Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 17/912,680

A CLASS OF ARTIFICIAL SEI LAYERS FOR STABILIZING LITHIUM DEPOSITION IN LITHIUM BATTERIES AND RELATED METHODS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 19, 2022
Priority
Mar 19, 2020 — provisional 62/992,069 +1 more
Examiner
HA, STEVEN S
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Board of Regents of the University of Texas System
OA Round
2 (Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
479 granted / 683 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
732
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
73.2%
+33.2% vs TC avg
§102
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 683 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Status of the Claims Applicant’s amendment filed 11 March 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 12, 28, and 40 have been amended, claims 3, 5, 8, 11, 16, and 18 are canceled, and claims 12, 13, 28, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 38-41 remain withdrawn, and claims 1, 2, 12, 13, 28, 30, 31, 33, 34, 36, 38-41 remain pending. 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 . 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamo (JP H1167210 A; using the attached English machine translation for citations). Regarding claim 1, Kamo teaches an electrode comprising: an alkali metal or a substrate for alkali metal deposition (copper foil, see [0010]); and an interface material on a surface of the alkali metal or the substrate (equated to the slurry, which includes the active material discussed in [0006], applied onto the substrate of the copper foil, see [0010]), the interface material comprises Li2TeS3, Li2CS3, LixMySz, wherein M is Mo, W, In, Sn, or Bi and x, y, and z are independently between 0 and 1 (LixWSy, wherein x = 0 to 3, y = 0.5 to 3, see [0006]). Applicant is reminded 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. 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. See MPEP §2144.05(I). Regarding claim 2, Kamo teaches wherein the interface material (LixWSy, wherein x = 0 to 3, y = 0.5 to 3, see [0006]) comprises, corresponds to, or acts as an artificial solid-electrolyte interphase (The proportions of Kamo either overlap or are so close that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties as the claimed invention, and so Kamo’s interface material must also comprise, correspond, or act as an artificial solid-electrolyte interphase; see MPEP §2144.05(I)). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2 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 STEVEN HA whose telephone number is (571)270-5934. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458 . 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. /S.S.H/Examiner, Art Unit 1735 28 May 2026 /KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Mar 11, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12683244
ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICE
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12665213
STACK MODULE BOX IN CONNECTION WITH A PLURALITY OF MEDIA GUIDES LEADING TO THE STACK MODULE BOX, FUEL CELL DEVICE AND FUEL CELL VEHICLE
3y 6m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12623265
BRIDGING AN INTERRUPTION IN PRODUCTION IN A COMBINED CASTING-ROLLING INSTALLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12609360
LARGE CAPACITY SOLID STATE BATTERY
3y 2m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12605760
LOW-PRESSURE CASTING APPARATUS
1y 5m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.5%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 683 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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