DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. New grounds of rejection have been added as a result of the amendment to the claims submitted 12/22/2025.
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, 7-10, 13-16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (CN 103560249 A, see Machine Translation) in view of Nagata et al. (US 2010/0173098).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Chen et al. discloses in Figs 1-2, a silicon composite material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2), comprising a core (refs 1, 2) and a first coating layer (at ref 3) covering (Fig 1) a surface of the core (refs 1, 2, Fig 1), wherein the core (refs 1, 2) comprises a first core (ref 2) and a second core (ref 1); the first core (ref 1) comprises a first conductive material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2); the first conductive material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2) comprises a flexible conductive material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2); the second core (ref 1) comprises a silicon-based material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2) of which a surface (Fig 1) is coated with a second coating layer (ref 4, Fig 1 shows coating, P2-3/§ embodiments 1-5 indicate a coating is present on the silicon-based materia); and the second coating layer (ref 4, Fig 1) comprises a second conductive material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2).
Chen et al. does not explicitly disclose the flexible conductive material comprises natural and artificial graphite, and the silicon-based material comprises SiO having a Dv50 of 2 – 5 microns.
Nagata et al. discloses in Figs 1-9, a secondary battery ([0040]) including an electrode material comprising a silicon composite including natural and/or artificial graphite ([0110], [0111]) and SiO having a D50 of 5 microns ([0127]). This configuration enhances battery energy density, capacity, and overall performance ([0001], [0002], [0014]).
Nagata et al. and Chen et al. are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the SiO at the size disclosed by Nagata et al. and the natural and artificial graphite disclosed by Nagata et al. into the composite material of Chen et al. to enhance battery energy density, capacity, and overall performance.
Regarding claim 2, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the silicon-based material (ref 1) is a nanoscale (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2) silicon-based material (ref 1).
Regarding claim 3, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses wherein Dv50 of the silicon-based material is in a range from 10 nm to 5 micron (P2/§ Summary/¶2, 20 – 200 nm).
Regarding claim 7, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the flexible conductive material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2) comprises one or both of soft carbon or graphite (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2).
Regarding claim 9, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the Dv50 of the graphite is in a range from 0.5 – 20 microns (P2/§ Summary/¶2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges (1 – 3.5 microns) disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Regarding claim 10, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the second conductive material (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2) comprises one or more of a single-walled carbon nanotube or a multi- walled carbon nanotube (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2).
Regarding claim 13, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses a mass percentage (P2/§ Summary/¶2) of the first conductive material to the silicon-based material of which the surface is coated with the second coating layer is (10%-90%):(90%-10%) (P2/§ Summary/¶2, mass % within these ranges defined).
Regarding claim 14, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses a mass percentage of the first conductive material to the silicon-based material of which the surface is coated with the second coating layer is (40%-90%):(60%-10%) ((P2-3/§ embodiments1-5 define examples of these ranges).
Regarding claim 15, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the first coating layer comprises a carbon coating layer (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2, Fig 1, layer depicted).
Regarding claim 16, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the carbon coating layer (ref 3) comprises amorphous carbon (P2/§ Summary/¶1-2, Fig 1).
Regarding claim 19, modified Chen et al. discloses in Figs 1-2, a secondary battery (P2/§ Background/¶1), comprising the silicon composite material (P2/§ Summary/¶1) as set forth above.
Regarding claim 20, modified Chen et al. discloses in Figs 1-2, an electrical apparatus (P2/§ Background/¶1), comprising the secondary battery (P2/§ Background/¶1) as set forth above.
Claims 4-6, 11-12 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (CN 103560249 A, see Machine Translation) in view of Nagata et al. (US 2010/0173098) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dai et al. CN 116525772 A, see Machine Translation).
Regarding claims 4-6, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above but does not explicitly disclose the silicon-based material comprises one or both of pure silicon, wherein Dv50 of the pure silicon is in a range from 10 nm to 150 nm, or the Dv50 of the pure silicon is in a range from 50 nm to 100 nm.
Dai et al. discloses a silicon composite active material for a negative electrode battery material (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶1-7) comprising pure silicon having a size of D50 50 nm (P2/10 (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶8). This configuration enhances the energy density and capacity of the battery (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶6-7).
Dai et al. and Chen et al. are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, silicon composite materials for batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the pure silicon at the size disclosed by Dai et al. into the silicon composite material of Chen et al. to enhance energy density and capacity of the battery.
Regarding claims 11, 12 and 17, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above but does not explicitly disclose a thickness of the second coating layer is in a range from 0.3 nm to 3 nm, the thickness of the second coating layer is in a range from 1.2 nm to 3 nm, or a thickness of the carbon coating layer is in a range from 20 nm to 60 nm.
Dai et al. discloses a silicon composite active material for a negative electrode battery material comprising a silicon composite material (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶1-7). The silicon composite material includes multiple carbon coating layers on a silicon material. At least one of the carbon coating layers is 3 nm thick (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶7) and another carbon coating material layer is 25 – 35 nm thick (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶9). This configuration enhances the energy density and capacity of the battery (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶6-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the carbon material coating layers coating the silicon material core disclosed by Dai et al. into the silicon composite material of Chen et al. to enhance energy density and capacity of the battery.
Regarding claim 18, modified Chen et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above but does not explicitly disclose the silicon composite material comprises one or more of the following features:(1) tap density is in a range from 0.9 g/cm3 to 1.3 g/cm3; (2) a specific surface area is in a range from 0.6 m2/g to 1.4 m2/g; and (3) the Dv50 of the silicon composite material is in a range from 3 – 30 microns.
Dai et al. discloses a silicon composite active material for a negative electrode battery material (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶1-7) having a size of D50 4 – 8 nm (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶10). This configuration enhances the energy density and capacity of the battery (P2/§ Contents of the invention/¶6-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the silicon composite material of Chen et al. at the particle size disclosed Dai et al. to enhance energy density and capacity of the battery.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH J DOUYETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8A - 4P EST.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/KENNETH J DOUYETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights