www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/480,847
`
`07/25/2019
`
`Ryo Kazawa
`
`P190735US00
`
`6783
`
`WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP
`8500 LEESBURG PIKE
`SUITE 7500
`TYSONS, VA 22182
`
`AMPONSAH,OSEI
`
`ART UNIT
`1729
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`03/04/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`patentmail @ whda.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-6 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)() The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 07/25/2019 is/are: a)[¥) accepted or b)(.) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)¥) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 07/25/2019.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210227
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/480 847
`Kazawaetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`OSEI K AMPONSAH
`1729
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s)filed on 25 July 2019.
`C) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/480,847
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application,filedonor after March 16, 2013,
`
`is being examined underthe
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Receiptis acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
`
`Priority
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07-25-2019 isin compliance
`
`with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being
`
`considered by the examiner.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`In the eventthe determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA35
`
`U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subjectto pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction
`
`of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the
`
`prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under
`
`either status.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obvio usness
`
`rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/480,847
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 3
`
`A patent fora claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed inventionis
`notidentically disclosed as set forth ins ection 102,if the differences between the claimed invention
`and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the
`effective filing date ofthe claimed invention to a person having ordinaryskillin the art to which the
`claimed invention pertains. Pa tentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`was made.
`
`The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under
`
`35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
`
`FPWNER
`
`Determining the scope and contentsof the prior art.
`Ascertaining the differences between the priorart and the claims at issue.
`Resolving the level of ordinary skillinthe pertinent art.
`Considering objective evidence presentin the application indicating obviousness
`or nonobviousness.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the
`
`claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly
`
`ownedas of the effectivefiling date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the
`
`contrary. Applicantis advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventorand
`
`effective filing dates of each claimthat was not commonly ownedas of the effectivefiling date
`
`of the later inventionin order for the examinerto consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C.
`
`102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the laterinvention.
`
`Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO
`
`2017/010255 Aji [English equivalent US 2018/0145371] hereinafter Maeda in view ofU.S.
`
`Pre-Grant Publication No. 2008/0063939 hereinafter Ryu.
`
`Regarding Claims 1 and 5, Maeda teaches a lithiumion secondarybattery (see figure 1)
`
`comprising: a negative electrode that comprises a negative electrode active material layer; a
`
`positive electrode; anda non-aqueous electrolyte that comprises a non-aqueous solvent
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/480,847
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 4
`
`(paragraph 73), wherein the negative electrode active material layer comprises carbon and
`
`silicate (paragraph 34), and the non-aqueous solvent includes a fluorinated solvent (paragraphs
`
`55, 64).
`
`Maeda does not specifically disclose a layered silicate such as laponite and included in
`
`an amount of 5% by weightor less.
`
`However, Ryu teaches an electrode material fora lithiumion secondary battery that
`
`comprises laponite (layered silicate) in an amount of 5% by weightor less based on the total
`
`weight of the electrode material (paragraph 16, 21, 23). Therefore, it would have been obvious
`
`to one of ordinary skill inthe art to use such layered silicate material before the e ffectivefiling
`
`date of the claimed invention because Ryu discloses that such modification can increase
`
`mechanical strength of the electrode material and improve the impregnation ability of an
`
`electrolyte (paragraph 16).
`
`Regarding Claim 2, the combination teaches a negative electrode active material layer
`
`that comprises carbon and layered silicate as described above, MPEP 2112.01 states that where
`
`the claimedand prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or
`
`composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie
`
`case of either anticipation or obviousness has beenestablished. /n re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255,
`
`195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA1977). "When the PTO showsa sound basis for believing that the
`
`products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of
`
`showing that they are not." /n re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir.
`
`1990). Becausethe structure recitedin the reference is substantially identical to that of the
`
`claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/480,847
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 5
`
`Regarding Claim 3, the combination teaches that the content of the fluorinated solvent
`
`is 5 vol % or more based on the total volume of the non-aqueous solvent (paragraphs 60, 84).
`
`Regarding Claim 4, the combinationteaches that the fluorinated solventincludes
`
`fluoroethylene carbonate (paragraph 64).
`
`Regarding Claim 6, the combinationteaches that the negative electrode active material
`
`layer includesa polymericthickener (i.e. carboxymethyl cellulose) (pargarph 51).
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examinershould be directed to OSEI K AMPONSAH whosetelephone numberis (571)270-3446.
`
`The examinercan normally be reached on Monday- Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
`
`Examinerinterviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing
`
`using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview,applicantis
`
`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, Ula C Ruddock can be reached on (571)272-1481. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or PublicPAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/480,847
`Art Unit: 1729
`
`Page 6
`
`system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/Private Pair. Should you have questions on access
`
`to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-
`
`free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to
`
`the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (INUSA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/OSEI K AMPONSAH/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
`
`