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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 31 March 2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because details of the various figures are blurry and in some cases it is not clear where the data points lie (see, for example, Fig. 1, particularly Example 2; similar remarks apply to the other figures).
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
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
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, 5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu US20210218062A1 in view of Qian CN105304877A (using machine English translation).
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a lithium-sulfur battery (Xu, [0162], cathode comprises a carbon/sulfur composite, Fig. 2B battery 200), comprising:
a positive electrode (Xu, Fig. 2B, cathode 240), wherein the positive electrode comprises a sulfur-carbon composite as a positive electrode active material (Xu, [0162]) and
wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode current collector (Xu, Fig. 2B, collector 260) and a positive electrode active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the positive electrode current collector (Xu, Fig. 2B, material 250, collector 260),
a negative electrode (Xu, Fig. 2B, anode 210),
a separator interposed therebetween (Xu, Fig. 2B, separator 270)
and an electrolyte solution (Xu, [0077]),
wherein the electrolyte solution comprises a lithium salt (Xu, [0077], lithium salt), an organic solvent (Xu, [0077], nonaqueous solvent), and an additive for the electrolyte solution (Xu, [0077], diluent), and wherein the electrolyte solution does not contain a dioxolane-based compound (Xu, [0135-0140]), the examiner notes that 1,3,-dioxolane is taught as one solvent which may be used, Xu discloses embodiments such as, for example, the nonaqueous solvent consists of DME (Xu, [0139]), satisfying the claim limitation,
wherein the additive for the electrolyte solution comprises bis (2,2,2-trifluoroethyl) ether (Xu, [0142]). Xu however does not disclose wherein the positive electrode comprises an additive for the positive electrode, wherein the additive for the positive electrode comprises tellurium, and wherein the positive electrode active material layer comprises the positive electrode active material and tellurium, wherein tellurium is contained in an amount of 1 to 10% by weight based on a total of 100% by weight of the positive electrode active material layer.
Qian teaches wherein the positive electrode comprises an additive for the positive electrode (Qian, [0028], “S1-x Mx /C (II)”), wherein the additive for the positive electrode comprises tellurium (Qian, [0028], “S1-x Mx /C (II)…M is any one or more of…Te”), and wherein the positive electrode active material layer comprises the positive electrode active material and tellurium (Qian, [0028], “S1-x Mx /C (II)…M is any one or more of…Te”), wherein tellurium is contained in an amount of 1 to 10% by weight based on a total of 100% by weight of the positive electrode active material layer (Qian, [0015], [0028], “S1-x Mx /C (II)…0 < x < 1…M can be one or more of…Te”), the examiner notes that when x = 0.01, falling in the range as disclosed by Qian (Qian, [0024]), tellurium is contained in an amount of about 4%, falling within the claimed range and satisfying the claim limitation. Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the additive of Qian to Xu thereby improving electrochemical performance (Qian, [0009-0011]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Xu further teaches wherein bis (2,2,2-trifluoroethyl)ether is contained in an amount of 1 to 20% by volume based on a total of 100% by volume of the electrolyte solution (Xu, [0151], solvent to diluent molar ratio of 5, corresponding to about 1.25 vol% of BTFE as the lower end of the molar ratio). See MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 10, modified Xu additionally teaches wherein the lithium salt comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of LiCl, LiBr, LiI, LiClO4, LiBF4, LiC4BO8, LiPF6, LiAsF6, LiSbF6, LiN(SO2F)2, LiSCN, LiN(CF3SO2)2, LiCF3SO3 (Xu, [0006]).
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu US20210218062A1 in view of Qian CN105304877A (using machine English translation) and further in view of West US20060269834A1.
Regarding claim 6, modified Xu also teaches wherein the organic solvent comprises an acyclic ether (Xu, [0139]) but does not teach comprises a cyclic ether.
West teaches the organic solvent comprises a cyclic ether (West, [0023]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan to add the cyclic ether of West to modified Xu thereby improving operating cell voltage (West, [0025]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Xu as further modified above by West additionally teaches wherein the cyclic ether comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of 2-methylfuran, tetrahydrofuran (West, [0023]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Xu additionally teaches wherein the acyclic ether comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of dimethoxyethane, diethylene glycol dimethyl ether, triethylene glycol dimethyl ether, tetraethylene glycol dimethyl ether, (Xu, [0139]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Xu also teaches wherein the organic solvent comprises dimethoxyethane (Xu, [0139]) and as modified above by West 2-methylfuran (West, [0023]).
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 any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jilek US20180048017A1 (discloses a Li-S battery and electrolyte comprising BTFE).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARED HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4590. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at 571-270-7078. 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.
/JARED HANSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights