Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/890,357

Additive Containing Sulfide-Based Solid Electrolyte

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 18, 2022
Examiner
PATEL, SUHANI JITENDRA
Art Unit
1783
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
National Taiwan University Of Science And Technology
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
6 granted / 7 resolved
+20.7% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
51
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
57.4%
+17.4% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 7 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 Claim 1 is amended. Claims 4-7, 9-13 are cancelled. Claims 1-3, 8 are pending. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendments filed on 12/29/2025 have been entered. The 103 rejections on Claims 1-13 have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment to Claim 1. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Masaya et al (JP2013062242A; machine translation) as evidenced by PubChem compound summary (National Center for Biotechnology Information (2026). PubChem Compound Summary for CID 16702007, Aluminum acetylacetonate. Retrieved January 14, 2026 from https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Aluminum-acetylacetonate). Regarding Claim 1, Masaya teaches a solid electrolyte layer comprising sulfide based solid electrolytes such as Li2S-P2S5 (paragraph 0050), and an organoaluminum compound such as aluminum pentanedionate and aluminum acetylacetonate (Paragraph 0080). The sulfide based solid electrolyte has at least one phosphorus atom and one sulfur atom. Per PubChem compound summary page, aluminum acetylacetonate is a synonym for aluminum pentanedionate (as claimed). The invention of Masaya has advantages related to forming thin film solid state secondary battery using a low cost, simple coating method. Hence, Masaya teaches the claimed solid electrolyte and the acidic component of aluminum pentanedionate. Masaya teaches the electrolyte composition of instant invention Claim 1 but do not expressly teach that the acidic component comprises a hydrophobic property presenting with a hydrophobic structure suppressing a formation of hydrogen sulfide for the sulfide based solid electrolyte. Per MPEP 2112.01 II., products of identical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. it is reasonable to presume that the hydrophobic property of the acidic component is inherent to Masaya. Masaya does not expressly teach that the acidic component carries a positive charge, and that the positive charge attaches to the phosphorus sulfur structure of the solid electrolyte. It is evident that the acidic component in the prior art is the same as instant specification (i.e. aluminum pentanedionate). Hence, it is expected to have the same properties as the claimed invention. See MPEP 2112.01 II. Masaya combines the solid electrolyte and acidic component such that the acidic component attaches to the sulfide phosphorus sulfur structure of the electrolyte. Regarding Claim 2, Masaya teaches that the solid electrolyte has a phosphorus sulfur structure such as Li2S-P2S5 (Paragraph 0050). This structure includes -PS, -P2S64-. Regarding Claim 3, Masaya teaches the electrolyte composition of instant invention Claim 1 but does not expressly teach that the acidic component dissociates and generates an acidic radical, ion or group with positive charge, a base radical with a negative charge, and that the positive radical attaches to the sulfur atom of the sulfide-solid electrolyte. Per MPEP 2112.01 II., products of identical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties. it is reasonable to presume that the interaction between radicals of the electrolyte composition is inherent to Masaya. Support for said presumption is found in that the instant specification cites that the method of producing the electrolyte is simply mixing the phosphorus sulfur structure with a solution of the acidic component (instant specification, Paragraph 0029). Masaya also teaches using mixing, heating and stirring to combine the electrolyte ingredients (Paragraph 0200). Since the electrolyte composition are identical and the method of preparation is the same, the electrolyte of Masaya is expected to exhibit the same properties as the claimed invention. Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Masaya et al (JP2013062242A; machine translation) as evidenced by PubChem compound summary (National Center for Biotechnology Information (2026). PubChem Compound Summary for CID 16702007, Aluminum acetylacetonate. Retrieved January 14, 2026 from https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Aluminum-acetylacetonate) and Deiseroth et al (US 20200290969 A1). Regarding Claim 8, Masaya teaches that the solid electrolyte comprises sulifde based solid electrolytes such as Li2S-P2S5 (Paragraph 0050). Masaya does not limit the electrolytes to the list of chemicals provided. Masaya also lists LiI-Li2S-P2S5 as an electrolyte. This consists of iodide element which is a halide similar to the claimed chloride element. Furthermore, as evidenced by Deiseroth that Li6PS5Cl is prepared with the starting materials of Li2S, P2S5, LiCl (Paragraph 0036). Deiseroth shows that lithium argyrodites used as solid electrolytes are compounds with formula Li6PS5Z where Z is selected from the group consisting of halides (Paragraph 0014). Hence, the use of Li6PS5Cl as a solid electrolyte is evident based on Masaya and Deiseroth. References of Interest Examiner notes the following references of interest pertinent to this area Kim et al (US 20220093922 A1) Sakamoto et al (US 20210242501 A1) Hotta et al (US 4501686) Choi et al (US 20200052330 A1) Liu et al (US 20190027788 A1) Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant argues that previously cited art does not show the mechanism (acidic component with hydrophobic structure suppressing H2S) and the specific additive set. With respect to previously cited art failing to recognize or suggest any of the advantageous properties exhibited by the claimed invention, showing the advantageous properties exhibited by the claimed invention is not the standard for a 103 rejection, nor is it a showing of unexpected results. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-6278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 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, Maria Veronica D. Ewald can be reached on 571-272-8519. 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. /SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 1783 /MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 18, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Sep 19, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Dec 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 02, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12531272
Non-Aqueous Electrolyte for Lithium Secondary Battery, and Lithium Secondary Battery Comprising Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12500268
NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE ADDITIVE, NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE CONTAINING SAME, POWER STORAGE DEVICE, AND ELECTRIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12482886
BATTERY AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12456755
ELECTROLYTE FOR LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY, AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 4 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
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.0%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 7 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