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 .
Response to Amendment
This is a final office action in response to Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed on 12/18/2025. Claims 1, 5-17, and 25-26 are presented for examination.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections in the previous office action are maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues one of ordinary skill in the art would have no reasonable expectation that boron in the amorphous phase of a garnet-type glass-ceramic would predictably have the features of claim 1. The conductivity disclosed by Schneider is tied to the NaSICON crystal phase and its specific cooperation with the boron-containing glass phase. Modifying Schneider to replace the NaSICON crystal phase with a garnet-type crystal phase would alter the distribution of boron in the glass-ceramic and therefore provide no reasonable expectation that the claimed conductivity would be maintained. Further, Hona evidences that boron can yield different conductivities across different glass chemistries.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to substitute a garnet-type glass-ceramic for the NaSICON glass-ceramic of Schneider because Hochrein teaches that both NaSICON (phosphates) and garnet-type crystal types are suitable to form glass ceramics ([0014]) and that NaSICON materials are less stable against metallic lithium ([0010]). The claimed conductivity is considered to be inherently present in the structure of Schneider in view of Hochrein since there is no distinction between the instant claims and the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 5-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schneider (US 2019/0241463 A1; previously cited) in view of Hochrein (US 2016/0329598 A1; cited in the IDS filed 12/06/2021), as evidenced by Millipore Sigma (Product data for Lithium Aluminum Titanium Phosphate, Boric anhydride, Lithium oxide, and Phosphorous pentoxide, 2025) and American Chemical Society (Aluminum Oxide 1344-28-1, 2025).
Regarding claim 1, Schneider discloses a lithium ion conductive glass-ceramic material ([0002]) comprising: a crystalline phase (NaSICon [0019]); and an amorphous phase (residual glass phase [0031]) that is between 0.5 vol-% and 5 vol-% of a total composition of the glass-ceramic material (see explanation below), wherein the glass-ceramic material has a sintering temperature of 1000°C or lower ([0011]), and an ion conductivity of at least 1*10-5 S/cm (claim 3), and wherein the amorphous phase comprises boron (B2O3 [0031]).
Though Schneider does not explicitly state a vol-% of the amorphous phase, Schneider discloses that the composition of the residual glass phase may be calculated by assuming that a maximum amount of the starting materials crystallizes to form the stoichiometric crystal Li1.3Al0.3Ti1.7(PO4)3 and that the rest of the components remain in the residual glass phase. ([0031]). Example 5 (TABLE 1 on p. 4) includes 3.638 mole % Al2O3, 16.763 mole % Li2O, 37.375 mole % P2O5, 41.225 mole % TiO2, and 1 mole % B2O3. Assuming a basis of 100 moles of materials, TiO2 is the limiting reactant and 24.25 moles of Li1.3Al0.3Ti1.7(PO4)3 (LATP) are formed, leaving an amorphous phase comprising 0.003 moles Al2O3, 1.54 moles Li2O, 0.67 moles P2O5, and 1 mole B2O3 and amounting to 2.84 vol-% of a total composition of the glass ceramic material as calculated using the values in the table below, which are evidenced by Millipore Sigma (MS) and American Chemical Society (CAS), which falls within the claimed range of “between 0.5 vol-% and 5 vol-%.”
Density (g/cm3)
Molar mass (g/mol)
Mass in glass-ceramic (g)
Volume in glass-ceramic (cm3)
Volume fraction of glass-ceramic (%)
LATP
2.92 (MS p. 13)
382 (MS p. 12)
9264
3110
97.16%
Li2O
2.01 (MS p. 6)
29.9 (MS p. 5)
46.0
22.88
0.71%
P2O5
2.39 (MS p. 9)
141.9 (MS p. 8)
94.6
39.59
1.24%
B2O3
2.46 (MS p. 3)
69.6 (MS p. 7)
69.6
28.30
0.88%
Al2O3
3.99 (CAS)
102.0 (CAS)
0.3
0.09
0.00%
Schneider does not disclose wherein the material comprises a garnet-type crystalline phase.
Hochrein teaches a lithium ion conductive glass-ceramic material comprising: a garnet-type crystalline phase (according to the chemical formula Li7+x-yMxIIM3-xIIIM2-yIVMyVO12, wherein MII is a bivalent cation, MIII is a trivalent cation, MVI is a quadrivalent cation, and MV is a pentavalent ion, 0≤x≤2, 0≤y≤1, [0024]) and an amorphous phase (dark regions of FIG. 3, [0055]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the glass-ceramic material of Schneider to substitute a garnet-type crystalline phase because Hochrein teaches it is possible to form a glass-ceramic with a garnet-type crystalline phase and that systems with garnet-like crystal phases are more stable against lithium than systems with a NaSICon crystalline phase ([0010]).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the amorphous phase comprises lithium oxide (Schneider: Example 5 includes lithium oxide in the amorphous phase, see rejection of claim 1, Hochrein [0030] teaches lithium oxide as a starting material to form garnet-type crystalline phase and teaches that it should be used in excess of the amount required to form the stoichiometric garnet crystal [0059]; Schneider [0031] and the instant disclosure, see [0053]-[0056] of the published application US 2022/0181679 A1, both teach that excess lithium oxide is considered to remain in the amorphous phase) and at least one doping agent and wherein the doping agent is at least one of based on aluminum (Schneider: Example 5 includes aluminum oxide in the amorphous phase, see rejection of claim 1; Schneider [0057] and Hochrein [0070]-[0071] both teach the use of aluminum oxide as a doping agent).
Regarding claim 7, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the garnet-type crystalline phase is boron-free (Schneider: insertion of boron into the crystal phase is undesirable [0032]).
Regarding claim 8, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the glass-ceramic material is free of at least one of: alkali metals except lithium and compositions thereof, halogenides and compositions thereof, selenium and compositions thereof, sulfur and compositions thereof, lead and compositions thereof, cadmium and compositions thereof, and tellurium and compositions thereof (Schneider: amorphous phase preferably comprises only boron [0031]; crystalline phase of Hochrein is Li7La3Zr2O12 doped with Al, Ta, or Nb [0070]-[0071]).
Regarding claim 9, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the garnet-type crystalline phase has the formula: Li7-3x+y-zAlxMyIIM3-yIIIM2-zIVMzVO12±δ, wherein M" is a bivalent cation, M"' is a trivalent cation, MIV is a quadrivalent cation and MV is a pentavalent cation, wherein x+z>0, and wherein δ < 0.5 represents potential oxygen vacancies (Hochrein: Li7+x-yMxIIM3-xIIIM2-yIVMyVO12, or preferably Al- doped Li7La3Zr2O12 [0070]-[0071], which is equivalent to the claimed formula where x > 0, y=0, and z=0)
Regarding claim 10, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches (see Hochrein) wherein the trivalent cation comprises a lanthanide (lanthanum, [0025]), and wherein the quadrivalent cation comprises zirconium ([0025]) and the pentavalent cation comprises niobium and/or tantalum ([0070]-[0071]).
Regarding claim 11, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches (see Hochrein) wherein the garnet-type crystalline phase is a cubic garnet-type inorganic solid electrolyte ([0070], TABLE 1 on p. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches (see Hochrein) wherein the cubic garnet- type inorganic solid electrolyte is lithium lanthanum zirconium oxide (LLZO) doped with at least one of niobium and aluminum ([0070]-[0071]).
Regarding claim 13, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein amorphous phase further comprises at least one refining agent selected from the group consisting of arsenic oxide, antimony oxide, tin oxide, and any combinations thereof (Schneider: [0067]; these compounds are fining and fluxing agents and therefore would be present in the amorphous phase of the material).
Regarding claim 14, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the material has a sintering temperature of 950 °C or lower (Schneider: [0047]).
Regarding claim 15, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the material has an ion conductivity of at least 1*10-4 S/cm (Schneider: [claim 3]).
Regarding claim 16, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the material has an electronic conductivity that is smaller than 10-5 S/cm (Schneider: electronic conductivity is lower than the ionic conductivity by a factor of 104, [0044]; ion conductivity is at least 10-5, [claim 3]).
Regarding claim 17, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches wherein the material has an electronic conductivity that is smaller than 10-6 S/cm (Schneider: electronic conductivity is lower than the ionic conductivity by a factor of 104, [0044]; ion conductivity is at least 10-5, [claim 3]).
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schneider (US 2019/0241463 A1) in view of Hochrein (US 2016/0329598 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ohta (Co-sinterable lithium garnet-type oxide electrolyte with cathode for all-solid-state lithium ion battery, 2014; cited in the Office Action mailed 05/22/2024).
Regarding claim 25, Schneider in view of Hochrein teaches a component comprising a glass-ceramic material according to claim 1, wherein the component is a separator of a battery (Schneider: [0074]), an electrode of a battery (Schneider: [0049]), or a membrane (Schneider: [0074]), but does not disclose wherein the material of claim 1 is co-sintered with at least one other material to obtain the component.
Ohta teaches that a garnet lithium ion conductive material, which is doped with niobium and modified with boron and aluminum (sec. 3, ¶1 on p. 41), can be co-sintered with an electrode active material to obtain an electrode comprising the conductive material (sec. 1, ¶4 on p. 41). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have co-sintered the material of Schneider in view of Hochrein with an electrode active material to obtain an electrode of a battery because Ohta teaches that doing so simplifies battery production (sec. 1, ¶4 on p. 41).
Regarding claim 26, Schneider in view of Hochrein and Ohta teaches a battery comprising a component according to claim 25 (Schneider: [0049]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTINE C. DISNEY whose telephone number is (703)756-1076. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 MT.
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.
/C.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723