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 .
Status of the Claims
In the communication dated November 5, 2025, claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are elected and claims 3-10 and 13-16 are withdrawn.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 1-4 and 11-14 and further election of Species A, claims 2 and 12, in the reply filed on November 5, 2025 is acknowledged. It is noted that claims 1 and 11 are generic in Group II. As such, claims 1, 2, 11 and 12 are being examined infra.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the labels of FIGS. 4-8 are degraded in quality and difficult to distinguish from one another. Examiner suggests enlarging the figures and placing each on a separate page.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakatsuji et al. US20110267009A1 in view of Wang US20170018803A1.
Regarding claim 1. Nakatsuji discloses a method for enhancing battery cycle performance, applied in a battery (14) (FIG. 1-2), wherein the method comprises the following steps:
at a first stage (T1-T2), charging the battery at a first-stage current (I1A) until reaching a first-stage voltage (Vth1) (¶60); and
at a second stage (T2-T3), charging the battery at a second-stage current (I2A/I1B) until reaching a second-stage voltage (Vfull) , wherein the second-stage voltage is greater than the first-stage voltage (Vfull>Vth1), and the second-stage current is less than the first-stage current (I2A<I1A) (¶60).
Although Nakatsuji discloses a lithium ion battery (¶28), it is not directed toward the electrolyte and thus does not teach the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive, the additive comprises a nitrile compound, and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5%.
In a secondary lithium battery Wang teaches wherein the lithium battery is a lithium-ion battery (Wang, [0007]) the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive (Wang, [0013], [0022]),, the additive comprises a nitrile compound (Wang, [0022]), and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5% (Wang, [0023]), encompassing the claimed range of 0.5% to 5%, the Courts have held that 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) and similarly a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close, Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985), see MPEP 2144.05, in order to prevent a lithium-ion battery from being overcharged (Wang, [0010]) and overheating.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Zhang with the teaching of Nakatsuji wherein the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive, the additive comprises a nitrile compound, and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5% thereby preventing a lithium-ion battery from being overcharged and overheating.
Regarding claim 11. An electronic device (FIG. 1), comprising a battery (14) and a battery management unit (202), and the battery management unit is configured to execute a method for enhancing battery cycle performance, wherein the method comprises the following steps (FIG. 2):
at a first stage (T1-T2), charging the battery at a first-stage current (I1A) until reaching a first-stage voltage (Vth1) (¶60); and
at a second stage (T2-T3), charging the battery at a second-stage current (I2A/I1B) until reaching a second-stage voltage (Vfull) , wherein the second-stage voltage is greater than the first-stage voltage (Vfull>Vth1), and the second-stage current is less than the first-stage current (I2A<I1A) (¶60).
Although Nakatsuji discloses a lithium ion battery (¶28), it is not directed toward the electrolyte and thus does not teach the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive, the additive comprises a nitrile compound, and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5%.
In a secondary lithium battery Wang teaches wherein the lithium battery is a lithium-ion battery (Wang, [0007]) the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive (Wang, [0013], [0022]),, the additive comprises a nitrile compound (Wang, [0022]), and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5% (Wang, [0023]), encompassing the claimed range of 0.5% to 5%, the Courts have held that 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) and similarly a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close, Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985), see MPEP 2144.05, in order to prevent a lithium-ion battery from being overcharged (Wang, [0010]) and overheating.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Zhang with the teaching of Nakatsuji wherein the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive, the additive comprises a nitrile compound, and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5% thereby preventing a lithium-ion battery from being overcharged and overheating.
Regarding claim 2 and claim 12. Nakatsuji does not explicitly disclose that the additive comprises a nitrile compound represented by Structural Formula 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
18
228
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein, Ru is selected from substituted or unsubstituted C1 to C10 alkylidene or C1 to C10 alkyleneoxy.
Wang discloses that the additive comprises a nitrile compound represented by Structural Formula 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
18
228
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(formula 4 - ¶8)
wherein, R11 is selected from substituted or unsubstituted C1 to C10 alkylidene or C1 to C10 alkyleneoxy (¶8 – “each of R7 to R14 is one independently selected from the group consisting of linear alkyl groups with 1 to 10 carbon atoms, side chain-containing alkyl groups, double bond-containing hydrocarbon groups, triple bond-containing hydrocarbon groups, ether bond-containing alkyl groups, or carbonyl-containing alkyl groups”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Zhang with the teaching of Nakatsuji wherein the battery comprises an electrolytic solution containing an additive, the additive comprises a nitrile compound, and a mass percent of the nitrile compound in the electrolytic solution is 0.5% to 5% thereby preventing a lithium-ion battery from being overcharged and overheating.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure..
Hung et al. US20210066946A1 discloses multiple charging stages – see FIG. 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA JEPPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/PAMELA J JEPPSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights