Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/791,512

ELECTROLYTIC COMPOSITION COMPRISING A SULFONYLIMINE ELECTROLYTE SALT AND A SOLVENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 07, 2022
Examiner
LA RAIA III, LAWRENCE
Art Unit
1727
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nippon Shokubai Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
20 granted / 27 resolved
+9.1% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
70
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 27 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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/13/2025 has been entered. Claim Status This Office action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed on 10/13/2025. Claims 1 and 5 have been amended. Claims 3, 10-11, 14-15, 19-20, and 23-24 have been cancelled. Claims 1-2, 4-9, 12-13, 16-18 and 21-22 are currently pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 has 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 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 1-2, 4-7, 9, 12, 13, 16, and 18, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160028115 A1, KIM et al. in view of US 20150107093 A1, LUO et al. Regarding claims 1-2, and 5. KIM discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte solution (abstract-applies to claims 14, 15, 23-24) [0011] discloses a composition comprising an electrolyte solution additive for lithium secondary battery, and a non-aqueous electrolyte solution further comprising: an electrolyte in the form of bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide, LiFSI [0011]; a solvent ethylmethyl carbonate [0040]; an acid component, wherein: the electrolyte contains a sulfonylimide salt in the form of bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide, LiFSI [0011], KIM [0040] discloses a concentration of fluoride ions in the form of lithium difluoro bis(oxalato)phosphate (LiDFOP) in an acidic solution is 1 wt%, the molecular weight of lithium difluoro bis(oxalato)phosphate (LiDFOP) is about 252 g/mol which translates to about 3 ppm which is less than 100 ppm of ions relative to the electrolyte in the instant application, and KIM [0040] discloses a concentration of sulfate ions in the form of ethylene sulfate in an acidic solution is 1 wt%, the molecular weight of ethylene sulfate is about 124 g/mol which translates to about 7 ppm which is less than 100 ppm of ions relative to the electrolyte in the instant application. KIM does not disclose the acid component contains an acid component having an acid-dissociation constant pKa of 0 or more and 6.5 or less at a concentration of 50 ppm or more and 10,000 ppm, and wherein the acid component is at least one selected from the group consisting of an amidosulfuric acid component, an acetic acid component, a carbonic acid component, and a phosphoric acid component, the amidosulfuric acid component is at least one selected from the group consisting of amidosulfuric acid and a salt thereof, the solvent contains a carbonate solvent, wherein the carbonate solvent is a chain carbonate solvent, and a concentration of fluoride ion is 100 ppm or less relative to the electrolyte, and a concentration of sulfate ion is 100 ppm or less relative to the electrolyte. LUO [title] An Aqueous Cathode Slurry where LUO [0051] discloses an acid component in the form of carbonic acid where, a pKa of 3.5 to 5.5 which is in the instantly claimed range of 0 to 6.5. LUO [0051] further discloses “It is recognized that these organic acids generally contain less impurities compared to stronger acids, such as hydrogen chloride (HCl), sulfuric acid (H.sub.2SO.sub.4), nitric acid (HNO.sub.3). Further, the by-products from certain of these organic acids may not disturb the electrochemistry of the electrochemical cells (e.g., the battery cell 10). Therefore, positive electrode performance is less likely to be affected due to undesirable impurities associated with the stronger inorganic acids.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the pKa range of an carbonic acid group disclosed by LUO for the electrolyte disclosed by KIM in order to reduce the impurities associated with the stronger inorganic acids increasing electrode performance. KIM [0011] discloses the solvent contains a carbonate group ethylmethyl carbonate as also applied to the limitations of claims 2, and 5 (a carbonate solvent). Regarding claims 4 and 6. KIM [0040] discloses the ethylmethyl carbonate (EMC), this carbonate solvent is a chain carbonate also applied to the limitations of claims 4, and 6. Regarding claims 7 and 16. KIM [0011] discloses that the electrolyte contains lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide as also applied to claim 16 of the instant application. Regarding claims 9 and 18. KIM [0022] teaches “the LiFSI and LiPF6 may be mixed in a molar ratio of LiFSI to LiPF6 of 10:90 to 50:50”, this satisfies the content of the sulfonylimide salt as 10 mass% or more relative to the entire composition as also applied to claim 18. Regarding claims 12-13, and 21-22. It is noted that these claims further limit amidosulfuric acid in claim 1 without requiring the selection thereof over a carbonic acid component, and a phosphoric acid component. (It is noted WO 2019188210 A1, MASAKAZU et al. teaches the claimed amidosulfuric acid as discussed in the prior office action.) Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20160028115 A1, KIM et al. in view of US 20150107093 A1, LUO et al. as applied to claims 1 and 5 above and further in view of US 5631100 A, YOSHINO et al. Regarding claims 8 and 17. Modified KIM teaches the composition of claims 1 and 5 respectively. However, modified KIM does not disclose that water is contained at a concentration of 0.1 ppm or more and 1000 ppm or less relative to the electrolyte. YOSHINO [col 2 lines 6-12] disclose that “it has unexpectedly been found that when the water content of an organic electrolytic solution is suppressed to 450 ppm or less, the above-mentioned non-aqueous type secondary battery can exhibit not only excellent performance characteristics but also high safety. The present invention has been completed, based on this novel finding.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have kept the concentration of water in the electrolyte below 1000 ppm especially below 450 ppm in order to increase performance and safety. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20100174113 A1, SANCHEZ et al. met the claimed limitations of the instant application across several different embodiments of electrolytic solutions so was disregarded for the sake of clarity and brevity in favor of the reference used above. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAWRENCE LA RAIA III whose telephone number is (703)756-5441. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 6:00am-4:00pm. 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached on (571) 272-1330. 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. /L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727 /Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 07, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 17, 2025
Interview Requested
May 13, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
May 13, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 27, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 13, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12512469
POSITIVE ELECTRODE, LITHIUM BATTERY INCLUDING POSITIVE ELECTRODE, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING POSITIVE ELECTRODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12500260
PRESSING JIG WITH A GRADIENT HARDNESS PRESSING PAD FOR A BATTERY CELL AND A DEGASSING METHOD OF BATTERY CELL USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12476278
ALL SOLID STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12469877
ALL SOLID STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12451557
Gas Removing Device and Method for Removing Gas From a Pouch Type Case of a Secondary Battery
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.7%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 27 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