1 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/22/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This is a non-final Office action in response to Applicant’s remarks and amendments filed on 11/24/2025. Claims 1 and 18 are amended. Claim 11 Is canceled. Claims 1 – 2, 5 – 7, 9 – 10, and 12 – 20 are pending in the current Office action.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections set forth in the previous Office action are withdrawn, and a new grounds of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment is established below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and instantly claimed EC/EMC ratio have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 5, 9 – 10, 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa (WO2017204213A1, English equivalent US PG Pub. 2019/0173123 A1 used English translation in view of in view of Chung (US PG Pub. 2015/0244016 A1), Abe (US PG Pub. 2007/0148554 A1), Li (CN106848325A), Ihara (CN103003457B), Umeyama (US PG Pub. 2016/0380299 A1), and Zheng (US PG Pub. 2016/0093912 A1) {Examiner Note: All prior art, except Chung and Abe, were previously cited in Office action mailed 09/30/2025}.
Regarding Claim 1, Ishikawa discloses a lithium ion battery ([0021]), comprising a battery housing (film package; Fig. 4, 10; [0092]); an electrolyte, comprising a lithium ion salt and an organic solvent ([0060 – 0061];[0069]); and an electrode assembly (battery element ; Fig. 4, 20; [0089 – 0090]), comprising a positive electrode plate (Fig. 4, 30; [0090]), a negative electrode plate (Fig. 4, 40; [0090]), and a separator (Fig. 4, 25; [0090]); wherein the positive electrode plate comprises a positive electrode current collector (metal foil; Fig. 4, 31; [0049];[0058];[0090]) and a positive electrode membrane that is disposed on at least one surface of the positive electrode current collector and that comprises a positive electrode active material (Fig. 4, 32; [0049];[0090]), and the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode current collector (metal foil; Fig. 4, 41; [0022];[0046];[0090]) and a negative electrode membrane that is disposed on at least surface one surface of the negative electrode current collector and that comprises a negative electrode active material (Fig. 4, 42; [0022 – 0023];[0032];[0090]).
In example 1, Ishikawa specifically discloses using LiPF6 and LiFSI, which is represented by FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F, as supporting salts in the electrolyte (Table 1; [0103]); therefore, Ishikawa further discloses wherein the lithium salt comprises lithium hexafluorophosphate and one compound within the scope of claimed Formula I.
In example 1, LiFSI is included in the electrolyte in an amount of 14 wt% (Table 1; [0103]), which is within the claimed range 12% to 25% of a total mass of the electrolyte, and the LiPF6 is included in the electrolyte in an amount of 8 wt% (Table 1; [0103]), which is within the claimed range of 2% to 10% of total mass of the electrolyte.
In example 1, Ishikawa discloses the electrolyte solution comprising a mixed solvent of EC (ethylene carbonate) and DEC (diethyl carbonate) as a volume ratio of EC/DEC=30/70; therefore, Ishikawa further discloses an embodiment of organic solvent comprising ethylene carbonate (EC).
Ishikawa does not disclose; however, the organic solvent further comprising ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) and a mass ratio of EC:EMC (EC:EMC) being from 1:20 to 3:7.
Ishikawa generally teaches using aprotic organic solvents including cyclic carbonates such as propylene carbonate (PC), ethylene carbonate (EC), and butylene carbonate (BC); open-chain carbonates such as dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) and dipropyl carbonate (DPC); propylene carbonate derivatives; aliphatic carboxylic acid esters such as methyl formate, methyl acetate and ethyl propionate; ethers such as diethyl ether and ethyl propyl ether; and fluorinated aprotic organic solvents in which at least a part of the hydrogen atoms of these compounds is(are) substituted with fluorine atom(s) as the nonaqueous solvent of the battery ([0061]). Furthermore Ishikawa teaches a preference for the using cyclic or open-chain carbonates and that the solvents can be used alone or in combinations of two or more ([0061];[0063]).
Chung, directed toward secondary batteries and adding electrolyte solutions in such batteries, teaches an electrolyte solution comprising a lithium salt and non-aqueous solvent ([0014];[0025]). The scope of electrolyte solutions taught by Chung overlap in scope with electrolyte solutions taught by Ishikawa, that is Chung teaches using salts, such as LiPF6 and imide salts, and solvents, such as linear and cyclic carbonates, exemplified by Ishikawa (Chung: [0026];[0029 – 0030] and Ishikawa: [103]). The solvents DEC and EMC are included among Chung’s finite list of linear carbonates and the solvent EC is included among Chung’s finite list of cyclic carbonates ([0029 – 0030]). In a working example, Chung particularly teaches a non-aqueous solvent composition including ethylene carbonate and ethyl methyl carbonate mixed in a volumetric ratio of 3: 7 ([0058]).
Since Ishikawa generally teaches a preference for using cyclic or open-chain carbonates alone or in combinations of two or more and already suggests using ethyl methyl carbonate from a finite list of open-chain carbonates that also includes diethyl carbonate (DEC) ([0061];[0063]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used EMC in electrolyte solution instead of DEC, and thus obtain the claimed solvent composition of EC:EMC, because such a modification would be as suggested by Ishikawa, and shown Chung (Refer to [0058]), a selection of a functionally equivalent linear carbonate solvent to be used with ethylene carbonate recognized in the art and one with ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so [MPEP2144.06(II)].
Chung further teaches controlling the nonaqueous solvent to particularly include 1 – 80 wt% of cyclic carbonate and 20 – 99 wt% of linear carbonate, which would provide a mass ratio of cyclic carbonate {i.e. corresponds to EC}:linear carbonate {i.e. corresponds to EMC} of 1:99 to 80:20, for the purpose of improving interfacial contact properties between an electrode assembly and an electrolytic solution by maximizing mobility of electrolytic solutions ([0031]).
As such, it would have further been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the volume ratio of EC:EMC in modified Ishikawa such that the mass ratio of EC:EMC is within the range taught by Chung, and thus encompassing the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving improved interfacial contact properties between the electrode assembly and electrolytic solution of modified Ishikawa’s battery.
Abe, also directed to secondary battery electrolyte compositions, teaches with respect to cyclic and linear carbonate solvents, that the amount of cyclic carbonate relative to linear carbonate impacts the viscosity and conductivity of the electrolyte solution ([0005]:[0018]). Specifically, Abe suggests that increases in cyclic carbonate relative to the linear carbonate can increases electrolyte solution viscosity and conductivity but if the electrolyte solution becomes too viscous electrolyte permeation is negatively impacted ([0018]).
Selection within the overlapping portion of the claimed range and the taught range would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to optimize the viscosity of the electrolyte solution of modified Ishikawa while also ensuring that the conductivity of the electrolyte solutions is sufficient, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Ishikawa does not limit their battery structure to stacking type-batteries and further teaches that their electrolyte is applicable to winding type batteries as well ([0090]).
Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose a group margin of the battery cell of the lithium-ion battery ranging from 85 – 95%.
Li teaches controlling the length/positioning of coating areas on wound secondary battery electrodes for the purpose of reducing group margin of the entire battery cell to save internal battery space and optimize the capacity of the cell ([0026];[0056 – 0058]). The group margin value taught by Lee is obtained by dividing the battery cell thickness by the internal thickness of the battery casing ([0097]); therefore, the group margin taught by Li reads on the claimed group margin (Refer to [0020] of the instant specification). Li exemplifies group margin values ranging from 88.1% - 92.80% (Table 3, Examples C1 – C11; [0101]).
Since Ishikawa teaches utilizing winding-type battery structures, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Ishikawa’s example battery element to have the wound electrode structure {i.e. electrode coating area position and length} taught by Lee, and thus obtain a group margin within the claimed range of 85 – 95%, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a functioning lithium ion battery with optimized internal space and capacity.
Ishikawa exemplifies using an aluminum metal foil with a thickness of 20 µm (Example 1; [0099]).
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose an embodiment where a thickness of the positive electrode current collector ranges from 8 µm to 12 µm.
Ihara teaches an aluminum hard foil collector for a positive electrode of a secondary lithium ion battery that has a thickness of 5 – 20 µm ([0002];[0031]). Ihara further teaches that in order to increase the battery capacity of lithium ion secondary batteries, the thickness of aluminum, but that it is difficult to produce a high-strength foil less than 5 µm ([0059]). Exceeding 20 µm is taught by Ihara to reduce the amount of electrode active material that can be included in the battery and thus decrease battery capacity {Examiner Note: In [0059] Ihara states “when the particle size exceeds 20 µm”; however this appears to be a machine translation error, because the recitation before and after the sentence with the error is clearly directed to only current collector thickness. As such, the examiner believes the sentence was meant to recite “when the thickness exceeds 20 µm”. Furthermore, the Examiner provides an additional machine translation from Google Patents which, in the same sentence, does not include words “particle size” (Refer to highlighted text on pg. 4)}.
Umeyama teaches that for a positive electrode current collector for a lithium ion secondary battery controlling the thickness to be preferably 8 to 30 µm in consideration of a balance between capacity density and strength of the current collector ([0071]).
Since Ishikawa only exemplifies using an aluminum foil positive electrode current collector with a thickness of 20 µm and does not necessarily limit the thickness of the current collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the thickness of the exemplified current collector to be within the overlapping portion of the claimed ranged and the ranges taught by Ihara and Umeyama to optimize the current collector strength and the battery capacity, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
As established above, the current collector of modified Ishikawa has a thickness within the range of 8 – 12 µm.
Modified Ishikawa does not disclose an elongation at break of the positive electrode current collector ranging from 0.8% - 4%.
Ihara teaches an aluminum hard foil collector for a positive electrode of a secondary lithium ion battery that has a thickness of 5 – 20 µm, a strength of 215 MPa or more, and an elongation of 1.0% or more ([0002];[0031]). Ihara further teaches that as the strength of the foil increases, the elongation, which corresponds to the ductility of the foil, decreases ([0020]). Ihara further teaches that when elongation is high and strength is low, the foil during the electrode manufacturing process may become brittle and break ([0021]). Based on the examples, the highest elongation amount taught by Ihara is 5.8% (Table 1, Example 10; [0109]).
Since Ishikawa teaches using aluminum foil as a collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use as the aluminum collector of modified Ishikawa, the aluminum hard foil collector taught by Ihara, and thus obtain a collector with an elongation that overlaps the claimed range of 0.8 – 4%, with a reasonable expectation of obtaining a collector suitable for the battery of modified Ishikawa with the benefits of sufficient strength and elongation.
Selection of an elongation at break within the overlapping portion of Ihara’s taught range {i.e. 1 – 5.8%} and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the strength and ductility of the collector, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
In their examples, Ishikawa teaches preparing the positive electrode by preparing a positive electrode slurry, applying the slurry to a surface of the aluminum foil collector, drying the coated foil, and finally pressing the coated foil ([0099]).
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose wherein a single-sided coating weight of the positive electrode plate ranges from 0.015 g/cm2 to 0.023 g/cm2 .
Zheng teaches preparing positive electrodes with a coating weight of 230 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.015 g/cm2} to 380 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.025 g/cm2 } and negative electrodes with a coating weight of 120 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.008 g/cm2} to 190 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.012 g/cm2} ([0019]). Zheng further teaches that reducing the coating weights of the electrodes decreases current per unit area, alleviates the concentration polarization along the thickness direction of the electrodes, and ultimately prevents precipitation of lithium ions on the negative electrode surface during fast charging ([0019];[0080]). Furthermore, Zheng teaches optimizing electrode capacity based on the coating weight, weight ratio of active material, and capacity per gram of active material ([0031]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the cathode and anode of modified Ishikawa using the coating weights taught by Zheng, and thus obtain a positive electrode with a coating weight that significantly overlaps the claimed range of 0.015 g/cm2 to 0.023 g/cm2, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining suitable electrodes for the battery of modified Ishikawa with the benefit of preventing precipitation of lithium ions on the negative electrode surface during charging.
Selection of positive electrode coating weights within the overlapping portion of Zheng’s taught range and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the capacity of the electrode and further ensure the prevention of lithium ion precipitation on the negative electrode surface of modified Ishikawa’s battery, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 2, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. In example 1, Ishikawa specifically discloses using LiFSI in the electrolyte (Table 1; [0103]), which as established above, is a compound within the scope of claimed Formula I. LiFSI is represented by FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F, and therefore is further within the list of claimed formula 1 compounds selected from one or more of FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, CF3SO2N- (Li+)SO2CF3, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2F, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2F, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2C F3, CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(LiF)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, and CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. Ishikawa further discloses wherein the positive electrode current collector is selected from aluminum foil (Example 1; [0099]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. In their examples, Ishikawa teaches preparing the positive electrode by preparing a positive electrode slurry, applying the slurry to a surface of the aluminum foil collector, drying the coated foil, and finally pressing the coated foil ([0099]).
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose wherein a compacted density of the positive electrode plate ranges from 2.0 g/cm3 to 3.5 g/cm3.
Umeyama teaches pressing positive electrodes to have a density of typically 2.0 g/cm3 or more and 4.2 g/cm3 or less ([0076]). Umeyama additionally teaches the electrode having a thickness of typically 50 – 100 µm after pressing ([0076]). Umeyama further teaches that densities and thicknesses within the taught range provide high battery performance, such as high energy density and output density ([0076]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to press the positive electrode of modified Ishikawa to a density taught by Umeyama, and thus obtain a positive electrode with a compacted density that overlaps the claimed range of 2.0 g/cm3 to 3.5 g/cm3, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a positive electrode that allows for high battery performance, such as high energy density and output density.
Zheng further teaches that a too high compacted density can fracture the positive electrode and that increases in compacted density provide increases in positive electrode polarization ([0014]).
Selection of a compacted density within the overlapping portion of Ueyama’s taught range and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the safety {i.e. avoid fracturing} and battery performance characteristics of the positive electrode, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claims 10 and 17, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. In example 1, Ishikawa particularly teaches using 8 wt% of LiPF6 (Table 1; [0103]). Generally, Ishikawa teaches including LiPF6 in the electrolyte in an amount of 10% by weight or less and 0% by weight or more ([0067]), which encompasses the claimed ranges of 0% to 5% (Claim 10) and further 2% to 5% (Claim 17) of a total mass of the electrolyte.
Ishikawa further teaches controlling the content of LiPF6 so that the content of the imide salt is 1.1 to 10 times more than the content of LiPF6 ([0068]). Both the weight ratio and the content range of LiPF6 is taught by Ishikawa to allow for improved cycle characteristics ([0068]). Additionally, in their comparison of examples, Ishikawa teaches that higher LiPF6 concentrations resulted in lower capacity retentions ([0107]).
Since Ishikawa generally teaches using 0 – 10 wt% of LiPF6 in their taught electrolyte, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the content of Ishikawa’s example electrolyte to include a mass percent of LiPF6 within the overlapping portion of Ishikawa’s taught range and the claimed ranges, to optimize the cycle characteristics of the battery, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 12, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. Ishikawa teaches utilizing their lithium ion battery as an electric power source for mobile devices and transport mediums including electric vehicles ([0110]).
Li further teaches that lithium ion batteries are favored for electric vehicle applications because of their high energy density, and further indicates that battery cells with reduced groups margins/saved internal space have capacities and energy densities that further favor applications in electric vehicles ([0004]).
Therefore, while modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose an apparatus, wherein a driving source or storage source of the apparatus is the lithium ion-battery according to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the battery of modified Ishikawa in a vehicle, and thus obtain the claimed apparatus, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining functioning vehicle, because, as shown by Ishikawa and Li, the battery characteristics of modified Ishikawa are suitable for electric vehicle applications.
Claim(s) 6 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa (WO2017204213A1, English equivalent US PG Pub. 2019/0173123 A1 used English translation), Chung (US PG Pub. 2015/0244016 A1), Abe (US PG Pub. 2007/0148554 A1), Li (CN106848325A), Ihara (CN103003457B), Umeyama (US PG Pub. 2016/0380299 A1) and Zheng (US PG Pub. 2016/0093912 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang (CN104966840A – cited in previous Office action mailed 09/09/2025).
Regarding Claims 6 and 7, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. For the current collector Ishikawa exemplifies using aluminum metal foil (Example 1; [0099]), and as established above the current collector of modified Ishikawa has thickness within the range of 8 – 12 µm.
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose wherein an aluminum oxide layer is disposed on both of two surfaces of the aluminum foil. (Claim 6), and further wherein the thickness of the aluminum oxide layer ranges from 5 nm to 40 nm (Claim 7).
Yang teaches a positive electrode current collector comprising an aluminum foil layer and a porous alumina resistor layer coated on the surface of the aluminum foil layer ([0012];[0014]). Yang further teaches a preference for having the coating layer be a thickness of 12 – 25 nm ([0015]). The alumina layer is taught by Yang to provide a positive electrode with increased safety, improved adhesion between the active material and collector, and improved cycle life ([0035]).
Since Ishikawa teaches using aluminum foil as a collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the collector of modified Ishikawa, by coating the surfaces of the aluminum foil with a 12 – 25 nm thick porous alumina layer, as taught by Yang, and thus obtain the claimed aluminum oxide layer with a thickness within the claimed range of 5 – 40 nm, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a positive electrode with increased safety, improved adhesion between the active material and collector, and improved cycle life.
Claim(s) 13 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa (WO2017204213A1, English equivalent US PG Pub. 2019/0173123 A1 used English translation), Chung (US PG Pub. 2015/0244016 A1), Abe (US20070148554A1), Li (CN106848325A), Ihara (CN103003457B), Umeyama (US PG Pub. 2016/0380299 A1) and Zheng (US PG Pub. 2016/0093912 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Han (CN102786443B – cited in previous Office action mailed 09/30/2025).
Regarding Claims 13 and 15, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. Ishikawa generally teaches including a lithium salt represented by LiN(SO2CnF2n+1)2, where n is an integer of 0 or more, and preferably 0 to 10, in the nonaqueous electrolyte solution of the battery ([0060];[0064]). In Example 1, Ishikawa specifically discloses using 14 wt% of LiFSI in the electrolyte (Table 1; [0103]). LiFSI is claimed Formula I where n = 1, m = 1, and Rf1 and Rf2 are the same {i.e. FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F}. lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide is claimed Formula 1 where n = 1, m = 1, and Rf1 and Rf2 are the same {i.e. CF3SO2N- (Li+)SO2CF3}.
Ishikawa does not disclose a lithium imide salt within the scope of claimed Formula I wherein the n is 2 – 3 (Claim 13).
Han teaches fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide alkali metal salts for non-aqueous electrolytes of lithium ion batteries, particularly Han teaches a binary and ternary fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide alkali metal salt having the structural formulas (II) and (IV), respectively, where M is Li, Na, K, Rb, or Cs ([0011 – 00012];[0021 – 0027];[0032 – 0033]).
PNG
media_image1.png
179
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Formula (II) and Formula (IV) from Han.
In Formulas (II) and (IV), the RF1 and RF2 is CmF2m+1 where m = 0 – 8 and may be the same or different ([0025 – 0027]). Formulas (II) and (IV), when M is Li, significantly overlap in scope with claimed formula I. Table 8 particularly shows examples of the binary and ternary lithium imide salts, and the example Li2[(FSO2N)2SO2] is within the claimed scope of formula I when n = 2 and further is within the claimed selection of compounds represented by formula I {i.e. FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2F } (claim 15). The imide salts are taught by Han to provide electrolytes with improved conductivity, low viscosity, a wide electrochemical window, and improved rate performance ([0084]).
Since Ishikawa already teaches using imide salts in lithium ion battery electrolytes with carbonate solvents, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Ishikawa to include Li2[(FSO2N)2SO2] as an imide salt, as taught by Han, and thus obtain an electrolyte comprising an imide salt within the claimed scope of claims 13 and 15, with a reasonable expectation that such an imide salt would be a functionally equivalent/suitable salt for Ishikawa’s electrolyte and further would be a selection of imide salt capable of providing an electrolyte with improved conductivity, low viscosity, a wide electrochemical window, and improved rate performance.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. Ishikawa teaches including a lithium salt represented by LiN(SO2CnF2n+1)2, where n is an integer of 0 or more, and preferably 0 to 10, in the nonaqueous electrolyte solution of a battery ([0060];[0064]). In Example 1, Ishikawa specifically discloses using 14 wt% of LiFSI in the electrolyte (Table 1; [0103]). LiFSI is claimed Formula 1 where n = 1, m = 1, and Rf1 and Rf2 are the same {i.e. CF3SO2N- (Li+)SO2CF3}.
Ishikawa does not disclose a lithium imide salt within the scope of claimed Formula I wherein n is 3 (Claim 14).
Han teaches fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide alkali metal salts for non-aqueous electrolytes of lithium ion batteries, particularly Han teaches a binary and ternary fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide alkali metal salt having the structural formulas (II) and (IV), respectively, where M is Li, Na, K, Rb, or Cs ([0011 – 00012];[0021 – 0027];[0032 – 0033]).
PNG
media_image1.png
179
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Formula (II) and Formula (IV) from Han.
In Formulas (II) and (IV), the RF1 and RF2 is CmF2m+1 where m = 0 – 8 and may be the same or different ([0025 – 0027]). Formulas (II) and (IV), when M is Li, significantly overlap in scope with claimed formula I. Table 8 particularly shows examples of the binary and ternary lithium imide salts, and the example Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] (refer to last four examples in Table 8) is within the claimed scope of formula I, specifically it is formula I when n = 3, Rf1 and Rf2 are the same, and CmF2m+1 is F {i.e. m = 0}. The imide salts are taught by Han to provide electrolytes with improved conductivity, low viscosity, a wide electrochemical window, and improved rate performance ([0084]).
Since Ishikawa already teaches using imide salts in lithium ion battery electrolytes with carbonate solvents, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Ishikawa to include Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] as an imide salt, as taught by Han, and thus obtain an electrolyte comprising an imide salt within the claimed scope of claim 14, with a reasonable expectation that such an imide salt would be a functionally equivalent/suitable salt for Ishikawa’s electrolyte and further would be a selection of imide salt capable of providing an electrolyte with improved conductivity, low viscosity, a wide electrochemical window, and improved rate performance.
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa (WO2017204213A1, English equivalent US PG Pub. 2019/0173123 A1 used English translation), Chung (US PG Pub. 2015/0244016 A1), Abe (US20070148554A1), Li (CN106848325A), Ihara (CN103003457B), Umeyama (US PG Pub. 2016/0380299 A1), Zheng (US PG Pub. 2016/0093912 A1) and Han (CN102786443B), as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Eshetu ("Ultrahigh performance all solid-state lithium sulfur batteries: salt anion’s chemistry-induced anomalous synergistic effect", 2018, Journal of the American chemical society, 140(31), pp. 9921-9933 – cited in previous Office action mailed 09/30/2025).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. As established above, modified Ishikawa includes Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] as an imide salt in the electrolyte. Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] is within the claimed scope of formula I, specifically it is formula I when n = 3, Rf1 and Rf2 are the same, and CmF2m+1 is F {i.e. m = 0}.
Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] does not include CF3 as one or both of the Rf groups; therefore, modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose a compound represented by formula (I) selected from one or more of FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(LiF)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3 and CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3.
Eshetu teaches that in lithium imide salts, the -SO2CF3 and -SO2F groups of the chemical structure provide different functionalities, and when used in combination, can merge the complementary advantages of both TFSI- and FSI- (Refer to Figure 1; Abstract and final paragraph in Introduction section). The synergistic effects of using both groups in the chemical structure include a robust SEI layer, improved discharge/areal capacity, stable long-term cyclability, high Coulombic/energy efficiency, etc. (Refer to second to last paragraph in Introduction section).
While the teachings of Eshetu are in reference to solid electrolyte batteries, since both Ishikawa and Han indicate that it is known in the art to use imide salts in non-aqueous electrolyte batteries, one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that such synergetic effects of using both -SO2CF3 and -SO2F groups in imide salts, such as improved discharge capacity or stable cyclability, would also be relevant to non-aqueous electrolyte batteries.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] salt of modified Ishikawa to include a -SO2CF3 and -SO2F group rather than two -SO2F groups, as taught by Eshetu, and thus obtain Li3[FSO2N(SO2)2NSO2CF3], which is within the claimed list of compounds, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining an lithium ion battery electrolyte with the benefits of improved discharge capacity or stable cyclability due to the synergistic effects of -SO2CF3 and -SO2F groups in the salt.
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa (WO2017204213A1, English equivalent US PG Pub. 2019/0173123 A1 used English translation) in view of Yang (CN104966840A), Chung (US PG Pub. 2015/0244016 A1), Abe (US20070148554A1), Li (CN106848325A), Ihara (CN103003457B), Umeyama (US PG Pub. 2016/0380299 A1) and Zheng (US PG Pub. 2016/0093912 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, Ishikawa discloses a lithium ion battery ([0021]), comprising a battery housing (film package; Fig. 4, 10; [0092]); an electrolyte, comprising a lithium ion salt and an organic solvent ([0060 – 0061];[0069]); and an electrode assembly (battery element ; Fig. 4, 20; [0089 – 0090]), comprising a positive electrode plate (Fig. 4, 30; [0090]), a negative electrode plate (Fig. 4, 40; [0090]), and a separator (Fig. 4, 25; [0090]); wherein the positive electrode plate comprises a positive electrode current collector (metal foil; Fig. 4, 31; [0049];[0058];[0090]) and a positive electrode membrane that is disposed on at least one surface of the positive electrode current collector and that comprises a positive electrode active material (Fig. 4, 32; [0049];[0090]), and the negative electrode plate comprises a negative electrode current collector (metal foil; Fig. 4, 41; [0022];[0046];[0090]) and a negative electrode membrane that is disposed on at least surface one surface of the negative electrode current collector and that comprises a negative electrode active material (Fig. 4, 42; [0022 – 0023];[0032];[0090]).
Ishikawa further discloses wherein the positive electrode current collector is an aluminum foil (Example 1; [0099]).
Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose an aluminum oxide layer disposed on both of two surfaces of the aluminum foil.
Yang teaches a positive electrode current collector comprising an aluminum foil layer and a porous alumina resistor layer coated on the surface of the aluminum foil layer ([0012];[0014]). The alumina layer is taught by Yang to provide a positive electrode with increased safety, improved adhesion between the active material and collector, and improved cycle life ([0035]).
Since Ishikawa teaches using aluminum foil as a collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the collector of Ishikawa, by coating the surfaces of the aluminum foil with a porous alumina layer, as taught by Yang, and thus obtain the claimed aluminum oxide layer, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a positive electrode with increased safety, improved adhesion between the active material and collector, and improved cycle life.
In example 1, Ishikawa discloses the electrolyte solution comprising a mixed solvent of EC (ethylene carbonate) and DEC (diethyl carbonate) as a volume ratio of EC/DEC=30/70; therefore, Ishikawa further discloses an embodiment of organic solvent comprising ethylene carbonate (EC).
Ishikawa does not disclose; however, the organic solvent further comprising ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) and a mass ratio of EC:EMC (EC:EMC) being from 1:20 to 3:7.
Ishikawa generally teaches using aprotic organic solvents including cyclic carbonates such as propylene carbonate (PC), ethylene carbonate (EC), and butylene carbonate (BC); open-chain carbonates such as dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) and dipropyl carbonate (DPC); propylene carbonate derivatives; aliphatic carboxylic acid esters such as methyl formate, methyl acetate and ethyl propionate; ethers such as diethyl ether and ethyl propyl ether; and fluorinated aprotic organic solvents in which at least a part of the hydrogen atoms of these compounds is(are) substituted with fluorine atom(s) as the nonaqueous solvent of the battery ([0061]). Furthermore Ishikawa teaches a preference for the using cyclic or open-chain carbonates and that the solvents can be used alone or in combinations of two or more ([0061];[0063]).
Chung, directed toward secondary batteries and adding electrolyte solutions in such batteries, teaches an electrolyte solution comprising a lithium salt and non-aqueous solvent ([0014];[0025]). The scope of electrolyte solutions taught by Chung overlap in scope with electrolyte solutions taught by Ishikawa, that is Chung teaches using salts, such as LiPF6 and imide salts, and solvents, such as linear and cyclic carbonates, exemplified by Ishikawa (Chung: [0026];[0029 – 0030] and Ishikawa: [103]). The solvents DEC and EMC are included among Chung’s finite list of linear carbonates and the solvent EC is included among Chung’s finite list of cyclic carbonates ([0029 – 0030]). In a working example, Chung particularly teaches a non-aqueous solvent composition including ethylene carbonate and ethyl methyl carbonate mixed in a volumetric ratio of 3: 7 ([0058]).
Since Ishikawa generally teaches a preference for using cyclic or open-chain carbonates alone or in combinations of two or more and already suggests using ethyl methyl carbonate from a finite list of open-chain carbonates that also includes diethyl carbonate (DEC) ([0061];[0063]), it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used EMC in electrolyte solution instead of DEC, and thus obtain the claimed solvent composition of EC:EMC, because such a modification would be as suggested by Ishikawa, and shown Chung (Refer to [0058]), a selection of a functionally equivalent linear carbonate solvent to be used with ethylene carbonate recognized in the art and one with ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so [MPEP2144.06(II)].
Chung further teaches controlling the nonaqueous solvent to particularly include 1 – 80 wt% of cyclic carbonate and 20 – 99 wt% of linear carbonate, which would provide a mass ratio of cyclic carbonate {i.e. corresponds to EC}:linear carbonate {i.e. corresponds to EMC} of 1:99 to 80:20, for the purpose of improving interfacial contact properties between an electrode assembly and an electrolytic solution by maximizing mobility of electrolytic solutions ([0031]).
As such, it would have further been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the volume ratio of EC:EMC in modified Ishikawa such that the mass ratio of EC:EMC is within the range taught by Chung, and thus encompassing the claimed range, with a reasonable expectation of success in achieving improved interfacial contact properties between the electrode assembly and electrolytic solution of modified Ishikawa’s battery.
Abe, also directed to secondary battery electrolyte compositions, teaches with respect to cyclic and linear carbonate solvents, that the amount of cyclic carbonate relative to linear carbonate impacts the viscosity and conductivity of the electrolyte solution ([0005]:[0018]). Specifically, Abe suggests that increases in cyclic carbonate relative to the linear carbonate can increases electrolyte solution viscosity and conductivity but if the electrolyte solution becomes too viscous electrolyte permeation is negatively impacted ([0018]).
Selection within the overlapping portion of the claimed range and the taught range would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to optimize the viscosity of the electrolyte solution of modified Ishikawa while also ensuring that the conductivity of the electrolyte solutions is sufficient, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Ishikawa further teaches including a lithium salt represented by LiN(SO2CnF2n+1)2, where n is an integer of 0 or more, in the nonaqueous electrolyte solution of a battery ([0060]). In Example 1, Ishikawa specifically discloses using 14 wt% of lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide {i.e. LiFSI} in the electrolyte (Table 1; [0103]). LiFSI is represented by LiN(SO2F)2, which is within the claimed list of lithium salt compounds {i.e. FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F}; therefore, Ishikawa further discloses wherein the lithium salt comprises FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F and a mass of the compound is 14% of a total mass of the electrolyte ([0103]), which is within the claimed range of 12% to 25%.
In Example 1, Ishikawa additionally discloses the lithium ion salt comprising lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6; Table 1; [0103]).
In example 1, Ishikawa teaches using 8 wt% of LiPF6 (Table 1; [0103]). Generally, Ishikawa teaches including LiPF6 in the electrolyte in an amount of 10% by weight or less and 0% by weight or more ([0067]), which encompasses the claimed mass percent range of 2% to 10%, based on a total mass of the electrolyte.
Ishikawa further teaches controlling the content of LiPF6 so that the content of the imide salt is 1.1 to 10 times more than the content of LiPF6 ([0068]). Both the weight ratio and the content range of LiPF6 is taught by Ishikawa to allow for improved cycle characteristics ([0068]). Additionally, in their comparison of examples, Ishikawa teaches that higher LiPF6 concentrations resulted in lower capacity retentions ([0107]).
Since Ishikawa generally teaches using 0 – 10 wt% of LiPF6 in their taught electrolyte, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the content of Ishikawa’s example electrolyte to include a mass percent of LiPF6 within the overlapping portion of Ishikawa’s taught range and the claimed range, to optimize the cycle characteristics of the battery, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Ishikawa does not limit their battery structure to stacking type-batteries and further teaches that their electrolyte is applicable to winding type batteries as well ([0090]).
Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose a group margin of the battery cell of the lithium-ion battery ranging from 85 – 95%.
Li teaches controlling the length/positioning of coating areas on wound secondary battery electrodes for the purpose of reducing group margin of the entire battery cell to save internal battery space and optimize the capacity of the cell ([0026];[0056 – 0058]). The group margin value taught by Lee is obtained by dividing the battery cell thickness by the internal thickness of the battery casing ([0097]); therefore, the group margin taught by Li reads on the claimed group margin (Refer to [0020] of the instant specification). Li exemplifies group margin values ranging from 88.1% - 92.80% (Table 3, Examples C1 – C11; [0101]).
Since Ishikawa teaches utilizing winding-type battery structures, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Ishikawa’s battery element to have the wound electrode structure {i.e. electrode coating area position and length} taught by Lee, and thus obtain a group margin within the claimed range of 85 – 95%, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining a functioning lithium ion battery with optimized internal space and capacity.
Ishikawa exemplifies using an aluminum metal foil with a thickness of 20 µm (Example 1; [0099]).
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose an embodiment where a thickness of the positive electrode current collector ranges from 8 µm to 12 µm.
Ihara teaches an aluminum hard foil collector for a positive electrode of a secondary lithium ion battery that has a thickness of 5 – 20 µm ([0002];[0031]). Ihara further teaches that in order to increase the battery capacity of lithium ion secondary batteries, the thickness of aluminum, but that it is difficult to produce a high-strength foil less than 5 µm ([0059]). Exceeding 20 µm is taught by Ihara to reduce the amount of electrode active material that can be included in the battery and thus decrease battery capacity {Examiner Note: In [0059] Ihara states “when the particle size exceeds 20 µm”; however this appears to be a machine translation error, because the recitation before and after the sentence with the error is clearly directed to only current collector thickness. As such, the examiner believes the sentence was meant to recite “when the thickness exceeds 20 µm”. Furthermore, the Examiner provides an additional machine translation from Google Patents which, in the same sentence, does not include words “particle size” (Refer to highlighted text on pg. 4)}.
Umeyama teaches that for a positive electrode current collector for a lithium ion secondary battery controlling the thickness to be preferably 8 to 30 µm in consideration of a balance between capacity density and strength of the current collector ([0071]).
Since Ishikawa only exemplifies using an aluminum foil positive electrode current collector with a thickness of 20 µm and does not necessarily limit the thickness of the current collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, modify the thickness of the exemplified current collector to be within the overlapping portion of the claimed ranged and the ranges taught by Ihara and Umeyama to optimize the current collector strength and the battery capacity, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
As established above, the current collector of modified Ishikawa has a thickness within the range of 8 – 12 µm.
Modified Ishikawa does not disclose an elongation at break of the positive electrode current collector ranging from 0.8% - 4%.
Ihara teaches an aluminum hard foil collector for a positive electrode of a secondary lithium ion battery that has a thickness of 5 – 20 µm, a strength of 215 MPa or more, and an elongation of 1.0% or more ([0002];[0031]). Ihara further teaches that as the strength of the foil increases, the elongation, which corresponds to the ductility of the foil, decreases ([0020]). Ihara further teaches that when elongation is high and strength is low, the foil during the electrode manufacturing process may become brittle and break ([0021]). Based on the examples, the highest elongation amount taught by Ihara is 5.8% (Table 1, Example 10; [0109]).
Since Ishikawa teaches using aluminum foil as a collector, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use as the aluminum collector of modified Ishikawa, the aluminum hard foil collector taught by Ihara, and thus obtain a collector with an elongation that overlaps the claimed range of 0.8 – 4%, with a reasonable expectation of obtaining a collector suitable for the battery of modified Ishikawa with the benefits of sufficient strength and elongation.
Selection of an elongation at break within the overlapping portion of Ihara’s taught range {i.e. 1 – 5.8%} and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the strength and ductility of the collector, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
In their examples, Ishikawa teaches preparing the positive electrode by preparing a positive electrode slurry, applying the slurry to a surface of the aluminum foil collector, drying the coated foil, and finally pressing the coated foil ([0099]).
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose wherein a single-sided coating weight of the positive electrode plate ranges from 0.015 g/cm2 to 0.023 g/cm2.
Zheng teaches preparing positive electrodes with a coating weight of 230 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.015 g/cm2} to 380 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.025 g/cm2 } and negative electrodes with a coating weight of 120 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.008 g/cm2} to 190 mg/1540.25 mm2 {i.e. about 0.012 g/cm2} ([0019]). Zheng further teaches that reducing the coating weights of the electrodes decreases current per unit area, alleviates the concentration polarization along the thickness direction of the electrodes, and ultimately prevents precipitation of lithium ions on the negative electrode surface during fast charging ([0019];[0080]). Furthermore, Zheng teaches optimizing electrode capacity based on the coating weight, weight ratio of active material, and capacity per gram of active material ([0031]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the cathode and anode of modified Ishikawa using the coating weights taught by Zheng, and thus obtain a positive electrode with a coating weight that significantly overlaps the claimed range of 0.015 g/cm2 to 0.023 g/cm2, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining suitable electrodes for the battery of modified Ishikawa with the benefit of preventing precipitation of lithium ions on the negative electrode surface during charging.
Selection of positive electrode coating weights within the overlapping portion of Zheng’s taught range and the claimed range would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to optimize the capacity of the electrode and further ensure the prevention of lithium ion precipitation on the negative electrode surface of modified Ishikawa’s battery, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation [See MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Claim(s) 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa (WO2017204213A1, English equivalent US PG Pub. 2019/0173123 A1 used English translation), Yang (CN104966840A), Li (CN106848325A), Ihara (CN103003457B), Umeyama (US PG Pub. 2016/0380299 A1) and Zheng (US PG Pub. 2016/0093912 A1), as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Han (CN102786443B) and Eshetu ("Ultrahigh performance all solid-state lithium sulfur batteries: salt anion’s chemistry-induced anomalous synergistic effect", 2018, Journal of the American chemical society, 140(31), pp. 9921-9933).
Regarding Claims 19 – 20, modified Ishikawa discloses all limitations as set forth above. As established above, in Example 1, Ishikawa teaches using LiFSI as the imide salt which is represented by FSO2N-(Li+)SO2F (Table 1; [0103]).
Generally Ishikawa teaches using a lithium imide salt represented by LiN(SO2CnF2n+1)2, where n is an integer of 0 or more ([0060]).
Modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose wherein the compound is selected from the groups consisting of FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2F, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2F, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2C F3, CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(LiF)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, and CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, and any combinations thereof (Claim 19), and more particularly from FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(LiF)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, and a combination thereof (Claim 20).
Han teaches fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide alkali metal salts for non-aqueous electrolytes of lithium ion batteries, particularly Han teaches a binary and ternary fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide alkali metal salt having the structural formulas (II) and (IV), respectively, where M is Li, Na, K, Rb, or Cs ([0011 – 00012];[0021 – 0027];[0032 – 0033]).
PNG
media_image1.png
179
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Formula (II) and Formula (IV) from Han.
In Formulas (II) and (IV), the RF1 and RF2 is CmF2m+1 where m = 0 – 8 and may be the same or different ([0025 – 0027]). Formulas (II) and (IV), when M is Li, significantly overlap in scope with claimed formula I. Table 8 particularly shows examples of the binary and ternary lithium imide salts, and the example Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] (refer to last four examples in Table 8) is within the claimed list of compounds in claim 19. The imide salts are taught by Han to provide electrolytes with improved conductivity, low viscosity, a wide electrochemical window, and improved rate performance ([0084]).
Since Ishikawa already teaches using imide salts in lithium ion battery electrolytes with carbonate solvents, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the electrolyte of Ishikawa to include Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] as an imide salt, as taught by Han, with a reasonable expectation that such an imide salt would be a functionally equivalent/suitable salt for Ishikawa’s electrolyte and further would be a selection of imide salt capable of providing an electrolyte with improved conductivity, low viscosity, a wide electrochemical window, and improved rate performance.
Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] does not include CF3 as one or both of the Rf groups; therefore, modified Ishikawa does not explicitly disclose a compound particularly selected from FSO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(LiF)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, CF3SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2N-(Li+)SO2CF3, or a combination thereof.
Eshetu teaches that in lithium imide salts, the -SO2CF3 and -SO2F groups of the chemical structure provide different functionalities, and when used in combination, can merge the complementary advantages of both TFSI- and FSI- (Refer to Figure 1; Abstract and final paragraph in Introduction section). The synergistic effects of using both groups in the chemical structure include a robust SEI layer, improved discharge/areal capacity, stable long-term cyclability, high Coulombic/energy efficiency, etc. (Refer to second to last paragraph in Introduction section).
While the teachings of Eshetu are in reference to solid electrolyte batteries, since both Ishikawa and Han indicate that it is known in the art to use imide salts in non-aqueous electrolyte batteries, one with ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that such synergetic effects of using both -SO2CF3 and -SO2F groups in imide salts, such as improved discharge capacity or stable cyclability, would also be relevant to non-aqueous electrolyte batteries.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Li3[(FSO2N)2(SO2)2N] salt of modified Ishikawa to include a -SO2CF3 and -SO2F group rather than two -SO2F groups, as taught by Eshetu, and thus obtain Li3[FSO2N(SO2)2NSO2CF3], which is within the claimed list of compounds in claim 20, with a reasonable expectation of success in obtaining an lithium ion battery electrolyte with the benefits of improved discharge capacity or stable cyclability due to the synergistic effects of -SO2CF3 and -SO2F groups in the salt.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARYANA Y ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5986. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/A.Y.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 2/19/2026