Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/643,737

ELECTROLYTES FOR LITHIUM-ION BATTERY CELLS WITH VOLUME-CHANGING ANODE PARTICLES

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 10, 2021
Examiner
DISNEY, CHRISTINE CONLON
Art Unit
1723
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sila Nanotechnologies Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
24%
Grant Probability
At Risk
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 1m
To Grant
52%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 24% of cases
24%
Career Allow Rate
5 granted / 21 resolved
-41.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 1m
Avg Prosecution
56 currently pending
Career history
77
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
63.6%
+23.6% vs TC avg
§102
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
§112
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 21 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 10/28/2025. Claims 1, 9, 17, and 25 are currently amended. Claims 15, 23, 25, 28-32 and 43-45 are withdrawn. Claims 2-3, 10-11, 18-19, 26-27, and 33 are cancelled. Claims 1, 4-9, 12-14, 16-17, 20-22, 24, 34-42 and 46 are presented for examination. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections in the previous office action are withdrawn. New grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendments are presented below. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 9 and 17 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. The new ground of rejection relies on Ohashi to teach the nitrogen-comprising co-solvent required by amended claims 1, 9, and 17. 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, 4-9, 12-14, 16-17, 20-22, 24, 34, 37, 40, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu (US 2022/0255135 A1; previously cited) in view of Yushin (US 2018/0205111 A1, cited in the IDS filed 04/04/2022) and Ohashi (US 2018/0034105 A1). Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17, Umezu discloses a Li-ion battery cell ([0139]), comprising: anode (negative) and cathode (positive) electrodes ([0141]-[0142]); a separator electrically separating the anode electrode and the cathode electrode ([0145]); and an electrolyte ionically coupling the anode electrode and the cathode electrode ([0143]), wherein the electrolyte comprises one or more metal-ion salts and a solvent composition, the one or more metal-ion salts including one or more Li salts (lithium hexafluorophosphate) with a total concentration of the Li salts in the electrolyte of 1 mol/kg ([0143]), the solvent composition comprising (see [0143] and Experiment example 1-4 in Table 1 on p. 12): one or more cyclic carbonates (ethylene carbonate or EC), and one or more electrolyte co-solvents, at least one of the one or more electrolyte co-solvents having the Formula 1-1 (p. 4, reprinted below), which corresponds to the following claimed compounds: R1R2R3COORx wherein R1, R2 are C1 alkyl, R3 is H, Rx is C2 alkyl (claim 1), R1R2R3COO(CR4)n(X)kRy wherein R1, R2 are C1 alkyl, R3 is H, Ry is C2 alkyl, n = 0, and k = 0 (claim 9), and R1R2R3CYZ(CR4)n(X)kRy wherein R1, R2 are C1 alkyl, R3 is H, Ry is C2 alkyl, n = 0, k = 0, and Y, Z are O (claim 17); and PNG media_image1.png 84 262 media_image1.png Greyscale Umezu Formula 1-1 wherein the one or more electrolyte co-solvents further comprise one or more linear esters (propyl propionate or PrPr). Umezu discloses a total concentration of the Li salts in the electrolyte from about 0.8M to about 2.0M (Umezu teaches a content of the electrolyte salt is within a range from 0.3 mol/kg to 3.0 mol/kg with respect to the electrolyte co-solvents ([0071]). Umezu uses LiPF6 at a set concentration of 1 mol/kg in the Experiment examples described at [0143] and in Table 1 on p. 12. The molarity of the resulting solution would lie within the claimed range of about 0.8 M to about 2.0 M as long as the density of the co-solvent mixture fell between 0.92 g/ml to 2.3 g/ml). Umezu teaches that the solvent composition may further comprise one or more nitrogen-comprising co-solvents (acetonitrile, succinonitrile, hexamethylene diisocyanate, [0069]), but does not disclose a specific battery cell including a nitrogen-comprising co-solvent. A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to add a nitrogen-comprising co-solvent to the Li-ion battery of Umezu with a reasonable expectation of improving the chemical stability of the electrolyte ([0068]). Umezu teaches that the cathode electrode has a potential of at least 4.5 V versus a lithium reference electrode ([0035]) and that the anode active material may include a metal-based material that can alloy with lithium, such as silicon ([0038]), but is silent as to the capacity loading of the anode electrode and material properties of the anode particles. Umezu therefore does not disclose “wherein the anode electrode has a capacity loading in the range of about 2 mAh/cm2 to about 10 mAh/cm2 and comprises anode particles that (i) have an average particle size in the range of about 0.2 microns to about 20 microns, (ii) exhibit a volume expansion in the range of about 8 vol. % to about 180 vol. % during one or more charge-discharge cycles of the battery cell, and (iii) exhibit a specific capacity in the range of about 800 mAh/g to about 3000 mAh/g,” “wherein the one or more nitrogen-comprising co-solvents are selected from dimethylacetamide (DMAc), 3-{[1,3-bis(2-cyanoethoxy)propan-2-yl]oxy}propanenitrile (CEPOPN), 1,5- dicyanopentane, 4,4-dimethylheptanedinitrile, 1-(cyanomethyl)cyclopropane-1-carbonitrile, 1,4- dicyano-2-butene, trans, 3-(2-cyanoethoxy)propanenitrile ethylene glycol bis(propionitrile)ether (EGBE), fumaronitrile (FM), p-toluenesulfonyl isocyanate, 1,1'-sulfonyldiimidazole, 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile (HTCN), pyridine boron trifluoride (PBF), 3-fluoro pyridine boron trifluoride (3F-PBF), and pyrazine boron trifluoride,” and, alternatively, does not disclose a concentration of the Li salts. Yushin teaches a Li-ion battery cell ([0007]), comprising: anode and cathode electrodes ([0044]), wherein the anode electrode has a capacity loading in the range of about 2 mAh/cm2 to about 10 mAh/cm2 ([0010]) and comprises anode particles that (i) have an average particle size in the range of about 0.2 microns to about 20 microns (0.2 microns to 40 microns [0010]), (ii) exhibit a volume expansion in the range of about 8 vol. % to about 180 vol. % during one or more charge-discharge cycles of the battery cell ([0049]), and (iii) exhibit a specific capacity in the range of about 800 mAh/g to about 3000 mAh/g (650 mAh/g to 2600 mAh/g, [0049]); and an electrolyte ionically coupling the anode electrode and the cathode electrode, wherein the electrolyte comprises one or more metal-ion salts and a solvent composition, the one or more metal-ion salts including one or more Li salts with a total concentration of the Li salts in the electrolyte range from about 0.8M to about 2.0M (0.8-1.2M, [0032]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have tried using an anode electrode that has a capacity loading in the range of about 2 mAh/cm2 to about 10 mAh/cm2 and comprises anode particles that (i) have an average particle size in the range of about 0.2 microns to about 20 microns, (ii) exhibit a volume expansion in the range of about 8 vol. % to about 180 vol. % during one or more charge-discharge cycles of the battery cell, and (iii) exhibit a specific capacity in the range of about 800 mAh/g to about 3000 mAh/g, in the battery of Umezu with a reasonable expectation that the anode would yield a cell with high energy density as taught by Yushin ([0044]) and to have used electrolyte salts in a concentration of 0.8-1.2 M with a reasonable expectation of achieving adequate ion conductivity ([0032]). Ohashi teaches a Li-ion battery cell ([0003]) comprising: an electrolyte ([0008]), wherein the electrolyte comprises one or more nitrogen-comprising co-solvents, wherein the one or more nitrogen-comprising co-solvents are selected from fumaronitrile and 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile ([0038]-[0039]). 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 Li-ion battery cell of Umezu in view of Yushin by substituting fumaronitrile or 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile for acetonitrile, succinonitrile, or hexamethylene diisocyanate because Ohashi teaches the compounds are known equivalents and have a large inhibitory effect on gas generation ([0038]-[0039]) Regarding claims 4, 12, and 20, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi does not disclose wherein the battery further comprises one or more sulfur-comprising co-solvents. However, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to add a sulfonic acid ester, which is a sulfur-comprising co-solvent, to the Li-ion battery of Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi because Umezu teaches that doing so will of improve the chemical stability of the electrolyte ([0063],[0068]). Regarding claims 5, 13, and 21, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi teaches wherein the one or more sulfur-comprising co-solvents is 1,3-propane sultone ([0068]). Regarding claims 6, 14, and 22, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi teaches wherein: the one or more cyclic carbonates is ethylene carbonate (EC, Umezu: [0143] and Table 1 on p. 12). It therefore would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected PC, FEC, VEC, and/or VC as the cyclic carbonate in the electrolyte of Umezu, Yushin, and Ohashi because Umezu teaches that the electrolyte may further comprise propylene carbonate (PC, [0065]), fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), vinylene carbonate (VC), and vinyl ethylene carbonate (VEC, [0069]). Regarding claim 7, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi teaches wherein the at least one of the one or more electrolyte co-solvents has the Formula 1-1, which is ethyl 2-methylpropionate or ethyl isobutyrate (Umezu: [0143] and Table 1 on p. 12, formula on p. 4). Umezu also discloses the following compounds as suitable co-solvents (the numbers following each compound correspond to the formulas presented on p. 4): methyl 2-methylpropionate (1-5), and methyl 2-fluoro-2-methylpropionate (1-9). Umezu further teaches that the co-solvent may comprise one or more of any branched ester compound represented by Formula 1 ([0045], reprinted below), wherein each of R1, R2, and R3 is one of a hydrogen group, a haologen group, an alkyl group, or a halongenated alkyl group; R4 is one of an alkyl group or or a halogenated alkyl group; two or more of Rl, R2, or R3 are each one of an alkyl group or a halogenated alkyl group; and a total of carbon number of Rl, carbon number of R2, and carbon number of R3 is 2 or 3. A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have used any of the above compounds as an electrolyte co-solvent in the battery of Umezu, Yushin, and Ohashi with a reasonable expectation that doing so would prevent electrolyte decomposition when the cathode potential of the battery becomes greater than or equal to 4.50 V as taught by Umezu ([0047]). PNG media_image2.png 108 246 media_image2.png Greyscale Umezu Formula 1 Regarding claims 8, 16, and 24, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi wherein the Li salt is Li hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6, Umezu: [0143]). Umezu also discloses LiFSI, LiTFSI LiBOB, and LiBF4 as suitable Li salts ([0071]). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would find it obvious to have used one or more of LiFSI, LiTFSI LiBOB, and LiBF4 as the electrolyte salt in the battery of Umezu with a reasonable expectation of achieving high ion conductivity as taught by Umezu ([0071]). Regarding claims 34, 37, and 40, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi does not disclose wherein the solvent composition further comprises a phosphorous-comprising compound. However, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have added a phosphoric acid ester, which is a phosphorous-comprising co-solvent, to the Li-ion battery of Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi because Umezu teaches that the electrolyte may further comprise additional electrolyte co-solvents ([0063]) such as a phosphoric acid ester ([0068]) to improve the stability of the electrolyte solution ([0068]). Regarding claim 46, Umezu in view of Yushin and Ohashi teaches wherein the linear ester is propyl propionate (Umezu: [0143] and Experiment example 1-4 in Table 1 on p. 12). A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have used one or more of ethyl acetate and ethyl propionate as an electrolyte co-solvent in the battery of Umezu, Yushi, and Ohashi because Umezu further discloses ethyl acetate and ethyl propionate as suitable co-solvents ([0066]). Claims 35-36, 38-39, and 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umezu (US 2022/0255135 A1) in view of Yushin (US 2018/0205111 A1), as applied to claims 34, 37, and 40 above, and further in view of Han (Why is tris(trimethylsilyl) phosphite effective as an additive for high-voltage lithium-ion batteries?, 2015; cited 10/11/2024). Regarding claims 35-36, 38-39, and 41-42,. Umezu and Yushin both teach high-voltage batteries (Umezu: [0035]; Yushin: [0044]), but do not disclose wherein the electrolyte incudes a phosphorous co-solvent comprising a phosphite or wherein the phosphite comprises tris(trimethylsilyl) phosphite. Han teaches the use of tris(trimethylsilyl) phosphite (TMSP) in high-voltage lithium batteries. A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have tried using tris(trimethylsilyl) phosphite as an electrolyte co-solvent in the battery of Umezu with a reasonable expectation that doing so would prevent electrolyte decomposition as taught by Han (P10900 C1 bridging C2). 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 extension fee 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 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 on (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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 10, 2021
Application Filed
Oct 05, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 08, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 28, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592443
PLATE FOR BATTERY STACK AND BATTERY STACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573722
EQUIPOTENTIAL APPARATUS, EQUIPOTENTIAL STRUCTURE, BATTERY AND ELECTRIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12456738
CATALYST FOR A FUEL CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 3 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
24%
Grant Probability
52%
With Interview (+28.6%)
4y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 21 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month