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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/16/25 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-7 & 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view Song et al. (US2018/043656) in view of Schmidhauser et al. (US 2015/0340676).
With respect to claim 1, Song et al. discloses a solid electrolyte separator comprising a reticulated coating or film [0049] comprising a) a resin (polymer) [0016] and b) nanoparticles [0021]
wherein the coating or film has an open porous structure, wherein the porous structure is from 10 vol. % to 80 vol% open pores [0014-0016; 0027], wherein the resin has a viscosity of from about 100 cp to 10,000 cp, [0070; 0135; 0158-0159] wherein the nanoparticles are lithium based [0021; claim 10], electronically conductive and have a surface area of 1 to 1000 m2/g. [0022; 0160] and wherein the average pore size is less than 500 nm [0027]
Although Song et al. does not directly disclose wherein the resin has a solution viscosity of from about 100 cp to 10,000 cp, the viscosity is a variable that can be modified to improve the performance of the composition [0122; 0123; 0066-0067; 0070; 0135-0136; 0159] Too high of a viscosity may extrude the polymer or not allow for a continuous structure and too low of a viscosity can effect the melt strength. Thus the precise claimed viscosity would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention. As such, without showing unexpected results, the claimed viscosity cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the viscosity to obtain a desired performance.
Song et al. does not directly disclose wherein the resin has a solution viscosity of from about 100 cp to 10,000 cp at room temperature
Schmidhauser et al. discloses an electrolyte separator comprising a reticulated coating or film comprising a) a resin and b) nanoparticles wherein the coating or film has an open porous structure, [0041-0046;0055; Abstract], wherein the resin has a solution viscosity of from about 100 cp to 10,000 cp (at room temperature) [0058]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Song et al. to include wherein the resin has a solution viscosity of from about 100 cp to 10,000 cp (at room temperature), as disclosed in Schmidhauser et al., in order to allow for improved electrode performance and allow for a simpler and cost-saving manufacturing process.
With respect to claim 2, Song et al. discloses wherein the average pore size is less than 100 nm. [0027]
With respect to claim 3, Song et al. discloses wherein the resin is selected from the group consisting of homopolymers and copolymers of: polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), poly ethylene-tetrafluoride ethylene (PETFE), polyvinyl fluoride (PVF), poly (alkyl) acrylates, poly(alkyl) methacrylates, poly styrene, poly vinyl alcohol (PVOH), polyesters, polyamides, poly acrylonitrile, poly acrylamide, carboxymethyl cellulose CMC, polyacrylic acids (PAA), polymethacrylic acids (PMAA); and combinations thereof. [0016; 0029; 0088; 0097; 100; 0161]
With respect to claim 4, Song et al. discloses wherein the resin comprises polyvinylidene fluoride homopolymer or copolymer. [0016; 0100]
With respect to claim 5, Song et al. discloses wherein the resin comprises at least one of poly methacrylates or carboxymethyl cellulose. [0097; 0106; 0161]
With respect to claim 6, Song et al. discloses wherein the resin comprises polyacrylic acid. [0097; 0121]
With respect to claim 7, Song et al. discloses wherein the nanoparticles is lithium phosphorous oxynitride (Lipon). [0121]
With respect to claim 9, Song et al. discloses wherein the nanoparticles is lithium phosphorous oxynitride (Lipon). [0121]
With respect to claim 10, Song et al. discloses wherein the weight percent of polymer to nanoparticles is from 80:20 to 10:90. [0021; 0161; 0176;
With respect to claim 11, Song et al. discloses wherein the nanoparticles have a surface area of from 1 to 700 m2/g. [0022; 0110; 0157; 0160; 0177]
With respect to claim 12, Song et al. discloses wherein the coating has a thickness of from 1 to 300 microns. [0027]
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view Song et al. (US2018/043656) and Schmidhauser et al. (US 2015/0340676) in further view of Aetukuri et al. (US 2019/0109359).
With respect to claim 8, Song et al. does not disclose wherein the nanoparticles comprise LLZO.
Aetukuri et al. discloses a solid electrolyte separator [0085] comprising nanoparticles which comprise LLZO. [0075]
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the separator of Song et al. to include LLZO, as disclosed in Aetukuri et al. in order to allow for improved thermal stability and ion conductivity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9AM-7PM.
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.
/KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751