Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/780,021

AN ELECTROLYTE FOR MAGNESIUM ION BATTERIES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 25, 2022
Examiner
ZENG, LINGWEN R
Art Unit
1723
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Agency For Science, Technology And Research
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
398 granted / 522 resolved
+11.2% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
544
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
61.5%
+21.5% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
7.5%
-32.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 522 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
CTNF 17/780,021 CTNF 89295 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-06 AIA Claim have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention , there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/27/2025 . Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 10/19/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 20, 23, 24, 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 ( a) (1 ) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2013/0337328 to Yamamoto et al . With respect to claim 1, Yamamoto et al. teach a liquid electrolyte composition comprising: i) a magnesium salt comprising a trifluoromethane sulfonate anion; ii) an additive comprising an aluminum chloride (an inorganic halide salt). iii) a solvent comprising 1,2-dimethoxyethane (an ether), wherein the total concentration of cations of the inorganic halide salt and magnesium ions of the magnesium salt divided by the concentration of anions of the inorganic halide salt is greater than 1 in the electrolyte composition (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim limitation, “wherein the organic halide salt comprises a halide anion and a cation selected from an optionally substituted quaternary ammonium or a three to nine membered N-heterocyclic cation, and the cation comprises at least one protonated nitrogen capable of dissociating the trifluoromethane sulfonate anion from the magnesium salt,” instant claim is proviso upon the limitation is not positively required by the claim 1; therefore, the limitation of instant claims do not come into force. With respect to claim 3, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the concentration of the magnesium salt is from 0.25 to 1.0M (0.01 M to 2.5 M) (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claims 4, 6, 7, 10, 12 and 13, instant claim is proviso upon limitation, “organic halide salt,” is not positively required by the claim 1; therefore, the limitation of instant claims do not come into force. With respect to claim 9, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the inorganic halide salt is chloride (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 14, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the concentration of the inorganic halide salt is from 0.25 M to 1 M (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 16, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the cations of the inorganic halide salt are aluminum ions (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 18, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the inorganic halide salt is aluminum chloride (AlCl.sub.3) (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 20, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the total concentration of the cations of the inorganic halide salt and magnesium ions of the magnesium salt divided by the concentration of anions of the inorganic halide salt in the electrolyte composition is in the range of greater than 1 to 5 (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 23, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the concentration of the magnesium trifluoromethanesulfonate is from 0.25 M to 1 M (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 24, Yamamoto et al. teach a liquid electrolyte composition consisting essentially of: i) a magnesium trifluoromethanesulfonate; ii) tetrabutylammonium chloride (with Aluminium chloride present in the solvent); and iii) a solvent comprising 1,2-dimethoxyethane (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 28, Yamamoto et al. teach the liquid electrolyte composition, wherein the solvent (ether) does not comprise water (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim 29, Yamamoto et al. teach an electrochemical cell comprising: a) a positive electrode; b) a magnesium negative electrode; and c) a liquid electrolyte composition comprising: i) a magnesium salt comprising a trifluoromethane sulfonate anion; ii) an additive comprising an inorganic halide salt; and iii) a solvent comprising 1,2-dimethoxyethane (an ether), wherein the total concentration of cations of the inorganic halide salt and magnesium ions of the magnesium salt divided by the concentration of anions of the inorganic halide salt is greater than 1 in the electrolyte composition, wherein the positive electrode and the magnesium negative electrode are in fluid communication with the electrolyte (Yamamoto et al.: Section [0146]). With respect to claim limitation, “wherein the organic halide salt comprises a halide anion and a cation selected from an optionally substituted quaternary ammonium or a three to nine membered N-heterocyclic cation, and the cation comprises at least one protonated nitrogen capable of dissociating the trifluoromethane sulfonate anion from the magnesium salt,” instant claim is proviso upon the limitation is not positively required by the claim 1; therefore, the limitation of instant claims do not come into force . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2013/0337328 to Yamamoto et al . With respect to claim 25, Yamamoto et al. teach the claimed invention except for the concentration of the magnesium trifluoromethanesulfonate salt is 2.5 M. However, it would have been obvious as of the effective filing dated of the claimed invention to have modified the concentration of the magnesium trifluoromethanesulfonate salt to be 2.5 M, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It has been held that discovering that general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Generally, differences in ranges will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such ranges is critical. In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In re Aller , 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In re Hoeschele , 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINGWEN R ZENG whose telephone number is (571)272-6649. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm. 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, Milton I Cano and Tiffany Legette can be reached on (313) 446-4937 and (571) 270-7078, respectively. 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. /LINGWEN R ZENG/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 12/17/2025 Application/Control Number: 17/780,021 Page 2 Art Unit: 1723 Application/Control Number: 17/780,021 Page 3 Art Unit: 1723 Application/Control Number: 17/780,021 Page 6 Art Unit: 1723 Application/Control Number: 17/780,021 Page 7 Art Unit: 1723 Application/Control Number: 17/780,021 Page 8 Art Unit: 1723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 25, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 25, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603351
BATTERY MODULE WITH IMPROVED COOLING PERFORMANCE AND BATTERY PACK INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597683
CURRENT COLLECTOR, BATTERY CELL, BATTERY PACK, AND VEHICLE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592449
ASSEMBLED BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573676
BATTERY UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573686
THERMAL MANAGEMENT COMPONENT, BATTERY AND POWERED DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+21.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 522 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month