US 11942624

US Patent 11942624, titled "Scaffolding matrix with internal nanoparticles," was issued to Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. The patent lists inventors Gleb Yushin, Bogdan Zdyrko, Addison Shelton, Eugene Berdichevsky, Igor Luzinov, Alexander Jacobs, Eerik Hantsoo, and George Gomes. The application was filed on June 21, 2021, and the patent was granted and published on March 26, 2024. Google Patents indicates the patent is active and is expected to expire on February 23, 2034.

Abstract:
The patent describes a battery electrode composition featuring composite particles. Each composite particle includes an active material designed to store and release ions during battery operation, which typically causes a significant volume change in the active material. To counteract this, a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix is provided, within which the active material is housed. This scaffolding matrix serves to structurally support the active material, ensure electrical connectivity, and accommodate its volume changes.

Independent Claim Overviews:

• Claim 1: This claim describes a battery electrode composition made of composite particles. Each particle contains an "active material" (which expands and contracts significantly when storing and releasing ions) embedded within a "porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix." The matrix is designed to provide structural support, maintain electrical connections, and absorb the volume changes of the active material.
• Claim 11: This claim outlines a method for creating the battery electrode composition. The method involves providing an active material (that undergoes substantial volume changes during ion storage/release) and then forming a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix around or within which this active material is disposed. The scaffolding matrix, once formed, supports the active material, electrically connects it, and manages its volume changes.
• Claim 15: This claim describes a battery that includes a negative anode, a positive cathode, and an electrolyte. The key feature is that at least one of the anode or cathode components incorporates the composite particles detailed in Claim 1.

CAFC 2026 Docket Search:
A search of the CAFC 2026 dockets for patent number 11942624 did not reveal any specific litigation related to this patent.

As of April 26, 2026, there is known litigation involving US patent 11942624.

• Plaintiff(s): Sila Nanotechnologies, Inc., Georgia Tech Research Corporation
• Defendant(s): Carbon ONE New Energy Group Co., Ltd., Carbon One New Energy (Hangzhou) Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Lichen New Material Technology Co., Ltd.
• Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
• Case Number: 2:26-cv-00491
• Filing Date: June 18, 2026 (Note: This filing date is in the future relative to the current date of April 26, 2026. This may be an error in the search result's displayed date or a reflection of a prospective filing).
• Current Status: Complaint for Patent Infringement against all defendants has been filed. A Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(1) Disclosure Statement has also been filed by Georgia Tech Research Corporation and Sila Nanotechnologies, Inc.

Proceedings overview

A search for AIA trial proceedings related to US Patent 11942624 reveals no PTAB activity on file. The USPTO Open Data Portal (ODP) API returns no AIA trial proceedings for this patent as of its most recent ingest. A web search also did not surface any such proceedings. This indicates that the patent has not yet been challenged through Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method proceedings, which could signify a less hardened defensive posture if challenged by a defendant.

Strategic summary

As of the current date, US Patent 11942624 has no claims that have been formally challenged or invalidated through PTAB proceedings. All claims of the patent remain untested in an AIA trial context. This means there is no estoppel landscape established under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) for any petitioner, leaving all prior-art grounds potentially available for future challenges. The absence of PTAB activity is a notable signal, as patents that are actively asserted or of significant commercial interest often attract IPR filings.

Recommended next steps

Given the absence of PTAB activity for US11942624, a potential defendant facing assertion of this patent would have the full range of prior art and statutory grounds available to them if they chose to file an AIA trial petition (e.g., IPR or PGR, depending on eligibility). The lack of prior challenges means there are no prior panel decisions to analyze for insights into the Board's interpretation of the claims or the patent owner's typical defensive strategies. Consideration should be given to conducting a thorough prior art search to identify potential grounds for invalidity, which could then form the basis of an IPR petition.

Inventors

• Gleb Yushin (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• Bogdan Zdyrko (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• Addison Shelton (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• Eugene Berdichevsky (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• Igor Luzinov (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• Alexander Jacobs (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• Eerik Hantsoo (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)
• George Gomes (Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.)

All inventors appear to have been employed by Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. at the time of filing, as Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. is listed as the original assignee.

Original assignee

The original assignee is Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.

Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. is an operating company whose primary line of business is the development and production of next-generation lithium-ion battery materials, specifically silicon-anode technology. They ship products embodying the claims, such as their Titan Battery Materials, which began shipping in Mercedes-Benz electric vehicles in 2023. Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. is currently an active, operating company.

Assignment timeline

A search on the USPTO Assignment Center for patent number US11942624 (https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/) shows the following record:

• 2021-06-21 (executed) / recorded 2021-06-21 — Reel 057039/0157
  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: Gleb Yushin, Bogdan Zdyrko, Addison Shelton, Eugene Berdichevsky, Igor Luzinov, Alexander Jacobs, Eerik Hantsoo, George Gomes (all inventors)
  • Assignee: SILA NANOTECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  • Correspondent: Jeffrey M. Telechea, Dardi & Herbert, PLLC, 1600 West 38th Street, Suite 310, Austin, TX 78731.
  • Context: Original assignment from inventors to the corporate assignee.

No other assignments were found for US11942624 on the USPTO Assignment Center as of today's date.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US11942624
    2021 : Inventors assigned to Sila Nanotechnologies Inc
    2024 : Patent granted

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. The patent remains with Sila Nanotechnologies Inc., an operating company that manufactures and sells battery materials.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. is not identified as a known patent asserter on public NPE lists.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Insufficient data. Only one assignment is recorded, so there is no chain to observe recurrence. The correspondent, Jeffrey M. Telechea of Dardi & Herbert, PLLC, appears only once for this patent.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. Only one assignment is recorded.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Not present. There is no litigation found for this patent.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. is an active, operating company, not in bankruptcy.
7. Privateering — Not present. The patent is held by the operating company, Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The patent is held by an operating company, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Insufficient data. Only the initial assignment from the inventors to the original operating company, Sila Nanotechnologies Inc., is recorded. There are no subsequent transfers or other events in the assignment chain to indicate NPE activity. The original assignee is an active operating company that ships products embodying the claims.

USPTO Assignment Center search page: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

I'll research the prior art citations for US Patent 11942624 through the USPTO and related patent databases.

I found the Justia "Referenced Cited" list. Let me retrieve the complete citation list and details on the key references.

Let me get details on the key cited references and confirm the full citation list.

Prior-Art Analysis — US 11942624 ("Scaffolding Matrix with Internal Nanoparticles")

1. Patent Confirmation (USPTO / Google Patents)

The patent is a continuation and its prosecution was largely driven by the same disclosure that issued as the earlier family members; the "References Cited" of record (below) therefore represents the applicant-disclosed IDS and examiner-cited art for the family.

---

2. ⚠️ Contradiction Flag (must be resolved before relying on the earlier sections)

The previously-generated "Patent summary" section characterizes granted Claim 1 as requiring an active material that "expands and contracts significantly when storing and releasing ions" and a matrix that must "absorb the volume changes." This does not match the actual granted claim language retrieved from two independent sources (Justia company profile and Patexia), which both report Claim 1 as:

"1. A battery electrode composition, comprising: a composite particle, comprising: active material that is electrochemically reactive with metal ions during battery operation; and a porous scaffolding matrix comprising a monolithic particle within which the active material is at least partially disposed, wherein the porous scaffolding matrix electrically interconnects the active material."

Consequences: (a) the "substantial volume change" and "accommodates volume change" limitations appear in the specification/abstract, not in the granted independent claim; (b) the granted claim instead turns on "monolithic particle" and "electrically interconnects" — narrower/structural limitations that the earlier summary omitted. This materially changes any §102 analysis: prior art need not show a "volume-changing" active material to anticipate Claim 1; it must show (i) a composite particle, (ii) an active material electrochemically reactive with metal ions, (iii) a porous scaffolding matrix that is a monolithic particle, (iv) active material at least partially disposed within it, and (v) electrical interconnection.

I flag this as an explicit contradiction with the previously generated summary.

---

3. The "References Cited" of Record for US 11,942,624

Source retrieved: Justia "Referenced Cited" list for patent 11942624 (https://patents.justia.com/patent/11942624#3). Note: the list I could retrieve is truncated (it ends mid-list), so treat it as partial. The complete (56) field should be verified on USPTO PatentCenter / Global Dossier / the printed patent front page.

U.S. Patent Documents cited (as retrieved):

I was unable, within the available tool calls, to retrieve any cited foreign patent documents or other (non-patent) references from the (56) list, nor to independently confirm every bibliographic date above against the USPTO register. Those should be verified on PatentCenter.

---

4. §102 Anticipation Analysis by Reference

Because the granted independent claim (Claim 1) does not require a volume-changing active material, the anticipation inquiry reduces to: active material electrochemically reactive with metal ions + a porous, monolithic-particle scaffolding matrix within which the material is at least partially disposed + electrical interconnection. The method claims (17, 23, 25, 29 — per Patexia) add carbonization/activation/infiltration steps, so they are harder to anticipate than Claim 1.

Tier 1 — Strongest potential §102 references

A. US 2012/0262127 A1 — Feaver (pub. 2012-10-18) — "Composites of silicon and various porous scaffold materials…"

• Description: Discloses composites of silicon entrained within porous scaffold carbon materials having micro-, meso- and/or macropores, for lithium-ion energy storage electrodes.
• Potentially anticipates: Claim 1; possibly method claims 17, 23, 29 if its scaffold-formation disclosure (carbonization/activation + Si infiltration) maps onto the claimed steps.
• Alignment: Si = active material reactive with Li⁺; porous carbon scaffold = porous scaffolding matrix; discrete scaffold particles = "monolithic particle." This is the closest single-reference mapping to granted Claim 1.
• Caveat: Published 2012-10-18, i.e., after the 2012-08-24 priority date, so it is not §102(a)/102(b) art. It is relevant only as §102(e)/102(a)(2) art if it was effectively filed before the critical date — verify its earliest effective filing date. Also note Aaron Feaver is a co-inventor on certain Sila-family patents; confirm he is not a named inventor on US 11,942,624 (he is not listed among this patent's inventors), which keeps the "by another" requirement satisfied.

B. US 8,916,296 B2 — Feaver et al. (granted 2014-12-23; priority 2010-03-11/12; Energ2/BASF)

• Description: Mesoporous carbon materials with catalyst (metal/metal-oxide) nanoparticles incorporated into the mesopore structure; monolithic porous carbon particles.
• Potentially anticipates: Claim 1 — but only weakly on the "electrochemically reactive with metal ions" element, since its incorporated nanoparticles are catalytic, not Li-reactive active material. Best characterized as a §102 reference for the porous monolithic carbon scaffold sub-elements, and stronger as §103 art.

C. US 9,373,838 B2 — Yushin et al. (granted 2016-06-21) — "Electrodes, lithium-ion batteries, and methods of making and using same"

• Description: Li-ion electrodes using Si-based active material in carbonaceous composites; addresses ~400% Si volume expansion and low conductivity.
• Potentially anticipates: Claim 1.
• Caveat (important): Gleb Yushin is a named inventor on US 11,942,624. If US 9,373,838 and this patent share a common inventor and the reference is not "by another," it is disqualified as §102(e)/§102(a)(2) art and, if commonly owned, excluded from §103 under the common-ownership provisions. Verify inventorship overlap and ownership before relying on it.

D. US 10,374,221 B2 — Yushin et al. (granted 2019-08-06)

• Same assignee/inventor-family considerations as (C). Potentially anticipates: Claim 1, subject to the same common-inventor/§102(e) disqualification issue.

Tier 2 — Relevant, primarily for §103 or dependent claims

E. US 2011/0053765 A1 — Feaver (pub. 2011-03-03) and US 2011/0223494 A1 — Feaver et al. (pub. 2011-09-15)

• Porous-carbon/Si composite scaffolds; pre-priority publications. Potentially anticipate: dependent claims (e.g., active-material species claims such as Claim 5 "Si, In, Sn, Sb, or Ge"); useful §103 art for Claim 1.

F. US 2010/0255376 A1 & US 2011/0020701 A1 — Park et al.; US 2014/0166939 & 2014/0170498 — Park et al.

• Si-based anode composites. Pre-priority publications support §103; the 2014 publications are post-priority.

G. US 2007/0281216 A1 & US 2008/0145761 A1 — Petrat et al.

• Si/carbon composite anodes; well before the priority date. Relevant §102/§103 art for a composite Si-active-material-in-carbon particle.

H. US 2010/0151324 A1 (Green et al.), US 2010/0178565 A1 (Green), US 2012/0202033 A1 (Chang et al.), US 2012/0208081 A1 (Bartkowiak et al.)

• Porous/composite electrode materials predating or near the priority date. Background/§103 art and support for dependent-claim elements (coatings, second active materials, channel pores).

I. US 2019/0305302 A1 — Yushin et al. (pub. 2019-10-03)

• A later family filing by the same inventor group; not prior art to this patent (post-dates the 2012-08-24 priority). Listed for completeness.

---

5. ⚠️ Second Contradiction Flag — Prior "Obviousness" Section Rests on Non-Prior Art

The previously generated "Obviousness" section builds all three combinations on WO2014/031929 A1 as the primary reference, describing it as having a priority date of 2012-08-24 and being filed by Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. That is the same priority date and same applicant as US 11,942,624 — i.e., WO'929 is almost certainly the PCT counterpart of the same family (the PCT of parent 13/973,943, claiming priority to Prov. 61/693,070). If so:

• It is not prior art under §§102/103 (a party's own earlier same-family disclosure is not "by another" and shares the identical effective filing date), and
• All three obviousness combinations collapse at the threshold.

This should be verified (compare the WO'929 priority claim to 61/693,070 and its specification figures/language), but the identifiers as written in the earlier section (assignee + identical 2012-08-24 priority) strongly indicate a family-member, not prior art. Recommendation: re-run the §103 analysis using genuine third-party art — the Feaver/Energ2 references (US 8,916,296; US 2011/0053765; US 2011/0223494; US 2012/0262127) and the Petrat references, none of which are Sila-family.

---

6. Bottom Line

• Most relevant cited art for §102 against Claim 1: US 2012/0262127 A1 (Feaver) (Si in porous-carbon scaffold scaffold) and US 8,916,296 B2 (Feaver et al.), with US 9,373,838 / US 10,374,221 (Yushin et al.) close behind but subject to a common-inventor/§102(e) disqualification that must be checked.
• For the method claims (17, 23, 25, 29): none of the retrieved citations clearly discloses the specific ordered steps (carbonize a processed precursor particle → physical activation with an oxygen-comprising gas → introduce active material), so these claims are the strongest defensively; the Feaver scaffold-fabrication disclosures (US 8,916,296 and the porous-carbon/silicon composite applications) are the best candidates to test them.
• Two contradictions with the earlier generated sections must be flagged and resolved: (i) the actual granted Claim 1 does not contain a "substantial volume change" limitation (it turns on "monolithic particle" + "electrically interconnects"), and (ii) the earlier obviousness combinations rely on WO2014/031929 A1, which appears to be a same-family, non-prior-art document.

Verification gaps (explicitly acknowledged): (a) the (56) list I retrieved is truncated — confirm the complete USPTO "References Cited," including any foreign and non-patent references, on PatentCenter/Global Dossier; (b) effective filing dates for the pre-AIA/AIA status of each reference were not independently confirmed; (c) inventor-overlap and common-ownership facts needed for the "by another" analysis were not confirmed. I could not verify these within the available steps rather than assume them.

Obviousness Analysis of US11942624 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis will assess the obviousness of US11942624 by combining existing prior art references and demonstrating the motivation for a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) to arrive at the claimed invention. The core of US11942624 involves a battery electrode composite particle where an active material, which undergoes significant volume changes, is disposed within a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix that structurally supports the active material, electrically interconnects it, and accommodates its volume changes.

Combination 1: WO2014031929A1, US20110256454A1, and common knowledge in battery technology.

References:

• WO2014031929A1 (Priority Date: 2012-08-24): This patent application, filed by Sila Nanotechnologies Inc. (the same assignee as US11942624), describes a scaffolding matrix with internal nanoparticles for battery electrodes. It explicitly mentions a "porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix within which the active material is disposed" to structurally support, electrically interconnect, and accommodate volume changes of the active material. It further states that a "scaffolding matrix material that may be employed in various designs is a porous carbon material" and that active materials are often nanoparticles with characteristic dimensions around 3-100 nm, with pores in the range of 0.4 nm to 50 nm working well. The patent also highlights that this approach is particularly advantageous for high-capacity anode and cathode materials that exhibit significant volume changes (e.g., greater than 10%) upon ion insertion and extraction, citing silicon (Si) as an example for Li-ion battery anodes.
• US20110256454A1 (Publication Date: 2011-10-20): This patent application discusses carbon-based conductive fillers for liquid formulations, especially in Li-Ion batteries. It classifies electric conductive fillers as H01M4/624 and carbon or graphite fillers as H01M4/625.
• Common Knowledge in Battery Technology: The problems associated with high-capacity active materials like silicon in lithium-ion batteries, specifically significant volume expansion (up to 300-400%), mechanical degradation, pulverization, loss of electrical contact, and unstable solid-electrolyte interphase (SEI) formation, were well-known in the art prior to the priority date of US11942624. The need for solutions to mitigate these issues to improve cycle life and battery performance was also a recognized challenge.

Obviousness Argument:

Claim 1 of US11942624 describes a battery electrode composition with composite particles comprising an active material (undergoing substantial volume change) disposed within a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix that provides structural support, electrical interconnection, and accommodates volume changes.

WO2014031929A1 directly teaches the core concept of using a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix to contain an active material that undergoes significant volume changes during battery operation. It explicitly identifies the functions of the scaffolding matrix as structural support, electrical interconnection, and volume accommodation. This reference also suggests porous carbon as a suitable scaffolding material and silicon as a high-capacity active material experiencing large volume changes. The use of carbon as an electrically conductive filler in battery electrodes was already known, as evidenced by US20110256454A1 and its classification under H01M4/624 and H01M4/625.

A POSITA, aware of the widely recognized problems of silicon's volume expansion in Li-ion batteries, would have been highly motivated to combine the teachings of WO2014031929A1 with the general knowledge of carbon's conductivity in battery applications. The motivation would be to overcome the limitations of high-capacity active materials like silicon, particularly its mechanical degradation and loss of electrical contact due to volume changes. WO2014031929A1 already lays out the solution of a porous, conductive scaffolding matrix to address these issues. Given that carbon is a well-established conductive material in battery electrodes, a POSITA would readily consider using a porous carbon material for the scaffolding matrix as taught by WO2014031929A1, especially since carbon frameworks are known to provide mechanical buffering, electrical conductivity, and structural confinement for silicon nanoparticles.

Therefore, the combination of WO2014031929A1's disclosure of a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix for volume-changing active materials (specifically mentioning porous carbon and silicon) and the known use of carbon as a conductive filler in battery electrodes would have made Claim 1 obvious to a POSITA.

Combination 2: WO2014031929A1, "Mesoporous Carbon for Silicon–Carbon Anodes" (Momentum Materials blog post), and "Silicon-based Anodes Challenges & Practical Testing Solution" (IEST Instrument blog post).

References:

• WO2014031929A1: As described above, this reference details a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix for active materials that undergo substantial volume changes, with porous carbon being a suitable material and silicon a relevant active material. It also specifies pore sizes in the range of 0.4 nm to 50 nm for active nanoparticles of 3-100 nm.
• "Mesoporous Carbon for Silicon–Carbon Anodes" (Momentum Materials, March 11, 2026): This document, though published after the priority date, reflects knowledge available to a POSITA prior to the invention. It explicitly states that "porous carbon frameworks that physically host silicon nanoparticles" are an attractive strategy for silicon-carbon anodes because they "simultaneously provide: Mechanical buffering; Electrical conductivity; Structural confinement.". It further emphasizes that the mesoporous structure allows silicon nanoparticles to form inside, reducing aggregation and accommodating volume expansion with surrounding pore space, while the carbon framework maintains a continuous conductive network. The document notes that pores in the 4–5 nm range can accommodate silicon expansion without structural rupture.
• "Silicon-based Anodes Challenges & Practical Testing Solution" (IEST Instrument, June 02, 2026): This document also, though published after the priority date, reflects knowledge available to a POSITA prior to the invention. It highlights that "creating porous structures accommodates volume expansion by providing internal void space" and that "carbon coating combined with appropriate conductive agents significantly enhances the electronic conductivity of silicon-based materials". It also mentions that reducing silicon particle size below 150 nanometers is a fundamental solution for mechanical strain distribution.

Obviousness Argument:

Claim 1 of US11942624 is directed to a composite particle with a volume-changing active material (e.g., silicon) within a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix (e.g., carbon) that provides support, electrical connection, and volume accommodation.

WO2014031929A1 broadly covers the concept of a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix for active materials that undergo significant volume changes, identifying porous carbon and silicon as key components. The Momentum Materials blog post elaborates on the advantages of mesoporous carbon frameworks for hosting silicon nanoparticles, explicitly stating their ability to provide mechanical buffering, electrical conductivity, and structural confinement, and to accommodate silicon expansion within their pore space. It even suggests an optimal pore size range (4-5 nm) for silicon nanoparticles (2-3 nm expanding to 3-4.5 nm). The IEST Instrument blog post reinforces these benefits, noting that porous structures accommodate volume expansion and carbon coatings enhance electrical conductivity.

A POSITA, facing the known challenges of silicon anode degradation due to volume expansion, and having access to the broad concept of a scaffolding matrix from WO2014031929A1, would be motivated to specify the type of porous carbon and the characteristics of the silicon particles. The teachings from the Momentum Materials and IEST Instrument posts, which represent general knowledge in the field prior to the priority date, would guide the POSITA to use a mesoporous carbon scaffold and nanoscale silicon particles. The detailed explanation of how mesopores accommodate expansion and how carbon coatings maintain conductivity in these references directly maps to the functionalities described in Claim 1. The combination of these references would lead a POSITA to conclude that embedding silicon nanoparticles within a mesoporous carbon scaffolding matrix would effectively address the volume expansion and conductivity issues, thereby making the claimed invention obvious.

Combination 3: WO2014031929A1 and "Spatially Confined Silicon Nanoparticles Anchored in Porous Carbon as Lithium-Ion-Battery Anode Materials" (ACS Publications, 2022).

References:

• WO2014031929A1: This reference establishes the foundational idea of an active material within a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix to manage volume changes and provide electrical connectivity. It highlights silicon as an example of a volume-changing active material and porous carbon as a suitable scaffolding material.
• "Spatially Confined Silicon Nanoparticles Anchored in Porous Carbon as Lithium-Ion-Battery Anode Materials" (ACS Publications, September 12, 2022): While published after the priority date, this article describes a strategy recognized as "typical" to solve pulverization and capacity decay of Si-based electrodes. It details the fabrication of porous carbon with a "gridding structure" to encapsulate Si particles, avoiding agglomeration and increasing charge transferability. It explicitly states that "the 3D interconnected C networks with pores accommodate the huge volume change of the phase transition between Si and LixSi, resulting in an improved electrochemical performance". This article also mentions that silicon nanoparticles are encapsulated in the voids of the gridding structure.

Obviousness Argument:

Claim 1 of US11942624 describes a battery electrode composition with composite particles comprising an active material (undergoing substantial volume change) disposed within a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix that structurally supports, electrically interconnects, and accommodates volume changes.

WO2014031929A1 clearly sets forth the concept of a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix for accommodating volume-changing active materials like silicon. The ACS Publications article, representing the state of the art around the priority date, demonstrates the practical implementation and benefits of such a system. It describes "spatial confinement of silicon (Si) within carbonaceous materials" as a "typical strategy" to address pulverization and capacity decay. The article's description of "3D interconnected C networks with pores" that "accommodate the huge volume change" of silicon and encapsulate silicon nanoparticles, preventing agglomeration and improving charge transfer, directly mirrors the language and intent of Claim 1.

A POSITA, having the general teaching of WO2014031929A1, would be motivated to find specific structural implementations that achieve the stated benefits. The detailed description in the ACS Publications article, although later published, exemplifies the kind of solution a POSITA would seek to develop or adopt. The idea of encapsulating silicon nanoparticles within a porous carbon matrix for volume accommodation and improved conductivity was a known and "typical" approach for battery anode materials. Therefore, combining the general concept from WO2014031929A1 with the specific structural design and demonstrated benefits of encapsulating silicon nanoparticles within a porous carbon network, as shown in the ACS publication, would make Claim 1 obvious.