Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`REMARKS
`
`Claims 1 to 4 are pending. Claim 1 has been amended. Support for the amendment can be
`
`found in at least paragraph [0027] of the specification as filed. No new matter has been entered.
`
`Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102
`
`Claims 1 to 4 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO
`
`2013/088540, Takahata et al. with US 2015/0030931 used as an English language equivalent.
`
`Applicants respectfully traverse the rejection.
`
`Claim 1 requires the battery is configured such that a discharge cut-off voltage of the
`
`nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery is in a range of 2.5 V to 3.0 V, and a part of the non-
`
`opposing region adjacent to a boundary between the opposing region and the non-opposing
`
`region has an electric potential plateau in a range of -0.02 V to +0.02 V relative to a negative
`
`electrode potential in the opposing region.
`
`Claim 1 has been amended in part to define ‘the part of the non-opposing region adjacent
`
`to the boundary” as “a region that extends toward the non-opposing region from the boundary by
`
`1 mm to 2 mm.’
`
`The Examiner acknowledges that Takahata fails to teach this feature but maintains this
`
`feature is inherently because, allegedly, Takahata recites a battery that is identical in structure. See
`
`the Office Action, page 9.
`
`Next, the Examiner argues that the Applicant’s arguments are directed to a method of
`
`charging/discharging that claimed battery, whereas the claims are a device, and not what the device
`
`does. See the Office Action, page 8.
`
`Applicant respectfully disagrees.
`
`

`

`Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`
`In consideration of the structure characteristic, the non-opposing region having an electric
`
`potential plateau in a range of -0.02 V to +0.02 V relative to a negative electrode potential in the
`
`opposing region, the specification as filed provides the following:
`
`[0010] When the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery starts to be charged,
`
`lithium is intercalated into the opposing region of the negative electrode, while
`
`lithium is not intercalated into the non-opposing region. Thus, the negative
`
`electrode potential in the non-opposing region is typically higher than that of
`
`the opposing region. Therefore, in a part of the non-opposing region adjacent
`
`to a boundary between the opposing region and the non-opposing region1 a
`
`large difference in the negative electrode potential is generated. To eliminate
`
`the large difference in the negative electrode potential in the part of the non-
`
`opposing region adjacent to the boundary, some of the lithium diffuses from the
`
`opposing region into the non-opposing region. Lithium in the opposing region also
`
`diffuses gradually into the non-opposing region as the charging progresses.
`
`However, the large difference in the negative electrode potential in the region
`
`adjacent to the boundary between the opposing region and the non-opposing
`
`region is retained even after discharging and charging are performed.
`
`Accordingly, during typical discharging, lithium that has diffused into the non-
`
`opposing region cannot be returned to the positive electrode, and during
`
`charging, lithium in the opposing region diffuses into the non-opposing region. The
`
`diffusion velocity of the lithium into the non-opposing region decreases with
`
`increasing the diffusion distance, that is, a distance from the boundary, and finally,
`
`the diffusion reaction appears to be completed. In other words, while charging and
`
`

`

`Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`discharging are repeatedly performed,
`
`lithium that cannot be returned to the
`
`positive electrode accumulates in the non-opposing region, thereby decreasing the
`
`capacity of the battery. Such a decrease in the capacity due to the accumulation
`
`of lithium in the non-opposing region is considerable during initial charge-
`
`discharge cycles (e.g.,
`
`1 cycle to 200 cycles).
`
`In other words, a decrease in the
`
`capacity during the initial charge-discharge cycles is considerable.
`
`Applicants unexpected achieve a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery in which a
`
`decrease in the capacity during initial charge-discharge cycles can be suppressed. This feature is
`
`achieved with the structure as per claim 1. That is, it is the specific structure of the battery of claim
`
`1 that achieves an electric potential plateau in a range of -0.02 V to +0.02 V in the non-opposing
`
`region relative to a negative electrode potential in the opposing region. The structural battery of
`
`claim 1 is achieved by a specific method of manufacture. The very fact that Takahata teaches a
`
`different structure, and a different method of manufactures plainly means the battery of Takahata
`
`cannot inherently possess the above characteristic.
`
`The Examiner’s attention is respectfully turned to Figures 4 of the specification as filed.
`
`“Here, Figure 4(B) illustrates an example of the negative electrode potential in a battery in which
`
`a second step that will be described later has been performed, and the negative electrode
`
`potential is a negative electrode potential in the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery in which
`
`discharging has been stopped in the range of 2.5 V to 3.0 V. Figure 4(C) illustrates an example of
`
`the negative electrode potential in a battery in which a typical charging and discharging have been
`
`performed once or more, and the negative electrode potential is a negative electrode potential in
`
`the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery in which discharging has been stopped in the range
`
`of 2.5 V to 3.0 V.” That is, Figure 4b illustrates the battery as presently claimed, and Figure 4c is
`
`

`

`Application No.: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No.: P171418USOO
`
`a prior art/comparative battery. The only difference between the batteries is whether or not the
`
`“second step” is performed.
`
`The “second step” is a specific step in the method of manufacture, and not a step of “what
`
`the device does” (see Office Action, page 8, final paragraph). The “second step” is as follows:
`
`[0029] ....(2) a second step of discharging the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary
`battery to a battery voltage (e.g., a battery voltage of 1.5 V to 1.9 V) lower than a
`typical discharge cut-off voltage at a high discharging rate (e.g., 1 C to 2 C) and
`then allowing the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery to stand for a
`predetermined time is performed after the first step, thereby obtaining a nonaqueous
`electrolyte secondary battery including a negative electrode in which the negative
`electrode potential gradient in the part of the non-opposing region adjacent to the
`boundary is less than that in the part of the non-opposing region farthest from the
`boundary.
`
`The method of manufacture,
`
`including this “second step” specifically imparts
`
`structure to the resultant battery that is evidence during the working of the battery. For example,
`
`in the Examples, the materials for the working example and the comparative are the same, however
`
`the method of manufacture differs (only whether the second step is carried out). That is, during
`
`manufacture the working example is discharged to 1.6V, and the comparative to 3V DURING
`
`THE MANUFACTURING. The following properties from the resultant batteries are provided
`
`in Table 1, reproduced herein for convenience:
`
`
`
`Example
`comparat've
`Example
`
`
`
`
`Negative electrode
`Negative electrode
`Negative electrode
`Negative electrode
`potential at a position potential at a position
`potential in part of
`potential in part of
`in non-opposing
`in non-opposing
`non-opposing region
`opposing region
`region 2 mm away
`region 10 mm away
`adjacent to boundary adjacent to boundary
`from boundary
`from boundary
`.
`.+
`.
`.+
`(“5' “/L' )
`(”5' “/L' )
`(vs. Li/Li+)
`(vs. Li/Li+)
`
`
`
`
`
`0.35 V
`0.34 v
`
`
`
`0.37 V
`0.37 v
`
`As detailed in the specification:
`
`

`

`Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`[0057] In Example, the negative electrode potential in a region extending from the
`
`boundary toward the opposing region by 1 mm, that is, the negative electrode
`
`potential in the part of the opposing region adjacent to the boundary was 0.35 V (vs.
`
`Li/Li+), and the negative electrode potential
`
`in a region extending from the
`
`boundary toward the non-opposing region by 1 mm, that is, the negative electrode
`
`potential in the part of the non-opposing region adjacent to the boundary was 0.34
`
`V (vs. Li/Li+). Since the negative electrode potential in the part of the opposing
`
`region adjacent to the boundary can be assumed to be equal to the negative
`
`electrode potential at the boundary, the amount of change in the electric potential
`
`in the part of the non-opposing region adjacent to the boundary was 0.01 V, thereby
`
`confirming that the electric potential plateau was formed in the part of the
`
`non-opposing region adjacent to the boundary.
`
`In contrast, in Comparative
`
`Example, the negative electrode potential in the part of the opposing region
`
`adjacent to the boundary was 0.34 V (vs. Li/Li+), and the negative electrode
`
`potential in the part of the non-opposing region adjacent to the boundary was
`
`0.38 V (vs. Li/Li+). Therefore, the amount of change in the electric potential in the
`
`part of the non-opposing region adjacent to the boundary was 0.04 V, thereby
`
`confirming that the electric potential plateau was not formed in the part of the
`
`non-opposing region adjacent to the boundary.
`
`Accordingly, contrary to the Examiner’s allegation that because Takahata teaches
`
`“identical” materials the claimed electric potential plateau would be ‘inherent,’ Applicant has
`
`unequivocally demonstrated that the feature is not an inherent property based upon material.
`
`

`

`Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`Rather, the property is a feature of the structure, and that structure is imparted based upon a specific
`
`method.
`
`Takahata teaches
`
`[0058] The negative electrode active material 55 desirably has shape magnetic
`
`anisotropy. The material having shape magnetic anisotropy may be easily oriented
`
`along the easy direction of magnetization by application of a magnetic field. A
`
`typical example of the material may include a graphite material having shape
`
`anisotropy. The graphite material may be natural graphite, artificial graphite,
`
`amorphous substances thereof and the like.
`
`That is, although Takahata teaches graphite material may be used, an essential structural
`
`element is that the resultant “the negative electrode active material” “has shape magnetic
`
`anisotropy.” This is achieves by:
`
`[0180] On a Cu foil having a thickness of 20 um which is a current collector, the
`
`composition for forming a conductive base accumulated layer 1 was applied on
`
`both sides at an areal weight of 1.8 mg/cm2 per side and then the composition for
`
`forming a negative electrode active material layer 1 was applied on both sides at an
`
`areal weight of 9 ing/cm2 per side. Before the paste was dried, a magnetic field
`
`having magnetic force lines perpendicular to the surface of the current collector
`
`was applied by using an orientation device 240 (magnets 245) shown in FIG. 6.
`
`Namely, the magnets 245 were arranged at positions 10 cm distant from the
`
`surfaces of the composition for forming a negative electrode active material
`
`layer and a magnetic field of 0.75 T was applied by moving the negative
`
`electrode sheet between the magnets 245. The magnetic field was applied for
`
`

`

`Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`10 seconds. After drying the negative electrode active material layer, the negative
`
`electrode was extended by applying pressure (pressed) so that the total thickness
`
`thereof was 120 um and the negative electrode active material layer had a density
`
`of about 1.5 g/cm3 to prepare a negative electrode 1 (negative electrode sheet)
`
`having negative electrode active material layers on both sides of the negative
`
`electrode current collector. The negative electrode 1 is cut into a length of 3300 m
`
`and is subjected to assembly of a battery.
`
`Thus, producing a negative electrode active material layer having shape magnetic
`
`anisotropy will result in a distinct structure to the negative electrode active material layer.
`
`Accordingly, as evident from above, the method that was argued in the previous response
`
`was not pertaining to “what the device does” but clearly demonstrating that the battery of Takahata
`
`could not inherently possess the claimed characteristics because these characteristics are specific
`
`to the structure imparted to the battery upon specific method steps. This is evidenced in the data
`
`in the specification as filed.
`
`According to MPEP § 2112(IV), the fact that a certain result or characteristic my occur
`
`or be present in the prior art is not sufficient to establish the inherency of that result or
`
`characteristic. In re Rijckaert, 9 F.3d 1531, 1534, 28 USPQ2d 1955, 1957 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
`
`(reversed rejection because inherency was based on what would result due to optimization of
`
`conditions, not what was necessarily present in the prior art), In re Oelrz'ch, 666 F.2d 578, 581-82,
`
`212 USPQ 323, 326 (CCPA 1981).
`
`It is well settled that the “very essence of inherency is that one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`would recognize that a reference unavoidably teaches the property in question.” Agilenl
`
`Technologies, Inc. v. Afi/melrix, Inc., 567 F.3d 1366, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (italicized emphasis
`
`10
`
`

`

`Application No: 15/859,856
`
`Docket No: P171418USOO
`
`added); see also In re Oelrich, 666 F.2d 578, 581 (CCPA 1981) (“Inherency, however, may not be
`
`established by probabilities or possibilities. The mere fact that a certain thing may result from a
`
`given set of circumstances is not sufficient”).
`
`In view of the claim amendments and aforementioned remarks, Applicants submit that the
`
`claims, as herein amended, are in condition for allowance. Applicants request such action at an
`
`early date.
`
`If the Examiner believes that this application is not now in condition for allowance, the
`
`Examiner is requested to contact the undersigned attorney at the telephone number indicated below
`
`to arrange for an interview to expedite the disposition of this case.
`
`If this paper is not timely filed, Applicants respectfully petition for an appropriate extension
`
`of time. The fees for such an extension or any other fees that may be due with respect to this paper
`
`may be charged to Deposit Account No. 50-2866.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`WESTERMAN, HATTORI, DANIELS & ADRIAN, LLP
`
`/Adele Critchley/
`
`Adele Critchley
`Patent Agent for Applicants
`Registration No. 73,864
`Telephone: 703-827-3800
`Facsimile: 571-395-8753
`
`AC/af/s s
`
`11
`
`