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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have 1, 3-4, 6-8 and 10 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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
The addition of the phrase “the additive does not comprise a sulfate-based compound” adds a negative limitation. The specification on pages 12-13, [0044-0045], that at least one additive selected from … ‘a sulfate-based compound’ … may be further included.”
Negative limitations are not allowed in claims unless expressly set forth in the specification. Otherwise, the added material is new matter. Ex. Parte. Grasselli; 231 USPQ 393.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. There has been no support found for the claim language “the additive does not comprise a sulfate-based compound”. The negative limitation in claim is not allowed in claim because the specification did not expressly set forth this negative limitation.
The rejection of claims under 35 USC § 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (WO 2018/135890) in view of Chen et al. (EP 3 836 279) has been withdrawn because of the new matter rejections given below. If the new matter is dropped than the above rejection would apply.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimanuki et al. [(WO 2018/212276) / (US 2020/0168955)] in view of Hallac et al. (US 2015/0221977). Shimanuki ‘955 et al. teaches in [0007], a lithium-ion secondary battery comprising a negative electrode active material comprising a silicon material and an electrolyte solution comprising an electrolyte solvent comprising a lithium salt comprising LiN(FSO2)2 in an open chain sulfone compound, a fluorinated cyclic carbonate and an open chain carbonate. Shimanuki et al. teaches in [0016], that the open chain sulfone compound is not particularly limited but can comprise ethyl methyl sulfone (EMS), dimethyl sulfone, etc. Shimanuki et al. teaches in Table 1, a lithium-ion secondary battery comprising a negative electrode comprising SiO/C and an electrolyte solution comprising 0.4 M LiPF6 and 0.8 M LiFSI in a solution comprising 5 or 10 vol% FEC; 70 vol% DEC and 15 vol% ethyl methyl sulfone (EMS).
Shimanuki et al. discloses the claimed invention teaching a battery comprising SiO anode and an electrolyte solution comprising a lithium salt comprising LiPF6 and LiFSI [LiN(FSO2)2] in a solvent comprising DEC and FEC with an additive comprising a sulfone comprising O=S=O bond but does not teach a sultone comprising O=S=O bond. Hallac et al. teaches in [0078], electrolyte solution comprising cyclic carbonates such as fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) and non-cyclic linear carbonates such as diethyl carbonate (DEC) and teaches in [0089], that additives include sultone-based additives such as propane sultone (PS), sulfone-based additives, etc. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a sultone-based additive comprising propane sultone (PS) instead of the sulfone-based additives because Hallac et al. teaches that both these additives can be used in the electrolyte solution as explained above and one would expect therefore that the sultone-based additive, PS would function in a similar way and give similar results. Shimanuki et al. teaches the claimed invention as explained above but does not specifically teach the volume ratio of DEC: FEC in 85:15 to 95:5 instead of in a range of 70:30 to 95:5. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use DEC: FEC in a volume ratio of 85:15 to 95:5, since it has been held that where general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimanuki et al. [(WO 2018/212276) / (US 2020/0168955)] in view of Hallac et al. (US 2015/0221977) and further comprising Korchev et al. (WO 2020/197672). Shimanuki ‘955 et al. teaches in [0007], a lithium-ion secondary battery comprising a negative electrode active material comprising a silicon material and an electrolyte solution comprising an electrolyte solvent comprising a lithium salt comprising LiFSI [LiN(FSO2)2] in an open chain sulfone compound, a fluorinated cyclic carbonate and an open chain carbonate. Shimanuki et al. teaches in [0016], that the open chain sulfone compound is not particularly limited but can comprise ethyl methyl sulfone (EMS), dimethyl sulfone, etc. Shimanuki et al. teaches in Table 1, a lithium-ion secondary battery comprising a negative electrode comprising SiO/C and an electrolyte solution comprising 0.4 M LiPF6 and 0.8 M LiFSI in a solution comprising 5 or 10 vol% FEC; 70 vol% DEC and 15 vol% ethyl methyl sulfone (EMS).
Shimanuki et al. discloses the claimed invention teaching a battery comprising SiO anode and an electrolyte solution comprising a lithium salt comprising LiPF6 and LiFSI [LiN(FSO2)2] in a solvent comprising DEC and FEC with an additive comprising a sulfone comprising O=S=O bond but does not teach a sultone comprising O=S=O bond. Hallac et al. teaches in [0078], electrolyte solution comprising cyclic carbonates such as fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) and non-cyclic linear carbonates such as diethyl carbonate (DEC) and teaches in [0089], that additives include sultone-based additives such as propane sultone (PS), sulfone-based additives, etc. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a sultone-based additive comprising propane sultone (PS) instead of the sulfone-based additives because Hallac et al. teaches that both these additives can be used in the electrolyte solution as explained above and one would expect therefore that the sultone-based additive, (PS) would function in a similar way and give similar results. Shimanuki et al. discloses the claimed invention but does not teach that the negative electrode active material comprises silicon (Si) instead of SiO. Korchev et al. teaches [00180], that electrolyte composition my contain special additives known to enhance the performance of SiOx or Si comprising anodes. Korchev et al. teaches in [00144], that the anode comprises negative active material comprises, consists essentially of or consists of silicon or in one embodiment, the negative active material is silicon-graphite or SiOx. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Si instead of SiO as the negative active material because Korchev et al. teaches that both these negative active materials can be used in the anode as explained above and one would expect therefore that these binder materials would function in a similar way and give similar results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jin et al. (WO 2018/135890) teaches the lithium secondary battery comprising a negative electrode comprising a carbon material; a positive electrode comprising lithium containing oxide, a separator and a nonaqueous electrolyte solution comprising a lithium salt dissolved in a mixed organic solvent. Jin et al. teaches that the organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of at least one cyclic carbonate comprising ethylene carbonate, fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), etc. and at least one linear carbonate comprising diethyl carbonate, ethyl methyl carbonate, dimethyl carbonate, etc. Jin et al. teaches that the non-aqueous electrolyte solution comprises a mixed additive in an amount of 1-4.5 wt% of vinylene carbonate (VC): 1, 3-propylene sulfate (PPS): 1, 3-propane sultone (PS) in a weight ratio of 1: 0.5 to 1: 0.2 to 1. Jin et al. teaches that the lithium salt can comprise LiPF6, LiN(SO2F)2, etc. or mixtures thereof in an amount of 0.8-2.5 M. Jin et al. teaches in Example 1, a battery comprising a positive electrode comprising lithium composite oxide, a negative electrode comprising artificial graphite and an electrolyte solution comprising 1M LiPF6 in EC:EMC (3:7 by volume) and 1g VC, 1g PPS and 1g PS. Chen et al. (EP 3 836 279) teaches a lithium battery comprising a nonaqueous electrolyte solution comprising a nonaqueous solvent and the lithium salt comprising LiPF6 and LiN(FSO2)2. Chen et al. teaches in [0022], wherein the weight ratio of LiPF6 to LiN(FSO2)2 is 4:1 to 1:4. Chen et al. teaches in [0037], that the linear carbonate may be diethyl carbonate (DEC), ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC), etc. Chen et al. teaches in Example 26, a positive electrode comprising LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2; a negative electrode comprising artificial graphite and an electrolyte solution comprising of 0.5 M LiPF6 to 0.5 M LiN(FSO2)2 in a solvent comprising compound A1, EMC and EC in a ratio of 30:65:5 and 2 wt% of PS. Chen et al. teaches in Example 28, a positive electrode comprising LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2; a negative electrode comprising artificial graphite and an electrolyte solution comprising of 0.5 M LiPF6 to 0.5 M LiN(FSO2)2 in a solvent comprising compound A1, EMC and EC in a ratio of 30:65:5 and 2 wt% of FEC. Chen et al. teaches in [0060]. that the negative electrode active material can be a carbon-based material such as graphite, a silicon-based material comprising silicon, silicon oxide, silicon carbon composite, silicon alloy, etc.
Jeong et al. (US 2021/0159541) teaches in the abstract, an electrolyte for a lithium battery comprising a nonaqueous organic solvent and a lithium salt comprising 1 M LiPF6, 0.01-1.2 M LiFSI and 0.05-0.7 M LiBF4. By using this electrolyte for a lithium battery, service life characteristics and high-temperature characteristics of the lithium battery may be improved. Jeong et al. teaches in [0025-0029], that examples of the non-aqueous organic solvent may include carbonate-based compounds comprising a chain carbonate compound or a cyclic carbonate compound or a fluoro-carbonate compound or combinations thereof such as the chain carbonate, may include, diethyl carbonate, dimethyl carbonate, etc. the cyclic carbonate compound may include, ethylene carbonate, etc. and the fluoro carbonate compound may include fluoroethylene carbonate, etc. Jeong et al. teaches in [0030-0031], that the carbonate-based compound may be a mixture of the chain and/or cyclic carbonate compound and the fluoro carbonate compound because the fluoro carbonate compound improves an ion conductivity by increasing the solubility of the lithium salt and may assist in facilitating formation of a thin layer on the anode and may particularly improve life characteristics of high capacity lithium batteries when present in an amount of 10-50 volume %. Jeong et al. teaches in [0064-0066 and 0070], that the anode active material may comprise silicon and further include another common anode active materials in addition to the silicon-based anode active material such as carbon-based materials such as graphite, etc. Jeong et al. teaches in Example 3, a battery comprising an anode comprising artificial graphite, a cathode comprising LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2 and an electrolyte solution comprising 0.65 M LiPF6, 0.70 M LiFSI and 0.15 M LiBF4 in ethylene carbonate, ethyl methyl carbonate, dimethyl carbonate and fluoroethylene carbonate. Kim (US 2012/0258357) teaches in [0005-0007, 0010], that the output at low temperature usually depends on the physical properties of an electrolyte and since batteries use for electric vehicles are used outdoors, they should not be sensitive to temperature change. The situation may be improved by changing the form of the solid electrolyte interface [SEI) formed on the surface of the negative electrode during the initial formation of the battery, or by changing the form of the anions of the lithium salt. The basic composition of a rechargeable lithium battery includes a positive electrode comprising lithium transition element composite oxides, a negative electrode and an electrolyte comprising a lithium salt composition comprising a 1st lithium salt and a 2nd lithium salt comprising LiFSI in a ratio of 1:0.05 to 1:1 dissolved in a nonaqueous organic solvent. Kim teaches in [0008-0010], an electrolyte for a rechargeable lithium battery having improved low temperature output and high-temperature characteristics. Kim teaches in [0027], that the 1st lithium salt may include LiPF6, etc. and teaches in [0030-0032], that the organic solvent may include a carbonate-based solvent such as ethylene carbonate (EC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dimethyl carbonate (DMC), etc., ester-based solvents such as methyl propionate, ethyl propionate, etc. in the nonaqueous organic solvent and may be used in a mixture with a mixture ratio may be controlled in accordance with the desirable battery performance. Kim teaches in [0034], that the electrolyte may further include an additive for forming a solid electrolyte interface (SEI) to improve the performance of the battery such as 1,3-propanesultone, 1,3 propenesultone, etc. Kim teaches in [0037-0039], that the negative electrode active material includes carbon material comprising graphite, etc. and a silicon-based material may be also used in a negative electrode, singularly or mixture of carbon and silicon with the silicon-based material includes Si, SiOx, etc. Kim teaches in Example 1, a battery comprising a negative electrode comprising graphite; a positive active material comprising a mixture of LiNi0.8Co0.15Al0.05O2 and LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 and an electrolyte solution comprising 0.7 M LiPF6 and 0.3 M LiFSI in ethylene carbonate, methyl propionate and ethyl propionate (2:4:4 vol). Sano (US 211/0052996) teaches in claim 1, a battery comprising a negative electrode material, a positive electrode material and an electrolyte solution with the negative electrode active material contains elemental silicon or a silicon -containing alloy or a silicon -containing oxide and an electrolyte solution comprising a lithium salt and a solvent comprising a cyclic carbonate, a chain carbonate, a fluoroethylene carbonate and 1, 3-propane sultone. Sano teaches in [0034], that the lithium salt can include LiPF6, LiBF4, Li(CF3SO2)2N, etc. and teaches in [0029], that the positive electrode material can comprise LiNixCoyMnzMaO2, etc.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laura Weiner whose telephone number is (571)272-1294. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 pm EST M-F.
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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/LAURA S. WEINER/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/Laura Weiner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights