Ex Parte Suzuki et al - Page 8

               Appeal 2007-1024                                                                       
               Application 10/231,144                                                                 
                          2.     Cintra                                                               
               18) Cintra describes a battery electrode.  (Cintra, Abstract).                         

               19) The Examiner found that Cintra describes blending an electrode                     
               mixture comprising a binder and carbon black until all the agglomerated                
               particles are less than 10 microns as measured using a Hegman gauge.                   
               (Cintra, ¶¶ 0029-33).                                                                  

                          3.     Ward                                                                 
               20) Ward describes air depolarized electrochemical cells.  (Ward,                      
               Abstract).                                                                             

               21) Ward teaches using carbon black catalyst having a density of 0.47                  
               g/ml and reducing the size of agglomerated particles.  (Id. col. 16, ll. 1-20          
               and col. 17, ll. 40-50).                                                               

                          4.     Ono                                                                  
               22) Ono describes a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery that                     
               employs a binder for forming its anode and cathode.  (Ono, Abstract).                  

               23) Ono’s binder is a mixture of a fluorine polymer and polyimide.  (Id.).             

                  C.    Examiner’s Answer                                                             
               24) The Examiner made the following finding in response to Applicant’s                 
               argument that the prior art does not inherently have the claimed conductive            
               particle size:                                                                         

                                                  8                                                   

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013