([0107]).
Claims 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1), Liu (CN-112072169-A, a machine translation is attached and referenced below), and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Kashiwagi discloses a battery cell ([0001]), comprising an electrode assembly and an electrolyte ([0013]), wherein the electrode assembly comprises a first electrode plate (positive electrode, [0013]), a second electrode plate (negative electrode, , [0013]), and a separator ([0013]), the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate have opposite polarities (positive and negative, [0013]), the separator is disposed between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate ([0013]), the separator comprises a substrate (microporous film, [0022]),and a lyophilic polymer (lithium-ion conductive resin film is adhered to at least one surface of the electrodes or the separator, [0013]; lithium-ion conductive resin film contains HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE copolymer, [0015]), the substrate has pores within the substrate (microporous film, [0022]), and the lyophilic polymer comprises a fluorinated polymer (HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE copolymer, [0015]).
Kashiwagi teaches the substrate is a microporous film made of polyolefins such as polyethylene and polypropylene ([0022]) and wherein the lyophilic polymer is distributed in a coating on at least one surface of the substrate ([0025]-[0026]), but does not disclose wherein at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer is distributed in the pores of the substrate.
Yun teaches a separator comprising a substrate (porous polyolefin, [0078]) and a polymer (fluorine-based ionomer, [0023]), the substrate has pores within the substrate (first pores, [0021]), and the polymer is distributed in a coating on at least one surface of the substrate and in the pores of the substrate ([0023]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified Kashiwagi by distributing at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer in the pores of the substrate because Yun teaches that doing so allows for adequate ionn conductivity while improving safety ([0033]).
Kashiwagi does not disclose wherein the fluorinated polymer comprises a structural unit represented by formula (AII) or wherein the battery cell satisfies the following formula:
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
, with a unit of g/μm3; and
p1 represents a porosity of the first electrode plate;
v1 represents a total volume of the first electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p2 represents a porosity of the second electrode plate; and
v2 represents a total volume of the second electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p3 represents a porosity of the separator;
v3 represents a total volume of the separator, with a unit of μm3; and
y represents mass of a free electrolyte solution in the battery cell, with a unit of g.
Liu teaches a battery cell ([0002]) comprising a fluorinated polymer (perfluoropolyether, [0018]), wherein the fluorinated polymer comprises a structural unit represented by formula (AII), wherein R11, R12, R13, and R14 each independently comprises a fluorine atom or substituted C1-C3 alkyl, and at least one of R11, R12, R13, and R14 comprises a fluorine atom; when substituted, substitutes comprise a halogen atom (see [0016] and [0018] on p. 4 of the original Liu document).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the battery cell of Kashiwagi and Yun by adding a fluorinated polymer comprising a structural unit represented by formula (AII) with a reasonable expectation that doing so would improve ion conduction in the battery cell by interacting with a HFP-VDF copolymer as taught by Liu ([0018]).
Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Liu does not teach wherein the battery cell satisfies the following formula:
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
, with a unit of g/μm3; and
p1 represents a porosity of the first electrode plate;
v1 represents a total volume of the first electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p2 represents a porosity of the second electrode plate; and
v2 represents a total volume of the second electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p3 represents a porosity of the separator;
v3 represents a total volume of the separator, with a unit of μm3; and
y represents mass of a free electrolyte solution in the battery cell, with a unit of g.
Tanjo teaches a battery cell (secondary battery 1, FIG. 1, [0019]) comprising an electrode assembly (power generating element 4, FIG. 2, [0020]) and an electrolyte (nonaqueous electrolyte, [0018]), wherein the electrode assembly (4) comprises a first electrode plate (positive electrode plate 42, FIG. 2, [0020]), a second electrode plate (negative electrode plate 41, FIG. 2, [0020]), and a separator (43, FIG. 2, [0020]), the first electrode plate (42) and the second electrode plate (41) have opposite polarities, and the separator (43) is disposed between the first electrode plate (42) and the second electrode plate (41).
Tanjo teaches wherein an amount of the free electrolyte solution (extra electrolyte, [0034]) in the battery cell is related to a total pore volume of the electrode assembly (the ratio between the total volume of electrolyte solution, including extra electrolyte solution, to the total pore volume of the electrode assembly, should be greater than 1 and at most 1.7 [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Liu such that the battery cell satisfies the formula
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
,
with a unit of g/μm3 because Tanjo teaches that the battery cell should include enough free electrolyte to sufficiently supply ions to the electrode assembly but not so much as to decrease the efficiency of the battery ([0034]).
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Liu to satisfy the formula
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
,
with a unit of g/μm3 since it has been held that discovering optimum values of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art; hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to adjust the amount of free electrolyte relative to the pore volume of the electrolyte assembly to ensure that the battery cell has adequate free electrolyte to supply ions to the electrode assembly but not enough to decrease the efficiency of the battery.
Regarding claim 23, Kashiwagi in view of Yun, Liu, and Tanjo teaches wherein the fluorinated polymer comprises at least one of the structural units represented by Formula (AII-3) and Formula (AII-5) (see [0016] and [0018] on p. 4 of the original Liu document).
Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (JP-2013084454-A) in view of Yun (US 2021/0234234 A1), Tatsuno (US 2019/0148739 A1), and Tanjo (US 2015/0311531 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Kashiwagi discloses a battery cell ([0001]), comprising an electrode assembly and an electrolyte ([0013]), wherein the electrode assembly comprises a first electrode plate (positive electrode, [0013]), a second electrode plate (negative electrode, , [0013]), and a separator ([0013]), the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate have opposite polarities (positive and negative, [0013]), the separator is disposed between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate ([0013]), the separator comprises a substrate (microporous film, [0022]) and a lyophilic polymer (lithium-ion conductive resin film is adhered to at least one surface of the electrodes or the separator, [0013]; lithium-ion conductive resin film contains HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE copolymer, [0015]), the substrate has pores within the substrate (microporous film, [0022]), and the lyophilic polymer comprises a fluorinated polymer (HFP-VDF, HFP-TFE, or HFP-VDF-TFE copolymer, [0015]).
Kashiwagi teaches the substrate is a microporous film made of polyolefins such as polyethylene and polypropylene ([0022]) and wherein the lyophilic polymer is distributed in a coating on at least one surface of the substrate ([0025]-[0026]), but does not disclose wherein at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer is distributed in the pores of the substrate.
Yun teaches a separator comprising a substrate (porous polyolefin, [0078]) and a polymer (fluorine-based ionomer, [0023]), the substrate has pores within the substrate (first pores, [0021]), and the polymer is distributed in a coating on at least one surface of the substrate and in the pores of the substrate ([0023]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified Kashiwagi by distributing at least a portion of the lyophilic polymer in the pores of the substrate because Yun teaches that doing so allows for adequate ionn conductivity while improving safety ([0033]).
Kashiwagi does not disclose wherein the fluorinated polymer comprises a structural unit represented by formula (AIII) or wherein the battery cell satisfies the following formula:
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
, with a unit of g/μm3; and
p1 represents a porosity of the first electrode plate;
v1 represents a total volume of the first electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p2 represents a porosity of the second electrode plate; and
v2 represents a total volume of the second electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p3 represents a porosity of the separator;
v3 represents a total volume of the separator, with a unit of μm3; and
y represents mass of a free electrolyte solution in the battery cell, with a unit of g.
Tatsuno teaches an battery cell ([0010]) comprising a fluorinated polymer ([0278]), wherein the fluorinated polymer comprises a structural unit represented by formula (AIII), wherein R15 comprises a single bond, and substituted C2 alkyl; the substituents comprise a halogen atom; p is selected from positive integers from 1 to 3; and n is selected from positive integers from 1000 to 30000 (perfluro(butenyl vinyl ether), [0278]).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the battery cell of Kashiwagi and Yun by adding a structural unit represented by formula (AIII) to the fluorinated polymer because Tatsuno teaches that it is known in the art to combine a structural unit represented by formula (AIII) to VDF, TFE, and HFP copolymers ([0278]).
Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tatsuno does not teach wherein the battery cell satisfies the following formula:
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
, with a unit of g/μm3; and
p1 represents a porosity of the first electrode plate;
v1 represents a total volume of the first electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p2 represents a porosity of the second electrode plate; and
v2 represents a total volume of the second electrode plate, with a unit of μm3;
p3 represents a porosity of the separator;
v3 represents a total volume of the separator, with a unit of μm3; and
y represents mass of a free electrolyte solution in the battery cell, with a unit of g.
Tanjo teaches a battery cell (secondary battery 1, FIG. 1, [0019]) comprising an electrode assembly (power generating element 4, FIG. 2, [0020]) and an electrolyte (nonaqueous electrolyte, [0018]), wherein the electrode assembly (4) comprises a first electrode plate (positive electrode plate 42, FIG. 2, [0020]), a second electrode plate (negative electrode plate 41, FIG. 2, [0020]), and a separator (43, FIG. 2, [0020]), the first electrode plate (42) and the second electrode plate (41) have opposite polarities, and the separator (43) is disposed between the first electrode plate (42) and the second electrode plate (41).
Tanjo teaches wherein an amount of the free electrolyte solution (extra electrolyte, [0034]) in the battery cell is related to a total pore volume of the electrode assembly (the ratio between the total volume of electrolyte solution, including extra electrolyte solution, to the total pore volume of the electrode assembly, should be greater than 1 and at most 1.7 [0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view of Yun and Tatsuno such that the battery cell satisfies the formula
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
,
with a unit of g/μm3 because Tanjo teaches that the battery cell should include enough free electrolyte to sufficiently supply ions to the electrode assembly but not so much as to decrease the efficiency of the battery ([0034]).
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view Yun and Tatsuno to satisfy the formula
0
≤
y
p
1
*
v
1
+
p
2
*
v
2
+
p
3
*
v
3
≤
23
,
with a unit of g/μm3 since it has been held that discovering optimum values of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art; hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to adjust the amount of free electrolyte relative to the pore volume of the electrolyte assembly to ensure that the battery cell has adequate free electrolyte to supply ions to the electrode assembly but not enough to decrease the efficiency of the battery.
Regarding claim 25, Kashiwagi in view of Yun, Tatsuno, and Tanjo does not disclose wherein the fluorinated polymer comprises at least one of the structural units represented by formula (AIII-1) to (AIII-3).
Yoshitake teaches fluorinated polymers for energy storage devices (C3 L52-58), including a fluorinated polymer comprising a structural unit represented by Formula (AIII) where R15 comprises a single bond, and substituted C1 or C2 alkyl; the substituents comprise a halogen atom; p is selected from positive integers from 1 to 3; and n is selected from positive integers from 1000 to 30000 (Formula 4, C4 L6 and L26-30). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the battery cell of Kashiwagi in view Tatsuno and Tanjo by substituting a fluorinated polymer comprising a structural unit represented by Formula (AIII-2) for the fluorinated polymer comprising a structural unit represented by Formula (AIII) where R15 comprises a substituted C2 alkyl because Yoshitake teaches said polymers are known equivalents. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see [MPEP § 2143, B.]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE C. DISNEY whose telephone number is (703)756-1076. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 MT.
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, Tiffany Legette-Thompson can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/C.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights