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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/01/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
The Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 12/01/2025, has been entered. Claim 1 is amended; claims 3-9 and 11-14 stand as originally or previously presented; claims 2 and 10 are cancelled; and claims 8-15 are withdrawn. Support for the amendments is found in the original filing, and there is no new matter.
Upon considered said amendments and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C.112(b) rejection has been withdrawn. The previous 35 U.S.C.103 rejection set forth in Office Action mailed 06/13/2025 has been maintained (and altered as required by amendment), as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 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 of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability 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:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in 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 owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to 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 later invention.
Claims 1, 5-7, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (JP 2014102987 A), in view of Miyashita et al. (US 20170352916 A1, hereinafter Miyashita).
Regarding Claims 1, 11 and 13, Ohashi discloses the limitations for a sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, sulfide solid electrolyte, Abstract) for a solid-state battery (Ohashi, sulfide solid electrolyte is used in an all-solid state battery, [0050]) comprising a lithium-ion conductive sulfide (Ohashi, solid electrolyte exhibiting excellent lithium ion conductive performance, [0036]) containing elemental lithium (Li), elemental phosphorus (P), and elemental sulfur (S) (Ohashi, for excellent lithium ion conductive performance, the solid electrolyte produced in the present invention is preferably a solid electrolyte containing Li, P, and S as main components, [0036]), wherein the sulfide solid electrolyte further comprises an ester compound (Ohashi, an additive, e.g. an ester compound, can be added to the container containing the solvent, [0023]) and a solvent (Ohashi, as the solvent, a hydrocarbon solvent can be used, [0018]).
While Ohashi does not explicitly disclose that the sulfide solid electrolyte has at least one peak observed in a chemical shift range of 3.4 ppm to 4.8 ppm in a spectrum obtained by 1H-NMR measurement electrolyte and has a full width at half maximum of the peak observed in the chemical shift range of 3.4 ppm to 4.8 ppm in the spectrum obtained by 1H-NMR measurement is from 0.2 ppm to 1.0 ppm,
the Applicant discloses that the noted peak is derived from a hydrogen atom that is bound to a carbon atom located adjacent to an oxygen atom in an ester linkage (see e.g. Instant Specification [0017]) and the FWHM indicates that an ester linkage site is bound to the surface of the lithium-ion conductive sulfide (see e.g. Instant Specification [0015]).
Accordingly, it is reasonably interpreted that the presence of a hydrogen atom that is bound to a carbon atom located adjacent to an oxygen atom in an ester linkage, and the ester linkage site being bound to the surface of the lithium-ion conductive sulfide is critical to the recited peak such that the sulfide solid electrolyte would necessarily possess the recited peak.
Thus, it would be reasonable to determine that the reaction between the sulfide solid electrolyte and the ester of Ohashi would result in a presence of a hydrogen atom that is bound to a carbon atom located adjacent to an oxygen atom in an ester linkage and the ester linkage site being bound to the surface of the lithium-ion conductive sulfide.
As Ohashi discloses (1) a substantially similar sulfide solid electrolyte comprising
an ester linkage having hydrogen bonded to carbon adjacent to oxygen and (2) a substantially similar manufacturing method (Ohashi, wet pulverization makes it easier to produce a particulate sulfide solid electrolyte with improved ion conductivity, [0012]) compared to the instant method of wet pulverization (Instant Specification [0035-0038]),
it is submitted that the sulfide solid electrolyte of Ohashi would necessarily exhibit the recited peak between 3.4 – 4.8 ppm in 1H-NMR and a full width at half maximum of the peak observed in the chemical shift range of 3.4 ppm to 4.8 ppm in the spectrum obtained by 1H-NMR measurement is from 0.2 ppm to 1.0 ppm. Where the claimed and 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 been established, as set forth in MPEP 2112.01 (1).
Ohashi does not explicitly disclose that the sulfide solid has a peak area observed in the range of 3.4 ppm to 4.8 ppm in the spectrum obtained by 1H-NMR measurement is 1.0 x 109 or more and 2.0 x 1010 or less.
With respect to the limitations a peak area observed in the range of 3.4 ppm to 4.8 ppm in the spectrum obtained by 1H-NMR measurement is 1.0 x 109 or more and 2.0 x 1010 or less, it is submitted that such limitations are simply measurements of, and thus descriptions of, inherent properties of the recited sulfide solid electrolyte.
Applicant discloses that the peak area corresponds to the amount of the ester compound contained in the sulfide solid electrolyte (see Instant Specification [0027-0028]).
Accordingly, it is reasonably interpreted that the amount of the ester compound contained in the sulfide solid electrolyte, i.e. a total amount of the ester compound and the organic solvent is 0.1 mass% or more and 1.5 mass% or less and a mass ratio of an amount of the ester compound to a total amount of the ester compound and the organic solvent is 0.05 or more is critical to the recited peak area range such that it would fulfil the recited measurements and necessarily possess the inherent properties (Claims 11 and 13) (see e.g. Instant Specification [0033-0034]).
Ohashi discloses that from the view point of making it easy to prevent adhesion of the coarse raw material to the media during grinding, the amount of the ester compound added is preferably 0.01% by weight or more (Ohashi, [0028]; the Examiner notes that while Ohashi does not disclose a mass ratio of ester compound to the total mass of the solvent and ester compound, the disclosed ester compound amount of 0.01% by weight or more would overlap the claimed mass ratio of 0.05 or more).
As Ohashi discloses (1) a substantially similar sulfide solid electrolyte comprising
an ester linkage having hydrogen bonded to carbon adjacent to oxygen and (2) a substantially similar manufacturing method (Ohashi, wet pulverization makes it easier to produce a particulate sulfide solid electrolyte with improved ion conductivity, [0012]) compared to the instant method of wet pulverization (Instant Specification [0035-0038]), and (3) a substantially similar amount of ester compound added to the sulfide solid electrolyte, it is submitted that the sulfide solid electrolyte of Ohashi would necessarily exhibit a peak area observed in the range of 3.4 ppm to 4.8 ppm in the spectrum obtained by 1H-NMR measurement is 1.0 x 109 or more and 2.0 x 1010 or less.
Where the claimed and 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 been established, as set forth in MPEP 2112.01 (1).
Ohashi discloses a total amount of the ester compound (Ohashi, from the view point of making it easy to prevent adhesion of the coarse raw material to the media during grinding, the amount of the ester compound added is preferably 0.01% by weight or more, [0028]) and the organic solvent is 0.1 mass% or more and 1.5 mass% or less (Ohashi, the finely divided sulfide solid electrolyte is dried for a predetermined time to remove the solvent and additives, [0032]; the Examiner notes that drying will still leave small traces of solvent and additives, which would overlap with the claimed range of 0.1 mass% or more and 1.5 mass% or less).
Ohashi is silent regarding the sulfide solid electrolyte having an argyrodite-type crystal structure.
Miyashita discloses a sulfide solid electrolyte having an argyrodite-type crystal structure (Miyashita, sulfide-based solid electrolyte which includes a compound having a crystal phase of a cubic argyrodite-type crystal structure, [0076]). Miyashita teaches that by having a sulfide-based solid electrolyte which includes a compound having a crystal phase of a cubic argyrodite-type crystal structure, cycle characteristics can be enhanced and a generation amount of hydrogen sulfide can be suppressed when being left to stand in the air and which can maintain high conductivity even when being left to stand in dry air (Mayashita, Abstract, [0076]).
Ohashi and Mayashita are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards a sulfide solid electrolyte.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to routinely design the sulfide solid electrolyte of Ohashi to have a crystal phase of a cubic argyrodite-type crystal structure, as taught by Miyashita, in order to enhance cycle characteristics enhanced and suppress a generation amount of hydrogen sulfide when being left to stand in the air and which can maintain high conductivity even when being left to stand in dry air.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the current invention to select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 5, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses the limitations for an electrode mixture (Ohashi, negative electrode active material layer, [0051]) comprising the sulfide solid electrolyte and an active material (Ohashi, includes a negative electrode active material, a sulfide solid electrolyte, and a binder, [0051]).
Regarding Claim 6, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses the limitations for a solid electrolyte layer comprising the sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, solid electrolyte layer includes a sulfide solid electrolyte and a binder, [0051]).
Regarding Claim 7, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses the limitations for a solid-state battery comprising the sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, an all-solid-state battery in which the sulfide solid electrolyte is used in one or more layers, [0051]).
Regarding Claims 12 and 14, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses a sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, sulfide solid electrolyte, Abstract), wherein the organic solvent comprises an aromatic hydrocarbon or an aliphatic hydrocarbon (Ohashi, examples of hydrocarbon solvents that can be used include aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, [0018]).
Claims 3-4 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi et al. (JP 2014102987 A), in view of Miyashita et al. (US 20170352916 A1, hereinafter Miyashita), as applied to Claim 1 above, and as evidenced by Gadewar et al. (US 20130197266 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses the limitations for a sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, sulfide solid electrolyte, Abstract), wherein the ester compound is an ester compound (Ohashi, examples of ester compounds include ethyl acetate, [0027]) of a carboxylic acid and an alcohol. It is evidenced by Gadewar that ethyl acetate is produced by the esterification of acetic acid with ethanol (Gadewar, [0004]; the Examiner notes that acetic acid is a carboxylic acid and ethanol is an alcohol).
Regarding Claim 4, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses the limitations for a sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, sulfide solid electrolyte, Abstract), wherein the ester compound (Ohashi, examples of ester compounds include ethyl acetate, [0027]) is represented by structural formula (1) below (Ohashi, examples of ester compounds include ethyl acetate, [0027]),
PNG
media_image1.png
70
212
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein x represents an integer of 0 to 2 (Ohashi, x = 2 hydrogen atoms, [0027]), R1 represents a hydrogen atom or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 4 carbon atoms (Ohashi, R1 = linear alkyl group having 1 carbon atom, [0027]), and R2 each independently represent a hydrogen atom or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 7 carbon atoms (Ohashi, R2 = linear alkyl group having 1 carbon atom, [0027]).
Regarding Claim 8, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses the limitations for a method for producing a sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, method for producing a sulfide solid electrolyte, Abstract), the method comprising:
a step of wet-pulverizing a slurry (Ohashi, wet mechanical milling was performed at a predetermined rotation and revolution speed for a predetermined time to pulverize the raw material and obtain a sulfide solid electrolyte material, [0054]) containing a lithium-ion conductive sulfide (Ohashi, lithium sulfide and diphosphorus pentasulfide, [0052]), an organic solvent (Ohashi, dehydrated heptane, [0052]), and an ester compound (Ohashi, ester compound is used as the additive, [0027]), the lithium-ion conductive sulfide containing elemental lithium (Li), elemental phosphorus (P), and elemental sulfur (S) sulfide (Ohashi, lithium sulfide and diphosphorus pentasulfide, [0052]), wherein the ester compound is an ester compound of a carboxylic acid and an alcohol (Gadewar, ethyl acetate is produced by the esterification of acetic acid with ethanol, [0004]).
Regarding Claim 9, Ohashi discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Ohashi discloses a sulfide solid electrolyte (Ohashi, sulfide solid electrolyte, Abstract), wherein the organic solvent is at least one of an aromatic hydrocarbon and an aliphatic hydrocarbon (Ohashi, examples of hydrocarbon solvents that can be used include aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, [0018]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (filed 12/01/2025) with respect to Claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Ohashi is understood to disclose crystallization by heating an amorphous sulfide solid electrolyte that has been finely pulverized in a solvent that contains ester compounds. So, there is absolutely no apparent reason to finely pulverize the solid electrolyte having an argyrodite crystal structure disclosed by Miyashita in a solvent containing ester compounds
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Ohashi and Miyashita disclose similar methods of crystallization of a sulfide solid electrolyte. Ohashi discloses a synthesis step that includes milling raw materials, then crystallization of the raw materials by heating the milled product (Ohashi, [0017-0019]). Miyashita also discloses a similar process of a synthesis step that includes milling raw materials, then crystallization of the raw materials by heating the milled product (Miyashita, [0051-0056]).
Thus, the Examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art may use Miyashita’s method as an alternative to Ohashi’s method, specifically the crystallization step, while routinely designing a sulfide-solid electrolyte, in order to make a sulfide-based solid electrolyte containing a crystal phase of the cubic argyrodite-type crystal structure, in order to enhance cycle characteristics of the battery, as noted above, instead of performing both methods consecutively, as argued in Remarks.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20140004257 A1 discloses a sulfide solid electrolyte comprising a dispersion medium that includes an ester having a functional group which is bonded to a carbon atom of an ester group and has a carbon number of 3 or more [0032-0041].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:50 - 7:50 ET.
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 A 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.
/K.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights