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 Claims
Claims 1-5, 7-13, 15-18, and 20 are pending.
Claims 6, 14, and 19 are canceled.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7-8, 10, 12-13, 15-17, and 20 are amended.
Status of Amendments
The amendment filed 18 July 2025 has been fully considered, but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
This action has been made final.
Status of Rejections and Objections Pending since the Office Action of 22 April 2025
The informality objection regarding claim 1 has been withdrawn.
The 112 rejection over claims 8, 16, and 20 have been withdrawn.
The 103 rejections over Xu in view of He have been withdrawn. However, a new grounds of rejection over Xu in view of He and further in view of Mu has been set forth, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-5, 7-13, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (CN 113809399 A using US 20240234815 A1 as the English equivalent), hereinafter Xu, in view of He et al. (US 20210234198 A1), hereinafter He, and further in view of Mu et al. (CN 109546218 A), hereinafter Mu.
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions, in this case an electrochemical device with high cycle performance [Xu 0006] indicating multiple charge and discharge cycles where the lithium ions get cycled between the positive and negative electrodes, the electrochemical cell comprising:
a first electrode comprising a nickel-rich positive electroactive material, in this case a lithium- nickel-containing transition metal oxide [Xu 0031-0032];
a second electrode comprising a silicon-based negative electroactive material [Xu 0089];
a separating layer disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode [Xu 0027]; and
an electrolyte comprising lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) and ethylene sulfate (DTD) [0011] (Table 4, Embodiments 52 and 53). Xu further teaches the electrolyte being in contact with at least one of the nickel-rich positive electroactive material and the silicon-based negative electroactive material, in this case the electrolytic solution is injected into the electrode assembly which indicates the electrolyte is in contact with at least one of the positive and the negative electroactive materials [Xu 0113].
Xu is silent as to the nickel-rich positive electroactive material comprising greater than or equal to about 80 weight percent of nickel (Ni). However, Xu teaches that the lithium-nickel-containing transition metal oxide may include lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide [Xu 0079]. Further, He teaches an electrochemical cell with a similar electrolyte comprising an ethylene sulfate additive [He 0010], wherein the positive electroactive material may be LiNiO2 or NMC811 [He 0072], both of which are greater than or equal to about 80 weight percent of nickel.
Xu and He are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrolytic additives in lithium-ion batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the positive electrode of Xu with the positive electroactive material of He. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use, in this case as a positive electroactive material, supports a prima facie obviousness determination. In re Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Xu is also silent as to the electrolyte comprising 1 weight percent LiPO2F2 and greater than or equal to 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 1 weight percent of ethylene sulfate. However, Mu teaches a similar lithium-ion battery electrolyte additive comprising 1 % ethylene sulfate and 1 % LiPO2F2 (pg. 4, ¶ 6).
Xu and Mu are both considered to be equivalent to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of lithium-ion battery electrolyte additives. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the additive of Xu to include the weight percent of lithium difluorophosphate and ethylene sulfate as taught by Mu. Doing so would have reduced the secondary reaction between the electrolyte and electrode and improved the battery cycle life (pg. 2, ¶ 7).
Regarding claim 2, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte further comprises a solvent mixture comprising ethylene carbonate (EC) [Xu 0006] and di[methyl carbonate (DMC) [Xu 0007].
Regarding claim 3, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 2, wherein a mass ratio between the ethylene carbonate (EC) and the dimethyl carbonate (DMC) is about 3:7, in this case the electrolytic solution is 1%-20% ethylene carbonate by mass [Xu 0007] and 30%-60% dimethyl carbonate by mass [Xu 0008]. These ranges could produce a range of ratios from 1:60 to 2:3. This range includes 3:7.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). Further, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 4, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte further comprises greater than or equal to about 0.01 weight percent to less than or equal to about 2.0 weight percent of vinylene carbonate (VC) [Xu 0012d] which overlaps with the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 1.5 weight percent. 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).
Regarding claim 5, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte further comprises greater than or equal to about 0.2 weight percent to less than or equal to about 2.5 weight percent of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) (Xu abstract) which overlaps with the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 2 weight percent. 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).
Regarding claim 7, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1, wherein the electrolyte further comprises a solvent mixture comprising:
ethylene carbonate (EC) [Xu 0006];
dimethyl carbonate (DMC) [Xu 0007], a mass ratio between the ethylene carbonate (EC) and the dimethyl carbonate (DMC) being about 3:7 (as discussed regarding claim 3 [Xu 0007-0008]);
about 1 weight percent of vinylene carbonate (VC) (as discussed regarding claim 4 using [Xu 0012d]); and
about 2 weight percent of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) (as discussed regarding claim 5 using Xu
abstract).
Regarding claim 9, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claim 1, wherein the nickel-rich positive electroactive material is represented by:
LiM1xM2yM3zM4(1-x-y-z)02
where M1 comprises nickel (Ni) and M2, M3, and M4 are transition metals independently selected from the group consisting of: manganese (Mn), cobalt (Co), aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), and combinations thereof, 0.8 < x <1, 0 < y <1, and 0 < z <1, in this case NMC811 [He 0072].
Regarding claim 10, modified Xu teaches an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions, in this case an electrochemical device with high cycle performance [Xu 0006] indicating multiple charge and discharge cycles where the lithium ions get cycled between the positive and negative electrodes, the electrochemical cell comprising:
a first electrode comprising a positive electroactive material represented by:
LiM1xM2yM3zM4(1-x-y-z)02
where M1 comprises nickel (Ni) and M2, M3, and M4 are transition metals independently selected from the group consisting of: manganese (Mn), cobalt (Co), aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), and combinations thereof,0.8<x<1, 0 < y <1, and 0 < z <1, in this case NMC811 (as discussed regarding claim 1 using [He 0072]);
a second electrode comprising a silicon-based negative electroactive material [Xu 0087]; and
a separating layer disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode [Xu 0027],
the electrolyte comprising 1 weight percent LiPO2F2 (as discussed regarding claim 1 using (Mu pg. 4, ¶ 6)) and greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 1 weight percent of ethylene sulfate (DTD), and combinations thereof [Xu 0012b] and a solvent mixture comprising ethylene carbonate (EC) and dimethyl carbonate (DMC) [Xu 0006-0007].
Xu does not specify the positive and negative electrode comprising the electrolyte intermingled with a positive or negative electroactive material. However, Xu teaches that the solid content of the positive electrode is 72% [0109] and the solid content of the negative electrode is 54% [0110]. This means each electrode is porous and would inevitably have electrolyte fill the pores through capillary action, fulfilling the limitation of the electrolyte intermingling with the active material of each electrode. Further, both electroactive materials taught by He, including the positive electroactive material used to initially modify Xu as discussed regarding claim 1 using [He 0072], are also taught to have a porosity of 25% and may include the electrolyte [He 0067, 0071].
Regarding claim 11, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell according to claim 7, wherein a mass ratio between the ethylene carbonate (EC) and the dimethyl carbonate (DMC) is about 3:7 (as discussed regarding claim 3 using [Xu 0007-0008]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell according to claim 10, wherein the electrolyte further comprises greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 1.5 weight percent of vinylene carbonate (VC) (as discussed regarding claim 4 using [Xu 0012d]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell according to claim 10, wherein the electrolyte further comprises greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 2 weight percent of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) (as discussed regarding claim 5 using Xu abstract).
Regarding claim 15, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell according to claim 10, wherein the electrolyte further comprises: about 1 weight percent of vinylene carbonate (VC) (as discussed regarding claim 4 using [Xu 0012d]); and about 2 weight percent of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) (as discussed regarding claim 5 using Xu abstract).
Regarding claim 17, modified Xu teaches an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions, in this case an electrochemical device with high cycle performance [Xu 0006] indicating multiple charge and discharge cycles where the lithium ions get cycled between the positive and negative electrodes, the electrochemical cell comprising:
a first electrode comprising an electrolyte intermingled with a positive electroactive material represented by (as discussed regarding claim 10 using [Xu 0109] and [He 0067 and 0071-0072]):
LiM1xM2yM3zM4(1-x-y-z)02
where M1 comprises nickel (Ni) and M2, M3, and M4 are transition metals independently selected from the group consisting of: manganese (Mn), cobalt (Co), aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), and combinations thereof,0.8<x<1, 0 < y <1, and 0 < z <1, in this case NMC811 (as discussed regarding claim 1 using [He 0072]);
a second electrode comprising the electrolyte intermingled a silicon-based negative electroactive material (as discussed regarding claim 10 using [Xu 0110]); and
a separating layer disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode [Xu 0027],
the electrolyte comprising:
1 weight percent of lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) (as discussed regarding claim 1 using (Mu pg. 4, ¶ 6));
greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 1 weight percent of ethylene sulfate (DTD) [Xu 0012b];
greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 1.5 weight percent of vinylene carbonate (VC) (as discussed regarding claim 4 using [Xu 0012d]);
greater than or equal to about 0.5 weight percent to less than or equal to about 2 weight percent of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) (as discussed regarding claim 5 using Xu abstract); and
a solvent mixture comprising ethylene carbonate (EC) and dimethyl carbonate (DMC) [Xu 0006-0007].
Regarding claim 18, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell according to claim 17, wherein a mass ratio between the ethylene carbonate (EC) and the dimethyl carbonate (DMC) is about 3:7 (as discussed regarding claim 3 [Xu 0007-0008]).
Regarding claims 8, 16, and 20, modified Xu teaches the electrochemical cell of claims 7, 15, and 17, respectively, wherein the electrolyte comprises about 1 weight percent of ethylene sulfate (DTD) [Xu 0012b]. 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).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have 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.
Conclusion
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 DUSTIN KENWOOD VAN KIRK whose telephone number is (703)756-4717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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.
/DUSTIN VAN KIRK/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/CHRISTINA CHERN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1721