DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 6-9, and 14-16 are presented for examination, wherein claims 1 and 9 are currently amended; plus, claims 9 and 14-16 are withdrawn. Claims 2-5 and 10-13 are cancelled.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 1 and 6-8 over Sakshaug in view of Ogihara plus Sakshaug in view of Wu are withdrawn, as a result of the amendment to claim 1, from which the other claims depend. However, see infra.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claim 7 over Sakshaug in view of Ogihara and Ji plus Sakshaug in view of Wu and Ji are withdrawn, as a result of the amendment to claim 1, from which said claim depends. However, see infra.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections of claims 1 and 6-8 over Ji in view of Ogihara plus Ji in view of Wu are withdrawn, as a result of the amendment to claim 1, from which the other claims depend. However, see infra.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakshaug et al (US 2017/0170477) in view of Lee et al (US 2008/0280211).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 1, Sakshaug teaches novel materials exhibiting extremely durable intercalation of lithium for use in energy storage applications, such as lithium-ion batteries, wherein said novel materials comprise a porous carbon scaffold with a pore volume, an electrochemical modifier, and silicon particles impregnated within said pores (e.g. ¶¶ 0003, 16-44, 177, and 377), reading on “energy storage device,” said battery comprising:
(1) a cathode (e.g. ¶¶ 0290-293, 399-400, 425, 428, 438, 510-511, and 562), reading on “a first electrode;”
(2) an anode, wherein said anode includes said silicon as its active material (e.g. ¶¶ 0003, 188, 287-288, 290-295, 300, 399-400, 417, 418, 424-425, and 428-439), reading on “a second electrode, wherein one or both of the first electrode and the second electrode is a Si-based electrode;” and,
(3) a separator (e.g. ¶0300), reading on “a separator…;” and,
(4) an electrolyte composition, such as 1M LiPF6 in an ethylene carbonate diethylcarbonate solvent mixture (e.g. ¶¶ 0076, 300, 326, 352, and 399), reading on “an electrolyte composition” and the previously added limitation “said electrolyte composition comprises one or more solvents, a lithium-containing salt….”
Sakshaug teaches said electrolyte composition, such as 1M LiPF6 in said ethylene carbonate and diethylcarbonate solvent mixture used in lithium-ion batteries (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the previously added limitation “said electrolyte composition comprises…at least one additive” and the newly amended, previously amended, previously amended limitation “wherein said additive comprises an organic acid compound; and wherein said organic acid compound comprises one or more of 1-Propene-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid; Aconitic acid; (Carboxymethoxy)succinic acid; Carboxysuccinic acid; Tricarballylic acid; 2-(Carboxymethylthio)succinic acid; trimesic acid; 1,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid; 1,2,3-Benzenetricarboxylic acid; 1,3,5-Cyclohexanetricarboxylic acid; Cyclohexane-1,2,4,5-tetracarboxylic acid; (Ethylene glycol-bis(β-aminoethyl ether)-N,N,N',N'-tetraacetic acid; tetrakis(4-carboxyphenyl)porphyrin; Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid; and myo-Inositol,1,3,4,6- tetrakis(dihydrogen phosphate).”
However, Lee teaches an electrolyte for lithium secondary batteries, said electrolyte containing a chelating agent that forms complexes with transition metal ions in the battery and at the same time does not react and coordinate with lithium ions, and thus can improve the performance and safety of the battery by suppressing side reactions,
said electrolyte comprising a nonaqueous solvent, an electrolyte salt, plus said chelating agent,
said non-aqueous solvent may be a mixture of e.g. ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), butylene carbonate (BC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dimethyl carbonate (DMC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), and ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC);
said electrolyte salt may be e.g. LiPF6, LiBF4, LiCl, LiBr, LiI, LiClO4, LiAsF6, LiCH3CO2, LiCF2SO3, LiN(CF3SO2)2, and LiC(CF2SO2)3; plus,
said chelating agent may be at least one selected from the group consisting of EDTA (ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid), NTA (nitrilotriacetic acid), DCTA (trans-1,2-diaminocyclohexanetetraacetic acid), DTPA (diethylene-triaminepentaacetic acid), and EGTA (ethylene glycol bis(2-aminoethyl ether)-N,N,N',N'-tetraacetic acid)
(e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 08-09, 21, and 23-25).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to further incorporate the chelating agent of Lee, of at least one of DTPA and EGTA, in the nonaqueous electrolyte of Sakshaug, since Lee teaches said chelating agent in nonaqueous electrolytic solution can improve the performance and safety of the battery by suppressing side reactions.
In the alternative, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the nonaqueous electrolyte of Lee, including said chelating agent, of at least one of DTPA and EGTA, for the nonaqueous electrolyte of Sakshaug, since Lee teaches said chelating agent in said electrolytic solution can improve the performance and safety of the battery by suppressing side reactions.
Regarding claim 6, Sakshaug as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein Sakshaug teaches said anode may comprise a homogeneous composite comprising said porous carbon scaffold and silicon impregnated within pores of said scaffold, wherein said composite may comprises 15 to 85 wt% silicon, 0.5-99.5 wt% carbon, and 0.5-99.5 wt% electrochemical modifier (e.g. ¶¶ 0040-41, 244, and 384), reading on the limitation “the second electrode is a Si-dominant electrode.”
Regarding claim 7, Sakshaug as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein said porous carbon scaffold of said anode may be formed by carbonizing a polymer material, which is then impregnated with said silicon (e.g. ¶¶ 0206-226), but does not expressly teach the limitation “the second electrode comprises a self-supporting composite material film.”
However, regarding the limitation “film,” it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the said porous carbon scaffold in the shape of a film since it would provide a high surface area to volume contact area with the electrolyte, thereby increasing the rate of ion exchange therewith. See also e.g. MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(B).
Further, Sakshaug teaches a substantially identical product formed by a substantially identical process (porous carbon scaffold with said silicon impregnated therein is a composite material formed by carbonizing, compare with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0071-72), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the limitation “self-supporting,” see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 8, Sakshaug as modified teaches the battery of claim 6, wherein Sakshaug teaches said anode may comprise a homogeneous composite comprising said porous carbon scaffold and silicon impregnated within pores of said scaffold, wherein said composite may comprises 15 to 85 wt% silicon, 0.5-99.5 wt% carbon, and 0.5-99.5 wt% electrochemical modifier (e.g. ¶¶ 0040-41, 244, and 384), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I) and wherein it is understood that a “scaffold” structure is a “substantially continuous phase that holds the Si-dominant electrode together,” reading on “the Si-dominant electrode comprises: greater than 0 % and less than about 95 % by weight of silicon particles, and greater than 0 % and less than about 90 % by weight of one or more types of carbon phases, wherein at least one of the one or more types of carbon phases is a substantially continuous phase that holds the Si-dominant electrode together such that the silicon particles are distributed throughout the Si-dominant electrode.”
In the alternative regarding the limitation “substantially continuous phase that holds the Si-dominant electrode together,” Sakshaug teaches said porous carbon scaffold of said anode may be formed by carbonizing a polymer material (e.g. ¶¶ 0206-226), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of said limitation since it teaches a substantially identical product formed by a substantially identical process (compare with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0067), see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakshaug et al (US 2017/0170477) in view of Lee et al (US 2008/0280211), as provided supra, and further in view of Ji et al (US 2019/0190070).
In the event Sakshaug as modified is interpreted to not teach claim 7, then regarding claim 7, Sakshaug as modified teaches the battery of claim 1, as provided supra, wherein said porous carbon scaffold of said anode may be formed by carbonizing a polymer material, which is then impregnated with said silicon (e.g. ¶¶ 0206-226).
However, Ji teaches a anode formed from a carbonized polymer may be self-supported, thereby eliminating the need of a current collector, since said carbonized polymer provides sufficient mechanical support and is sufficiently conductive, thereby providing higher capacity, enhanced overcharge/discharge protection, lower irreversible capacity due to the elimination (or minimization) of metal foil current collectors, and/or potential cost savings due to simpler manufacturing (e.g. ¶¶ 0011, 55, and 58-59).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the anode of Sakshaug as modified without a current collector, since Ji teaches an anode formed by carbonizing a polymer provides sufficient mechanical support and is sufficiently conductive, thereby providing higher capacity, enhanced overcharge/discharge protection, lower irreversible capacity due to the elimination (or minimization) of metal foil current collectors, and/or potential cost savings due to simpler manufacturing.
The anode of Sakshaug as modified reading on “the second electrode comprises a self-supporting composite material film.”
Claims 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ji et al (US 2019/0190070) in view of Lee et al (US 2008/0280211).
Regarding newly amended independent claim 1, Ji teaches a lithium-ion energy storage device, such as a lithium-ion battery (e.g. item 300) with silicon-based anode material, with the inventive concept providing for an improved electrolyte with new electrolyte additives (e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 08-10, and 55-56 plus e.g. Figure 1), reading on “energy storage device,” said device comprising:
(1) a first electrode, such as a cathode (e.g. item 304, e.g. ¶¶ 0009, 53-57, 67, 90, and 92-95 plus e.g. Figure 1), reading on “a first electrode;”
(2) a second electrode, such as a silicon-based anode (e.g. item 316), that may be formed from a carbonized polymer (e.g. ¶¶ 0009, 11, 53-56, 58-63, 66-67, 90, and 92-95 plus e.g. Figure 1), reading on “a second electrode, wherein one or both of the first electrode and the second electrode is a Si-based electrode;”
(3) a separator (e.g. item 306) between the first electrode and the second electrode (e.g. ¶¶ 0009, 67, and 92-95 plus e.g. Figure 1); and,
(4) an electrolyte, which may include LiPF6 in a mixture of e.g. ethylene carbonate and diethyl carbonate solvent (e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 09-10, 53-54, 59, 67-87), reading on “an electrolyte composition” and the previously added limitation “said electrolyte composition comprises one or more solvents, a lithium-containing salt….”
Ji teaches said electrolyte may include LiPF6 in a mixture of e.g. ethylene carbonate and diethyl carbonate solvent (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the previously added limitation “said electrolyte composition comprises…at least one additive” and the newly amended, previously amended, previously amended limitation “wherein said additive comprises an organic acid compound; and wherein said organic acid compound comprises one or more of 1-Propene-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid; Aconitic acid; (Carboxymethoxy)succinic acid; Carboxysuccinic acid; Tricarballylic acid; 2-(Carboxymethylthio)succinic acid; trimesic acid; 1,2,4-Benzenetricarboxylic acid; 1,2,3-Benzenetricarboxylic acid; 1,3,5-Cyclohexanetricarboxylic acid; Cyclohexane-1,2,4,5-tetracarboxylic acid; (Ethylene glycol-bis(β-aminoethyl ether)-N,N,N',N'-tetraacetic acid; tetrakis(4-carboxyphenyl)porphyrin; Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid; and myo-Inositol,1,3,4,6- tetrakis(dihydrogen phosphate).”
However, Lee teaches an electrolyte for lithium secondary batteries, said electrolyte containing a chelating agent that forms complexes with transition metal ions in the battery and at the same time does not react and coordinate with lithium ions, and thus can improve the performance and safety of the battery by suppressing side reactions,
said electrolyte comprising a nonaqueous solvent, an electrolyte salt, plus said chelating agent,
said non-aqueous solvent may be a mixture of e.g. ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), butylene carbonate (BC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dimethyl carbonate (DMC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), and ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC);
said electrolyte salt may be e.g. LiPF6, LiBF4, LiCl, LiBr, LiI, LiClO4, LiAsF6, LiCH3CO2, LiCF2SO3, LiN(CF3SO2)2, and LiC(CF2SO2)3; plus,
said chelating agent may be at least one selected from the group consisting of EDTA (ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid), NTA (nitrilotriacetic acid), DCTA (trans-1,2-diaminocyclohexanetetraacetic acid), DTPA (diethylene-triaminepentaacetic acid), and EGTA (ethylene glycol bis(2-aminoethyl ether)-N,N,N',N'-tetraacetic acid)
(e.g. ¶¶ 0002, 08-09, 21, and 23-25).
As a result, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to further incorporate the chelating agent of Lee, of at least one of DTPA and EGTA, in the nonaqueous electrolyte of Ji, since Lee teaches said chelating agent in nonaqueous electrolytic solution can improve the performance and safety of the battery by suppressing side reactions.
In the alternative, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to substitute the nonaqueous electrolyte of Lee, including said chelating agent, of at least one of DTPA and EGTA, for the nonaqueous electrolyte of Ji, since Lee teaches said chelating agent in said electrolytic solution can improve the performance and safety of the battery by suppressing side reactions.
Regarding claims 6-7, Ji as modified teaches the device of claim 1, wherein Ji teaches said second electrode may be said anode (e.g. supra), wherein said second electrode is a Si-dominant electrode comprising a monolithic self-supporting composite material film (e.g. ¶¶ 0011, 14-33, 54-55, 58-60, and 90), reading on “the second electrode is a Si-dominant electrode” (claim 6) and “the second electrode comprises a self-supporting composite material film” (claim 7).
Regarding claim 8, Ji as modified teaches the device of claim 6, wherein Ji teaches said second electrode may be said anode and wherein said second electrode is a Si-dominant electrode comprising a self-supporting composite material film (e.g. supra), wherein said composite material film comprises greater than 0% and less than about 90% by weight of silicon particles plus greater than 0% and less than about 90% by weight of one or more types of carbon phases, wherein at least one of the one or more types of carbon phases is a substantially continuous phase that holds said composite material film together such that said silicon particles are distributed throughout said composite material film (e.g. ¶¶ 0011, 55, and 60), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), and reading on “the Si-dominant electrode comprises: greater than 0 % and less than about 95 % by weight of silicon particles, and greater than 0 % and less than about 90 % by weight of one or more types of carbon phases, wherein at least one of the one or more types of carbon phases is a substantially continuous phase that holds the Si-dominant electrode together such that the silicon particles are distributed throughout the Si-dominant electrode.”
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed January 7, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicants allege the art does not teach the newly amended limitation of independent claim 1.
In response, the examiner respectfully refers supra.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-4.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. 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.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723