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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 3, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends that the LiBOB content disclosed in Yoon is outside the range of the instant claims (p. 4). However, the cited value is only an example. Yoon allows for as much as 5 wt% LiBOB, with a preferred range of up to 0.5 wt% (~0.03 mol/L) (Yoon [0036]), which overlaps the range of the instant claim.
Applicant contends that Yoon does not describe control of the LiBOB concentration (p. 6). However, Yoon describes the concentration relative to the electrolyte as a whole, the concentration of other salts, and the concentration of other additives, with a range of acceptable values for each (Yoon [0036]). Determining an appropriate value for a given electrolyte composition would necessarily entail experimentation and optimization.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (US 2020/0067078 A1) in view of Ma et al. (“A Study of Esters As Co-Solvents in Lithium-Ion Batteries”, ECS Meeting Abstracts MA2017-02 394, October 2017), Yoon et al. (US 2019/0067740 A9), Aravindan et al. ("Effect of LiBOB Additive on the Electrochemical Performance of LiCoPO4," Journal of the Electrochemical Society 159 A1435, August 2012), and Zhao et al. ("Simultaneous Stabilization of LiNi0.76Mn0.14Co0.10O2 Cathode and Lithium Metal Anode by Lithium Bis(oxalato)borate as Additive," ChemSusChem 11(13), pp. 2211-2220, July 2018).
Regarding claim 1, Son teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising an electrode assembly including a positive electrode (LiCoO2 on aluminum foil, Son [0074]) and a negative electrode (graphite on copper foil, Son [0072]-[0073]), and a non-aqueous electrolyte solution including a solvent (LiPF6 in EC-DEC, Son [0075]), with a N/P ratio (ratio Qn/Qp) of 1.5-2 (Son [0018]), which overlaps the range of the instant claim. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Son does not teach the addition of methyl acetate to the electrolyte. Ma teaches that adding 5 vol% methyl acetate to a LiPF6 alkylene carbonate electrolyte significantly improves stability of the electrodes (Ma Fig. 1 a and e). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add 5 vol% methyl acetate, which falls within the range of the instant claim, to the electrolyte of Son in order to improve stability of the electrodes.
Son does not teach the addition of 0.025-0.05 M LiBOB to the electrolyte. Yoon teaches that adding up to 0.5 wt% of LiBOB to a LiPF6 alkylene carbonate electrolyte (Yoon [0036], [0041], [0042], and [0045]) significantly improves capacity retention (Yoon [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add up to 0.5 wt% of LiBOB to the electrolyte of Son (up to approximately 0.03 M) in order to improve capacity retention. In addition, it is well known that LiBOB additive concentration controls capacity retention for a variety of lithium-ion battery chemistries. See, for example, Aravindan Fig. 5 or Zhao Fig. 1. LiBOB concentration is therefore a known result-effective variable. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select an optimum LiBOB concentration, including values with the range of the instant claim, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See, e.g., In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 2, the electrolyte of Son includes ethylene carbonate (Son [0075]).
Regarding claim 3, the electrolyte of Son includes lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6, Son [0075]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A CORNO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0745. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/J.A.C/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722