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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Examiner notes the following amendments made to the claims:
Claims 1-3, 5, and 16 amended
Claim 4 canceled
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 2/28/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3, 5-20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, the amendment made to claim 1 to further limit the molar percentage of VDF in the first copolymer overcomes the previously applied prior art Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Koh (US 20110318638 A1), which teaches both a VDF-TFE-HFP copolymer having the desired molar percentage of VDF, and also teaches that altering the molar percentage of VDF is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the previously applied art further in view of Koh meets the amended limitations of claim 1. Since no other arguments are presented regarding the dependent claims, other than that they rely on claim 1, the rejections of all the dependent claims remain in place and unchanged other than now relying further on Koh, and further in view of Ogata (US 20190123323 A1) for specifically claims 3 and 5, due to their additional amendments. Thus, there is currently not considered to be any allowable subject matter present in the 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7-11, 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 112768702A) in view of Jeon (US 20230187642 A1) and further in view of Koh (US 20110318638 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Ye teaches the following elements:
A positive electrode plate, (“Positive plate and high-safety lithium ion battery thereof” Ye title)
wherein the positive electrode plate comprises a positive electrode current collector (“A positive electrode sheet, comprising a current collector,” Ye [9])
and a positive electrode film layer disposed on at least one side of the positive electrode current collector, wherein , on the same side of the positive electrode current collector, the positive electrode film layer comprises one or more first active layers and one or more second active layers arranged along a thickness direction of the positive electrode current collector, (“A positive electrode sheet, comprising a current collector, a first active layer and a second active layer. The first active layer is arranged between the current collector and the second active layer. The first active layer is formed on the On at least one surface of the current collector,” Ye [9])
the first active layers and the second active layers being alternately stacked; (As can be seen below, the positive active layers of Ye are alternately stacked in the same manner as those in the instant application.)
PNG
media_image1.png
180
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
128
297
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the first active layer comprises a layered oxide active material (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the active material of the second active layer is … lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide or at least one of nickel cobalt manganese lithium oxide and ternary positive electrode active material.” Ye [16]. In this case, the second active layer of Ye corresponds to the first active layer in claim 1.)
and a first binder, (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, both the first active layer and/or the second active layer further contain a conductive agent and/or a binder.” Ye [17])
the first binder comprising a first copolymer; (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the binder is selected from … vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer,” Ye [19])
the first copolymer comprises vinylidene fluoride and one or more selected from vinyl fluoride, trifluoroethylene, tetrafluoroethylene, hexafluoropropylene, and perfluoroalkyl vinyl ether, (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the binder is selected from … vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer,” Ye [19]. In this case, the monomers comprising the first copolymer are vinylidene fluoride and hexafluoropropylene, meeting this limitation.)
and the second active layer comprises a phosphate-based positive electrode active material (“The first active layer is formed on the On at least one surface of the current collector, the active material of the first active layer includes lithium iron phosphate (LFP) and oligomers.” Ye [9]. In this case, the first active layer of Ye corresponds to the second active layer of claim 1.)
and a second binder, (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, both the first active layer and/or the second active layer further contain a conductive agent and/or a binder.” Ye [17])
wherein monomers forming the first copolymer comprise a fluorinated monomer. (The monomers that make up VDF-HFP copolymer are both fluorinated monomers, thus, if VDF-HFP were used as the copolymer in the first binder, then this limitation would be met.)
Ye is silent on the following elements of claim 1:
the second binder comprising a fluorinated monomer homopolymer
a molar percentage of the vinylidene fluoride in the first copolymer is 50% to 70%;
Jeon teaches the following elements of claim 1 that are not found in Ye:
the second binder comprising a fluorinated monomer homopolymer (“Meanwhile, the first coating layer 120 is formed on one or both surfaces of the current collector 110, and includes a first positive electrode active material, a first conductive material, and a first binder.” Jeon [0060], “In addition, the first binder may include at least one resin selected from the group consisting of a polyvinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer (PVDF-co-HFP),” Jeon [0068], “Furthermore, the second coating layer 140 is formed on the first coating layer 120 on which the patterned layer 130 is formed, and includes a second positive electrode active material, a second conductive material, and a second binder.” Jeon [0071], and “As an example, the second binder may include polyvinylidene fluoride.” Jeon [0078])
Jeon is considered to be analogous to Ye because they are both within the same field of cathodes for lithium secondary batteries having multiple positive electrode active material layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second layer of Ye to include specifically a PVDF homopolymer as this is a commonly known binder material in the art, and would only require the simple substitution of one commonly used binder for another. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Jeon and Ye are silent on the following elements of claim 1:
a molar percentage of the vinylidene fluoride in the first copolymer is 50% to 70%;
However, Koh teaches all of the elements of claim 1 that are not found in Ye or Jeon. Specifically, Koh teaches a copolymer including VDF and TFE and/or HFP, where the molar percentage of VDF overlaps the claimed range:
a molar percentage of the vinylidene fluoride in the first copolymer is 50% to 70%; (“The slurry comprises a positive-electrode active material, a binder, and an organic solvent, … the binder comprises a fluorine-containing polymer represented by Composition Formula: (VDF)m(TFE)n(HFP)I (wherein VDF is a structural unit from vinylidene fluoride; TFE is a structural unit from tetrafluoroethylene; HFP is a structural unit from hexafluoropropylene; and 0.45 ≤ m ≤ 1; 0 ≤ n ≤ 0.5; and 0 ≤ l ≤ 0.1, and m+n+I=1).” Koh abstract. Koh teaches a molar percentage of VDF that is between 45-100%, which encompasses the claimed range.)
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 45-100% for the molar percentage of VDF in a copolymer used in a positive electrode binder encompasses the claimed range of 50-70% for the same parameter. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Koh is considered to be analogous to Ye because they are both within the same field of positive electrodes for lithium secondary batteries that contain fluoropolymer copolymer binders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first copolymer of Ye to have the molar percentage of VDF as taught by Koh because this would only require the simple substitution of one known positive electrode binder for another, which one skilled in the art would be capable of doing. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.). Koh additionally teaches that a positive electrode including its binder has improved characteristics and that the inclusion of TFE in the copolymer improves base resistance (“The inventors conducted further investigations regarding this object, and as a result they found that among VdF copolymers, a VdF/TFE copolymer wherein TFE is copolymerized in a specific quantity with VdF is unexpectedly stable with regard to a basic lithium-containing complex oxide, and that a positive electrode mixture slurry prepared from a mixture thereof is not only homogeneous, but also stable. The inventors also found that a positive electrode that is formed using this positive electrode mixture slurry has excellent flexibility, the positive electrode mixture does not peel off the current collector, and the battery characteristics of a lithium secondary battery are improved thereby.” Koh [0018])
By modifying Ye with Koh, the additional limitations of claims 2 would be met without any further modification or motivation.
Regarding claim 2, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein the first copolymer comprises one or more selected from a group of vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer, vinylidene fluoride-ethylene oxide copolymer, vinylidene fluoride-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer, tetrafluoroethylene-hexafluoropropylene copolymer, tetrafluoroethylene-perfluoroalkyl vinyl ether copolymer, vinylidene fluoride-trifluoroethylene copolymer, vinylidene fluoride- trichloroethylene copolymer, vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer, and vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer. (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the binder is selected from … vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer,” Ye [19]. In this case, the monomers comprising the first copolymer are vinylidene fluoride and hexafluoropropylene, meeting the limitation of claim 2.)
Regarding claim 7, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein weight-average molecular weights of the first copolymer and the fluorinated monomer homopolymer are each independently 100,000 Da to 1,000,000 Da. (The known weights for PVDF homopolymer is approximately 244,000-670,000 Da, and the known weight for PVDF-HFP copolymer is approximately 400,000-455,000 Da. Both of these fall within the claimed range and therefore meet the limitation of claim 7. VDF-TFE-HFP is also known to usually have a molecular weight of 300,000 Da at least, and therefore would also be within the claimed range.)
Regarding claim 8, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein the positive electrode plate satisfies any one or more of the following conditions:
a mass percentage of the first binder in the first active layer is 0.5% to 2.5%; (“in the second active layer slurry, the solid content contains 97 wt% Of mixed active materials, 2wt% of binder PVDF and 1wt% of conductive carbon black;” Ye [53]. As in claim 1, the second active layer of Ye corresponds to the first layer of the instant application.)
a mass percentage of the second binder in the second active layer is 0.5% to 2.5%; (“In the first active layer slurry, the solid content contains 91wt% of LFP, 5wt% of bismaleimide oligomer, 1.5wt% of binder PVDF and 2.5wt% of conductive carbon black;” Ye [52]. As in claim 1, the first active layer of Ye corresponds to the second layer of the instant application.)
and the first active layer and the second active layer each independently comprise a conductive agent. (Both the first and second active layers of Ye comprise conductive carbon black, meeting this limitation. Ye [52-53])
Regarding claim 9, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a mixed slurry with a mass percentage of 10% formed by mixing the layered oxide active material with water has a pH value between 11 and 13. (By using the lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide of Ye, which is the exact same material as claimed in both claims 10-11 and paragraph [0017] of the instant spec, this limitation would be inherently met as by mixing this material with water the pH would be always be the same, or at least cover the same range based on the percentage of active material vs water—the instant claim does not specify how much water is added, and therefore routine experimentation with how much active material vs how much water would inherently meet this pH range.)
Regarding claim 10, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 9, wherein the layered oxide active material comprises a ternary positive electrode material and/or a quaternary positive electrode material. (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the active material of the second active layer is … lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide or at least one of nickel cobalt manganese lithium oxide and ternary positive electrode active material.” Ye [16]. In this case, the second active layer of Ye corresponds to the first active layer in claim 1.)
Regarding claim 11, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 9, wherein the layered oxide active material comprises one or more selected from a group of lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide positive electrode active material, lithium nickel cobalt aluminate positive electrode active material, lithium nickel cobalt manganese aluminate positive electrode active material, doped or coated lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide positive electrode active material, doped or coated lithium nickel cobalt aluminate positive electrode active material, and doped or coated lithium nickel cobalt manganese aluminate positive electrode active material. (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the active material of the second active layer is … lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide or at least one of nickel cobalt manganese lithium oxide and ternary positive electrode active material.” Ye [16]. In this case, lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide meets the limitations of claim 11.)
Regarding claim 16, Ye teaches the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein one first active layer and one second active layer are arranged, the first active layer is disposed on the current collector, the second active layer is disposed on the first active layer. (As can be seen below, the positive active layers of Ye are alternately stacked in the same manner as those in the instant application. In this case, there is one first active later and one second active layer arranged on each side of the current collector, forming two positive electrode film layers which both meet the above limitation. This meets the additional limitations of amended claim 16, as the first layer is clearly disposed on the current collector “Coating the above-mentioned first active layer slurry on the positive electrode current collector;” Ye [21] and the second layer is coated on the first active layer “The second active layer material is mixed with a conductive agent and/or a binder and then dispersed in a solvent (such as N-methylpyrrole (NMP)) to obtain a slurry, which is then coated on the first active layer” Ye [22]. Additionally, if applicant were to argue based on the order of layering in Ye, examiner states that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include the layer including layered oxides as the first layer, and stack from there, as this is taught by Ko [US 20240234723 A1], who’s relevance is discussed further regarding claim 20 “lithium nickel metal oxides with a layered structure as a positive electrode active material.” Ko [0005] and “The number of positive electrode mixture layers is not particularly limited as long as the positive electrode mixture layer has a structure of two or more layers, but specifically, it may be 2 to 10 layers; 2 to 8 layers; 2 to 6 layers; or 2 to 4 layers.” Ko [0060])
PNG
media_image1.png
180
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
128
297
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Ye teaches the following elements:
A secondary battery, comprising a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate, wherein the positive electrode plate comprises the positive electrode plate according to claim 1. (“According to an embodiment of the present invention, the method for preparing the lithium ion battery further includes combining the positive electrode sheet, the negative electrode sheet, the electrolyte and the outer shell to form a lithium ion battery.” Ye [35])
Claim(s) 3, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 112768702A) in view of Jeon (US 20230187642 A1), further in view of Koh (US 20110318638 A1), and further in view of Ogata (US 20190123323 A1).
Regarding claim 3, modified Ye teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Ye, Jeon, and Koh are silent on the following elements of claim 3:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein the first copolymer comprises one or more selected from, vinylidene fluoride-ethylene oxide copolymer, vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer.
However, Ogata teaches all of the elements of claim 3 that are not found in Ye. Specifically, Ogata teaches the use of vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer for use in an electrode, and teaches it used interchangeably with a VDF-HFP or VDF-TFE-HFP copolymer.
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein the first copolymer comprises one or more selected from, vinylidene fluoride-ethylene oxide copolymer, vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer. (“The resin may function as a binder for binding (i) particles of the aramid filler to one another, (ii) the aramid filler to an electrode,” Ogata [0042] and “Examples of the resin encompass: … fluorine-containing resins such as polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), … a vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer, … a vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer, a vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer,” Ogata [0043])
Ogata, Ye, and Koh are all considered to be analogous because they are all within the same field of secondary batteries containing fluorinated copolymers in their positive electrodes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first copolymer of Ye to comprise vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer in addition to the VDF-TFE-HFP copolymer having the desired VDF molar percentage of Koh, as Ogata not only teaches these compositions as equivalent in their suitability for use as an electrode binder, but also teaches that one or more can be selected. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would be capable of selecting both a VDF-VDF and VDF-TFE-HFP copolymer for use together based on the teachings of Ogata, and modifying the VDF molar percentage based on the teachings of Koh. The teachings of Ogata show this is a commonly known teaching in the art, and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). In this case, the binder compositions of both Koh and Ogata would be suitable for the intended use.
The limitations of claim 5 would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation:
Regarding claim 5, modified Ye teaches all of the elements of claim 3, as shown above. Ye is silent on the following elements of claim 5:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 3, wherein the first copolymer further comprises one or more selected from, vinylidene fluoride-trichloroethylene copolymer, and vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer.
However, the combination of Koh and Ogata, as applied above in claim 3, would meet all of the limitations of claim 5:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 3, wherein the first copolymer further comprises one or more selected from, vinylidene fluoride-trichloroethylene copolymer, and vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer. (“The resin may function as a binder for binding (i) particles of the aramid filler to one another, (ii) the aramid filler to an electrode,” Ogata [0042] and “Examples of the resin encompass: … fluorine-containing resins such as polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), … a vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene copolymer, … a vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride copolymer, a vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene-tetrafluoroethylene copolymer,” Ogata [0043] and “(“The slurry comprises a positive-electrode active material, a binder, and an organic solvent, … the binder comprises a fluorine-containing polymer represented by Composition Formula: (VDF)m(TFE)n(HFP)I (wherein VDF is a structural unit from vinylidene fluoride; TFE is a structural unit from tetrafluoroethylene; HFP is a structural unit from hexafluoropropylene; and 0.45 ≤ m ≤ 1; 0 ≤ n ≤ 0.5; and 0 ≤ l ≤ 0.1, and m+n+I=1).” Koh abstract. Koh teaches a VDF-HFP-TFE copolymer with the VDF content needed in claim 1, and Ogata teaches the use of one of more copolymers together, with the suitable choices in including both vinylidene fluoride-vinyl fluoride, as well as VDF-HFP-TFE.)
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 112768702A) in view of Jeon (US 20230187642 A1), further in view of Koh (US 20110318638 A1), and further in view of Kwon (US 20220271276 A1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Ye teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Ye and Jeon are silent on the following elements of claim 6:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the first active layer is 60 μm to 65 μm, a thickness of the second active layer is 60 μm to 65 μm
However, Kwon teaches all of the elements of claim 6 that are not found in Ye or Jeon. Specifically, Kwon teaches a cathode with two positive active material layers, which meet the thickness limitations of claim 6:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a thickness of the first active layer is 60 μm to 65 μm, a thickness of the second active layer is 60 μm to 65 μm (“In the electrode according to embodiments, for example, a thickness of the first electrode active material layer may be about 1% to about 60% of the total thickness of the electrode active material layer, and a thickness of the second electrode active material layer may be about 40% to about 99% of the total thickness of the electrode active material layer.” Kwon [0055] and “The total thickness of the electrode active material layer may be, for example, about 20 μm to about 200 μm, about 50 μm to about 150 μm, or about 80 μm to about 120 μm.” Kwon [0056]. Based on the above ranges, if the thickness of both the first and second electrode active material layer were 50% of the total thickness of the electrode active material layer, and the total thickness of the electrode active material were 120 μm, then both the first and second layer would have a thickness of 60 μm, within the claimed range.)
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art ranges of the thickness of the first and second active layer of being between 0.2-120 μm (ranging from 1% thickness of a 20 μm total layer to 60% thickness of a 200 μm total layer) -and 8-198 μm (ranging from 40% thickness of a 20 μm total layer to 99% thickness of a 200 μm total layer) for the first and second electrode active layers, respectively, encompasses the claimed range of 60-65 μm for both the first and second electrode active material layers. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Kwon is considered to be analogous to Ye because they are both within the same field of positive electrodes for secondary batteries having multiple positive electrode active material layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ye to use the specific thickness ranges of the first and second positive electrode active material layer, as taught by Kwon, in order to improve performance (“Because the first electrode active material layer and the second electrode active material layer of the electrode have a thickness ratio within these ranges, a lithium battery including the electrode may have further improved performance.” Kwon [0055]). Additionally, the teachings of Kwon demonstrate that altering the thickness of the positive electrode layers as well as the ratio of thickness between them is within the scope of normal optimization in the art, and something that one skilled in the art would be capable of doing.
Regarding claim 17, this is additionally related to modifying the thickness of the layers of Ye based on the teachings of Kwon, and thus the same reasoning as above is applied and no further motivation is required.
Regarding claim 17, modified Ye teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Ye and Jeon silent on the following elements of claim 17:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a ratio of a thickness of the first active layer to a thickness of the second active layer is 0.9:1 to 1.1:1.
However, Kwon teaches all of the elements of claim 17 that are not found in Ye or Jeon:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a ratio of a thickness of the first active layer to a thickness of the second active layer is 0.9:1 to 1.1:1. (“In the electrode according to embodiments, for example, a thickness of the first electrode active material layer may be about 1% to about 60% of the total thickness of the electrode active material layer, and a thickness of the second electrode active material layer may be about 40% to about 99% of the total thickness of the electrode active material layer.” Kwon [0055])
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art ranges of the ratio of thickness of the first and second active layer of being between 0.01:1 to 1.5:1 encompasses the claimed range between 0.9:1 to 1.1:1 for the same parameter. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 12-15, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 112768702A) in view of Jeon (US 20230187642 A1), further in view of Koh (US 20110318638 A1), and further in view of Li (US 20170092943 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Ye is silent on the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 9, wherein a surface of the layered oxide active material has a first coating layer,
wherein the first coating layer comprises one or more coating layers of carbon, conductive graphene, conductive polymer material, or oxide.
However, Li teaches all of the elements of claim 12 that are not found in Ye:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 9, wherein a surface of the layered oxide active material has a first coating layer, (“Preferably, the second positive electrode active material is one or more selected from a group consisting of the following materials: … LiaQz”NiyMny’Co1-y-y’-zO2 and “ 0≦z≦0.25, 0≦z′≦0.25, 0≦z″≦0.25, 0≦z′″≦0.25, 0<y<1, 0<y′<1, 0<y″<1, 0<y′″<1, 0<y+y′+z″<1, 0<y″+y′″+z′″<1, 1≦a≦1.2. Preferably, the element Q′ is one or more selected from a group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn,” Li [0022] and “Preferably, a carbon material or inorganic compound B is selected to coat the above-mentioned lithium cobalt dioxide, lithium nickelate, ternary lithium compounds” Li [0023])
wherein the first coating layer comprises one or more coating layers of carbon, conductive graphene, conductive polymer material, or oxide. (“That is to say, in the coated materials formed after the above-mentioned materials being coated, the coating layer is one or more selected from a group consisting of Al.sub.2O.sub.3, AlF.sub.3, AlPO.sub.4, Li.sub.3PO.sub.4, Li.sub.4P.sub.2O.sub.7, ZrO.sub.2, MgO, TiO.sub.2, Y.sub.2O.sub.3, LiAlO.sub.2 and LiNiPO.sub.4; or the coating layer is one or more selected from a group consisting of carbon black Super P, carbon fiber (VGCF), carbon nanotubes (CNTs), graphene, mesoporous ordered carbon (e.g. mesoporous ordered carbon CMK-3) and active carbon.” Li [0023])
Li is considered to be analogous to Ye because they are both within the same field of positive electrodes for lithium secondary batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the layered oxide material of Ye to include the coating layer of Li in order to decrease resistance and improve cycle times after nailing test, discharging internal resistance test, and cycle test. (Li table 4 compares batteries 1”-3” with batteries 1-7, where 1”-3” have no coating layer and 1-7 do. “] It can be learned from the relevant data in the above Table 4 that, compared with Batteries 1.sup.#˜3.sup.#, Batteries 1˜7 all possess lower nailing path temperature, no sparking, no fire, smaller discharging internal resistance and more cycle times after the nailing test, discharging internal resistance test and cycle test.” Li [0094])
This same reasoning applies to using the coating layer of Li to meet the limitations of claim 15 as well, and therefore no further modification of motivation is needed to meet the limitations of the claim
Regarding claim 13, Ye is silent on the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a mixed slurry with a mass percentage of 10% formed by mixing the phosphate-based positive electrode active material with water has a pH value between 8 and 10.
However, Li teaches all of the elements of claim 13 that are not found in Ye:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein a mixed slurry with a mass percentage of 10% formed by mixing the phosphate-based positive electrode active material with water has a pH value between 8 and 10. (By using the lithium iron phosphate salt of Li, which is the same material and has overlapping ranges with claim 14, as well as paragraph [0021] of the instant spec, this limitation would be inherently met as by mixing this material with water the pH would be always be the same, or at least cover the same range based on the percentage of active material vs water—the instant claim does not specify how much water is added, and therefore routine experimentation with how much active material vs how much water would inherently meet this pH range.)
Regarding claim 14, Ye is silent on the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 13, wherein the phosphate- based positive electrode active material comprises at least one of the following materials:LiMni-yFeyPO4, wherein y is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.5; Lii+tMni-cFecPi-zRzO4, wherein t is any value in a range of -0.100 to 0.100, c is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.500, z is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.100, and R comprises one or more elements selected from B, S, Si, and N; and Lii+wAmMni-uEuPi-aRaO4-nDn, wherein A comprises one or more elements selected from Zn, Al, Na, K, Mg, Nb, Mo, and W, E comprises one or more elements selected from Zn, Al, Na, K, Mg, Mo, W, Ti, V, Zr, Fe, Ni, Co, Ga, Sn, Sb, Nb, and Ge, R comprises one or more elements selected from B, S, Si, and N, D comprises one or more elements selected from S, F, Cl, and Br, w is any value in a range of -0.100 to 0.100, m is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.1, u is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.500, a is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.100, n is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.1, and Lii+wAmMni-uEuPi-aRaO4-nDn is electrically neutral.
However, Li teaches all of the elements of claim 14 that are not found in Ye:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 13, wherein the phosphate- based positive electrode active material comprises at least one of the following materials:LiMni-yFeyPO4, wherein y is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.5; Lii+tMni-cFecPi-zRzO4, wherein t is any value in a range of -0.100 to 0.100, c is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.500, z is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.100, and R comprises one or more elements selected from B, S, Si, and N; and Lii+wAmMni-uEuPi-aRaO4-nDn, wherein A comprises one or more elements selected from Zn, Al, Na, K, Mg, Nb, Mo, and W, E comprises one or more elements selected from Zn, Al, Na, K, Mg, Mo, W, Ti, V, Zr, Fe, Ni, Co, Ga, Sn, Sb, Nb, and Ge, R comprises one or more elements selected from B, S, Si, and N, D comprises one or more elements selected from S, F, Cl, and Br, w is any value in a range of -0.100 to 0.100, m is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.1, u is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.500, a is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.100, n is any value in a range of 0.001 to 0.1, and Lii+wAmMni-uEuPi-aRaO4-nDn is electrically neutral. (“Examples of the first positive electrode active material include: … LiMn0.75Fe0.25PO4” Li [0018])
Li is considered to be analogous to Ye for the reasons provided above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the phosphate based active material of Ye to substitute it with the phosphate based active material of Li because they are both known materials in the art and it would only require a simple substitution of one phosphate-based cathode active material for another, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
Regarding claim 15, Ye is silent on the following elements:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 13, wherein a surface of the phosphate-based positive electrode active material has a second coating layer,
wherein the second coating layer comprises one or more coating layers of pyrophosphate, phosphate, or carbon.
However, Li teaches all of the elements of claim 15 that are not found in Ye:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 13, wherein a surface of the phosphate-based positive electrode active material has a second coating layer, (“The material formed after the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt or lithium spinel salt being doped and/or coated refers to a material formed after the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt or lithium spinel salt being doped, or a material formed after the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt or lithium spinel salt being coated, or a material formed after the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt or lithium spinel salt being doped and then being coated.” Li [0014])
wherein the second coating layer comprises one or more coating layers of pyrophosphate, phosphate, or carbon. (“A carbon material can also be selected to coat the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt, lithium spinel salt and the doped material formed after the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt or lithium spinel salt being doped. The specific type of the carbon material can be selected according to actual demand, for example, carbon black (e.g. carbon black Super P), carbon fiber (VGCF), carbon nanotubes (CNTs), graphene, mesoporous ordered carbon (e.g. mesoporous ordered carbon CMK-3), active carbon and so on can all be used to coat the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt, lithium spinel salt and the doped material formed after the above-mentioned lithium phosphate salt, lithium silicate salt or lithium spinel salt being doped.” Li [0016])
Regarding claim 19, Ye is silent on the following elements:
An electric apparatus, comprising a secondary battery, wherein the secondary battery comprises the secondary battery according to claim 18.
However, Li teaches all of the elements of claim 19 that are not found in Ye:
An electric apparatus, comprising a secondary battery, wherein the secondary battery comprises the secondary battery according to claim 18. (“The lithium battery may be used in a battery that is used as a power source of a miniaturized device or may be used as a unit battery of a mid or large-sized device battery module including a plurality of batteries.” Li [0131])
Li is considered to be analogous to Ye for the reasons provided above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the secondary battery of claim 18, made from the positive electrode plate of claim 1, in an electric apparatus because not only is this taught explicitly by Li, but is an obvious use of a secondary battery, as the entire purpose of a battery is to be used to power an electric device or apparatus.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 112768702A) in view of Jeon (US 20230187642 A1), further in view of Koh (US 20110318638 A1), and further in view of Ko (US 20240234723 A1).
Regarding claim 20, modified Ye teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Ye is silent on the following elements of claim 20:
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein arrangement of the positive electrode film layer comprises any one of the following manners: one first active layer and two second active layers are arranged, with the first active layer disposed between the second active layers;
and two first active layers and one second active layer are arranged, with the second active layer disposed between the first active layers.
However, Ko teaches all of the elements of claim 20 that are not found in Ye or Jeon. Specifically, Ko teaches a positive electrode with two alternative positive electrode active material layers, that can have anywhere between 2 and 10 layers.
The positive electrode plate according to claim 1, wherein arrangement of the positive electrode film layer comprises any one of the following manners: one first active layer and two second active layers are arranged, with the first active layer disposed between the second active layers; (“Specifically, the positive electrode mixture layer has a structure in which n (where n≥2) individual positive electrode mixture layers are stacked on the positive electrode current collector. Here, the positive electrode mixture layer stacked on the surface contacting the positive electrode current collector is a first positive electrode mixture layer, and the second positive electrode mixture layer to the n.sup.th positive electrode mixture layer are sequentially stacked on the first positive electrode mixture layer, so that n individual positive electrode mixture layers are positioned on the positive electrode current collector.” Ko [0059] and “The number of positive electrode mixture layers is not particularly limited as long as the positive electrode mixture layer has a structure of two or more layers, but specifically, it may be 2 to 10 layers; 2 to 8 layers; 2 to 6 layers; or 2 to 4 layers.” Ko [0060])
and two first active layers and one second active layer are arranged, with the second active layer disposed between the first active layers.
Ko is considered to be analogous to Ye because it is within the same field of lithium secondary batteries containing multiple positive electrode active material layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the layered structure of Ye to include a third layer, in order to increase energy density of the electrode, among other beneficial effects (“By controlling the number of layers of the positive electrode mixture layer within the above range, the present disclosure may increase the energy density of the electrode while preventing a decrease in the manufacturing efficiency of the positive electrode, and at the same time, heat generated during charging and discharging of the battery can be effectively released to the outside.” Ko [0060]). Ko teaches that continuing to add additional alternating layers can provide positive effects on battery characteristics, and therefore, one skilled in the art would be able to come to the conclusion that adding a third layer (and possibly a 4th and beyond) could be a simple way to improve energy density, and therefore would be an obvious modification.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET whose telephone number is (571)272-0156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6pm except for the first Friday of bi-week.
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, NICHOLAS SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights