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 .
Request for Continued Examination
The request filed on March 9, 2026 for a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 based on parent Application No. 18/008847 is acceptable and a RCE has been established. An action on the RCE follows:
The following rejections are overcome:
Claims 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22-27, 29-32, 36 & 39-42 & 47-49 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph,.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22 & 25-26, 47-49 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO 2010016521 A1.
Claim(s) 24, 29, 30-32 & 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744 and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO 2010016521 A1 (‘521), and even further in view of Hayashi et al. WO2019150895 (‘895).
Claim(s) 27 & 39-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO2019150895 (‘895).
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22 & 25-26, 47-49 are newly rejected as follows:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22 & 25-26, 47-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 13 & 22 necessitate “the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4”, which appears to refer to the immediately preceding binder of the term “a binder” , in line 6.. Therefore, the CMC/PAA binder composition is in the cathode. However, the specification does not support CMC/PAA cathode binders. CMC presents 17 times in the instant specification, and is only used as an anode binder. See paragraph [0011], [0012], [0014], [0015], [0017] , [0018], [0070], [0071], [0072], [0073], & [0086]. Therefore, it does not appear that the CMC/PAA binder composition in the cathode, was in possession at the time the application was filed. An appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 4-6, 10, 16-17 & 25-26, 47-49 are rejected based on dependency of claims 1, 13 & 22.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22 & 25-26, 47-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 13 & 22 necessitate “the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4”, it is unclear if the anode binder or cathode binder is the binder said limitation refers to. “[T]he binder appears to refer to the immediately preceding binder of the term “a binder”, in line 6. Therefore, the CMC/PAA binder composition is in the cathode. In line 6, “a binder” suggests that the anode binder and cathode binder are different. An appropriate correction is required.
Claim(s) 4-6, 10, 16-17 & 25-26, 47-49 are rejected based on dependency of claims 1, 13 & 22.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22 & 25-26, 47-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and further in view of SHEN et al., CN-109286003-B.
With respect to claims 1 & 47, CHAE teaches a lithium ion battery (lithium secondary battery, Abstract), comprising: an anode comprising an anode collector (negative electrode active material on a current collector; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 1), and a composite anode material comprising
graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a cathode comprising a cathode collector and a composite cathode material comprising LiCoO2 (LiCoO2 cathode, Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery paragraph 12); one or both of graphene and carbon nanostructures (carbon nanotube; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); and a binder (binder; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a separator positioned between the anode and the cathode (separator; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 14); and an electrolyte in contact with the anode and the cathode (electrolyte; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 3). With respect to claim 4,
graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18).
With respect to claim 5, the composite anode material comprises graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18), and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) (carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) ; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16). With respect to claim 6, the composite anode material comprises graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18), and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) (carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) ; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16). With respect to claim 10, the composite anode material comprises a composite anode material comprising
graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18). With respect to claims 13 & 48, a lithium ion battery (lithium secondary battery, Abstract), comprising: an anode comprising an anode collector (negative electrode active material on a current collector; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 1), and a composite anode material comprising graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); and a composite cathode material comprising 90 wt% to 99 wt% LiCoO2 (97% LiCoO2; Example 1), 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% binder (1.5% binder; Example 1), and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% of one or both of graphene and carbon nanostructures or a combination thereof ( Super C, nano carbon black; 1.5% binder; Example 1), a separator positioned between the anode and the cathode (separator; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 14); and an electrolyte in contact with the anode and the cathode (electrolyte; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 3). With respect to claim 16, wherein the composite cathode material comprises 95 wt% to 99 wt% LiCoO2 (97% LiCoO2; Example 1), 1 wt% to 2 wt% binder (1.5% binder; Example 1), and 0.1 wt% to 1 wt% graphene, carbon nanostructures, or a combination thereof ( Super C, nano carbon black; 1.5% binder; Example 1). With respect to claim 17, the composite cathode material comprises 97 wt% to 98 wt% LiCoO2 (97% LiCoO2; Example 1), 1 wt% to 2 wt% binder(1.5% binder; Example 1), and 0.56 wt% graphene paste, carbon nanostructures, or a combination thereof ( Super C, nano carbon black; 1.5% binder; Example 1). With respect to claims 22 & 49, a lithium ion battery (lithium secondary battery, Abstract), comprising: an anode comprising an anode collector (negative electrode active material on a current collector; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 1), and a composite anode material comprising graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiOx (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a cathode comprising a cathode collector and a composite cathode material comprising LiCoO2 (LiCoO2 cathode, Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery paragraph 12); one or both of graphene and carbon nanostructures (carbon nanotube; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); and a binder (binder; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a separator positioned between the anode and the cathode (separator; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 14); and an electrolyte in contact with the anode and the cathode (electrolyte; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 3), wherein the electrolyte is a liquid organic solvent-based electrolyte comprising one or more of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), propylene carbonate (PC), diethyl carbonate (DC), ethylene carbonate (EC), and polypropylene (PP) (Example 1 1 M LiPF.sub.6, EC:EMC=3:7, FEC=1 wt%) in a lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6; Example 1 1 M LiPF.sub.6, EC:EMC=3:7, FEC=1 wt%) solution comprising one or more of adiponitrile (ADN), succinonitrile (SN), 1,3-propane sultone (PS), and vinylene carbonate (VC) (vinylene carbonate; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>; paragraph 15).
With respect to claim 25, the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.1M to 5M (Example 1 1 M LiPF.sub.6, EC:EMC=3:7, FEC=1 wt%). With respect to claim 26, one or more of adiponitrile (ADN), succinonitrile (SN), 1,3-propane sultone (PS), and vinylene carbonate (VC) and organosilicon additive (vinylene carbonate; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>; paragraph 15).
CHAE does not teach or suggest: 75wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 2wt% to 20 wt% SiOx, 0.1 wt% to 10 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 10wt% conductive additive (claim 1); cathode binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claims 1, 13 & 22); graphene cathode material (claims 1, 13, 16-17 & 22); 80 wt% to 90 wt% graphite, 5 wt% to 10 wt% SiOx, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 4); 86 wt% to 87 wt% graphite, 9 wt% to 10 wt% SiOx, 2 wt% to 3 wt% binder, and 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% conductive additive (claim 5); carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claim 5); 86.7 wt% graphite, 9.6 wt% SiO, 2.7 wt% binder, and 1 wt% conductive additive, and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of 0.5 : 2.2 (claim 6); 85 wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 1 wt% to 10 wt% SiOx, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 10); the LiPF6 solution comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt%,(claim 26).
Oguni teaches that it is well known in the art to employ graphene in cathode material ([0078];LiCo2; [0070]; claims 1, 13, 16-17 & 22).
SHEN teaches that it is well known in the art to employ a cathode binder mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (the cathode binder is composed of carboxymethyl cellulose and polyacrylic acid according to weight ratio of 1: 3; Specific implementation examples, paragraph 17; claims 1, 13 & 22).
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ graphene of Oguni, in the cathode material of CHAE, in order to increase conductivity of the electrode.
Further concerning claim 1, 75wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 2wt% to 20 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 10 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 10wt% conductive additive (claim 1); in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni, in order to increase conductivity of the electrode. CHAE teaches the silicon-based negative electrode active material (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11)and the carbon-based negative electrode active material (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11) at a weight ratio of 1:99 to 50:50, preferably 20:80 to 40:60; and the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 60 wt% to 99 wt%, preferably 75 wt% to 95 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraphs 13-14. The binder is present in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt%. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraph 17. he conducting agent may be included in the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraph 19. 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to a cathode binder mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claims 1, 13 & 22); it would have been obvious to employ the carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) cathode binder of SHEN, in the cathode of CHAE in view of Oguni, in order to increase structural integrity of the electrode. The skilled artisan recognizes the binder characteristics improve binding, and thus structural integrity, of the electrode. SHEN teaches the cathode binder is composed of carboxymethyl cellulose and polyacrylic acid according to weight ratio of 1: 3. See Specific implementation examples, paragraph 17. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to claim 16, 80 wt% to 90 wt% graphite, 5 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 4); 86 wt% to 87 wt% graphite, 9 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 2 wt% to 3 wt% binder, and 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% conductive additive (claim 5); 86.7 wt% graphite, 9.6 wt% SiO, 2.7 wt% binder, and 1 wt% conductive additive2 (claim 6); 85 wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 1 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 10); it would have been obvious in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of SHEN, in order to increase conductivity of the electrode. CHAE teaches the silicon-based negative electrode active material (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11)and the carbon-based negative electrode active material (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11) at a weight ratio of 1:99 to 50:50, preferably 20:80 to 40:60; and the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 60 wt% to 99 wt%, preferably 75 wt% to 95 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraphs 13-14. The binder is present in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt%. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraph 17. The conducting agent may be included in the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly> ;paragraph 19. 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claim 5), and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of 0.5 : 2.2 (claim 6); it would have been obvious in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of SHEN, in order to increase structural integrity o of the electrode. The binder is present in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt%. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>;paragraph 17. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to the LiPF6 solution comprising 0.1 wt% to 5 wt%,(claim 26); it would have been obvious in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of SHEN, in order to increase the ion conductivity of the electrode. CHAE teaches LiPF6 as a first lithium salt in the solvent to have a concentration of 1 M. See Example 1. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
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.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and in view of SHEN et al., CN-109286003-B, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO 2010016521 A1,.
CHAE in view of Oguni and SHEN teach a lithium ion battery as described in the rejection recited hereinabove.
` CHAE does not teach or suggest: the electrolyte further comprising one or more organosilicon additives (claim 23).
Hayashi teaches that it is well known in the art to employ organosilicon additives in the electrolyte for low initial battery resistance (claim 23). See ADVANTAGEOUS-EFFECTS, paragraph 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ organosilicon additives of Hayashi, in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of SHEN, for low initial battery resistance.
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.
Claim(s) 24, 29, 30-32 & 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and in view of SHEN et al., CN-109286003-B and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO 2010016521 A1 (‘521), and even further in view of Hayashi et al. WO2019150895 (‘895).
CHAE in view of Oguni and SHEN teach a lithium ion battery as described in the rejection recited hereinabove. The electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; Example 1), propylene carbonate (PC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), diethyl carbonate (DC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), ethylene carbonate (EC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), a LiPF6; (<Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), and vinylene carbonate (VC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 13).
CHAE does not teach or suggest: the electrolyte comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 0 vol% to 50 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 24); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 20 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 29); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 30); the electrolyte comprising 6 vol% to 8 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 8 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 18 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 27 vol% to 29 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 36 vol% to 38 vol%polypropylene (PP) (claim 31); the electrolyte comprising 7 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 9 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 19 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 28 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 32); the electrolyte comprising 1 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 35 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 36).
Hayashi (‘521) teaches it is well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 24); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 20 vol% to 30 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 29); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 5 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 15 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 25 vol% to 30 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 30); the electrolyte comprising 6 vol% to 8 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 8 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 18 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 27 vol% to 29 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12) (claim 31); the electrolyte comprising 7 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 9 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 19 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 28 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12) (claim 32); the electrolyte comprising 1 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 25 vol% to 35 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12)(claim 36).
Hayashi et al. (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ 0 vol% to 50 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 24); 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 29); and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 30); and 36 vol% to 38 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 31); and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 32); and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the electrolyte comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), (claim 24) of Hayashi (‘521), in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni and SHEN, to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘521) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 24). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 20 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 29); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 30); the electrolyte comprising 6 vol% to 8 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 8 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 18 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 27 vol% to 29 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 36 vol% to 38 vol%polypropylene (PP) (claim 31); the electrolyte comprising 7 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 9 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 19 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 28 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 32); the electrolyte comprising 1 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 35 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 36); it would have been obvious in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni, SHEN & Hayashi (‘521), to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘521) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to 0 vol% to 50 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 24); it would have been obvious to employ the polypropylene of Hayashi et al. (‘895), in the electrolyte of CHAE, in view of Oguni, SHEN & Hayashi (‘521), in order to form a gel electrolyte. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 29); and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 30); and 36 vol% to 38 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 31); and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 32); and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 36); it would have been obvious to employ the polypropylene of Hayashi et al. (‘895), in the electrolyte of CHAE, in view of Oguni, SHEN & Hayashi (‘521), in order to form a gel electrolyte. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
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.
Claim(s) 27 & 39-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and in view of SHEN et al., CN-109286003-B, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO2019150895 (‘895).
CHAE in view of Oguni and SHEN teach a lithium ion battery as described in the rejection recited hereinabove. The electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; Example 1), propylene carbonate (PC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), diethyl carbonate (DC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), ethylene carbonate (EC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), a LiPF6; (<Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), and vinylene carbonate (VC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 13).
CHAE does not teach or suggest: the electrolyte comprising polypropylene (PP) in a LiPF6 solution comprising adiponitrile (ADN), succinonitrile (SN), 1,3-propane sultone (PS), and vinylene carbonate (VC) and organosilicon additive (claim 27); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 39); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% 1,3- propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 40); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration of 1M and comprises 1 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% [[PS]] 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 1 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 2 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 41); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 1 wt% to 3 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% to 4 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt%vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 42).
Hayashi et al. (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ the electrolyte comprising polypropylene (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples) in a LiPF6 (Examples 1-8) solution comprising adiponitrile (AND; general formula (1a)), succinonitrile (SN; general formula (1a)), 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%; ), and vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more) and organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 27); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 39); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprising 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 1 wt% to 3 wt% 1,3- propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0).5 wt% to 1.5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 40); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration of 1M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 1 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 1 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 2 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 1 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 2 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 41); the LiPF6 solution (1.0M; Examples 1-8) has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 1 wt% to 3 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 1 wt% to 3 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 2 wt% to 4 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt%vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 39); of Hayashi (‘895), in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni and SHEN, to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising the LiPF6 solution having a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 39). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to the LiPF6 solution having a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% 1,3- propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 40); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration of 1M and comprises 1 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% [[PS]] 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 1 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 2 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 41); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 1 wt% to 3 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% to 4 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt%vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 42); it would have been obvious in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni, SHEN & Hayashi (‘895) , to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising the LiPF6 solution having a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 10, 13, 16-17, 22 & 25-26, 47-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and further in view of Kim et al., WO-2019168376-A1.
With respect to claims 1 & 47, CHAE teaches a lithium ion battery (lithium secondary battery, Abstract), comprising: an anode comprising an anode collector (negative electrode active material on a current collector; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 1), and a composite anode material comprising
graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a cathode comprising a cathode collector and a composite cathode material comprising LiCoO2 (LiCoO2 cathode, Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery paragraph 12); one or both of graphene and carbon nanostructures (carbon nanotube; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); and a binder (binder; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a separator positioned between the anode and the cathode (separator; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 14); and an electrolyte in contact with the anode and the cathode (electrolyte; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 3). With respect to claim 4,
graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18).
With respect to claim 5, the composite anode material comprises graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18), and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) (carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) ; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16). With respect to claim 6, the composite anode material comprises graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18), and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) (carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) ; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16). With respect to claim 10, the composite anode material comprises a composite anode material comprising
graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18). With respect to claims 13 & 48, a lithium ion battery (lithium secondary battery, Abstract), comprising: an anode comprising an anode collector (negative electrode active material on a current collector; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 1), and a composite anode material comprising graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); and a composite cathode material comprising 90 wt% to 99 wt% LiCoO2 (97% LiCoO2; Example 1), 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% binder (1.5% binder; Example 1), and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% of one or both of graphene and carbon nanostructures or a combination thereof ( Super C, nano carbon black; 1.5% binder; Example 1), a separator positioned between the anode and the cathode (separator; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 14); and an electrolyte in contact with the anode and the cathode (electrolyte; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 3). With respect to claim 16, wherein the composite cathode material comprises 95 wt% to 99 wt% LiCoO2 (97% LiCoO2; Example 1), 1 wt% to 2 wt% binder (1.5% binder; Example 1), and 0.1 wt% to 1 wt% graphene, carbon nanostructures, or a combination thereof ( Super C, nano carbon black; 1.5% binder; Example 1). With respect to claim 17, the composite cathode material comprises 97 wt% to 98 wt% LiCoO2 (97% LiCoO2; Example 1), 1 wt% to 2 wt% binder(1.5% binder; Example 1), and 0.56 wt% graphene paste, carbon nanostructures, or a combination thereof ( Super C, nano carbon black; 1.5% binder; Example 1). With respect to claims 22 & 49, a lithium ion battery (lithium secondary battery, Abstract), comprising: an anode comprising an anode collector (negative electrode active material on a current collector; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 1), and a composite anode material comprising graphite (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), SiO (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), binder (binder; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 16), and conductive additive (conducting agent; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a cathode comprising a cathode collector and a composite cathode material comprising LiCoO2 (LiCoO2 cathode, Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery paragraph 12); one or both of graphene and carbon nanostructures (carbon nanotube; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); and a binder (binder; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 13; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 18); a separator positioned between the anode and the cathode (separator; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 14); and an electrolyte in contact with the anode and the cathode (electrolyte; Method of manufacturing lithium secondary battery, paragraph 3), wherein the electrolyte is a liquid organic solvent-based electrolyte comprising one or more of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), propylene carbonate (PC), diethyl carbonate (DC), ethylene carbonate (EC), and polypropylene (PP) (Example 1 1 M LiPF.sub.6, EC:EMC=3:7, FEC=1 wt%) in a lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6; Example 1 1 M LiPF.sub.6, EC:EMC=3:7, FEC=1 wt%) solution comprising one or more of adiponitrile (ADN), succinonitrile (SN), 1,3-propane sultone (PS), and vinylene carbonate (VC) (vinylene carbonate; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>; paragraph 15).
With respect to claim 25, the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.1M to 5M (Example 1 1 M LiPF.sub.6, EC:EMC=3:7, FEC=1 wt%). With respect to claim 26, one or more of adiponitrile (ADN), succinonitrile (SN), 1,3-propane sultone (PS), and vinylene carbonate (VC) and organosilicon additive (vinylene carbonate; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>; paragraph 15).
CHAE does not teach or suggest: 75wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 2wt% to 20 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 10 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 10wt% conductive additive (claim 1); anode binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claims 1, 13 & 22); graphene cathode material (claims 1, 13, 16-17 & 22); 80 wt% to 90 wt% graphite, 5 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 4); 86 wt% to 87 wt% graphite, 9 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 2 wt% to 3 wt% binder, and 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% conductive additive (claim 5); carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claim 5); 86.7 wt% graphite, 9.6 wt% SiO, 2.7 wt% binder, and 1 wt% conductive additive, and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of 0.5 : 2.2 (claim 6); 85 wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 1 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 10); the LiPF6 solution comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt%,(claim 26).
Oguni teaches that it is well known in the art to employ graphene in cathode material ([0078];LiCo2; [0070]; claims 1, 13, 16-17 & 22).
Kim teaches that it is well known in the art to employ a anode binder mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (the anode binder is composed of carboxymethyl cellulose and polyacrylic acid according to weight ratio of 1: 3; the weight ratio of carboxymethyl cellulose and polyacrylic acid is (95: 5) to (5:95); See TECH-SOLUTION, paragraph 10; claims 1, 13 & 22).
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ graphene of Oguni, in the cathode material of CHAE, in order to increase conductivity of the electrode.
Further concerning claim 1, 75wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 2wt% to 20 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 10 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 10wt% conductive additive (claim 1); in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni, in order to increase conductivity of the electrode. CHAE teaches the silicon-based negative electrode active material (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11)and the carbon-based negative electrode active material (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11) at a weight ratio of 1:99 to 50:50, preferably 20:80 to 40:60; and the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 60 wt% to 99 wt%, preferably 75 wt% to 95 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraphs 13-14. The binder is present in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt%. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraph 17. he conducting agent may be included in the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraph 19. 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to a anode binder mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claims 1, 13 & 22); it would have been obvious to employ the carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) anode binder; with the weight ratio of carboxymethyl cellulose and polyacrylic acid is (95: 5) to (5:95) of Kim, in the anode of CHAE in view of Oguni, in order to increase structural integrity of the electrode. The skilled artisan recognizes the binder characteristics improve binding, and thus structural integrity, of the electrode. SHEN teaches the cathode binder is composed of carboxymethyl cellulose and polyacrylic acid according to weight ratio of 1: 3. See Specific implementation examples, paragraph 17. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to claim 16, 80 wt% to 90 wt% graphite, 5 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 4); 86 wt% to 87 wt% graphite, 9 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 2 wt% to 3 wt% binder, and 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% conductive additive (claim 5); 86.7 wt% graphite, 9.6 wt% SiO, 2.7 wt% binder, and 1 wt% conductive additive2 (claim 6); 85 wt% to 95 wt% graphite, 1 wt% to 10 wt% SiO, 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% binder, and 0.1 wt% to 2 wt% conductive additive (claim 10); it would have been obvious in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of Kim, in order to increase conductivity of the electrode. CHAE teaches the silicon-based negative electrode active material (SiOx; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11)and the carbon-based negative electrode active material (graphite; <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11) at a weight ratio of 1:99 to 50:50, preferably 20:80 to 40:60; and the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 60 wt% to 99 wt%, preferably 75 wt% to 95 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraphs 13-14. The binder is present in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt%. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>, ;paragraph 17. The conducting agent may be included in the negative electrode active material layer in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material layer. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly> ;paragraph 19. 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4 (claim 5), and the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of 0.5 : 2.2 (claim 6); it would have been obvious in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of Kim, in order to increase structural integrity o of the electrode. The binder is present in an amount of 0.5 wt% to 10 wt%, preferably 1 wt% to 5 wt%. See <Manufacture of negative electrode assembly>;paragraph 17. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
With respect to the LiPF6 solution comprising 0.1 wt% to 5 wt%,(claim 26); it would have been obvious in the lithium ion battery of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of Kim, in order to increase the ion conductivity of the electrode. CHAE teaches LiPF6 as a first lithium salt in the solvent to have a concentration of 1 M. See Example 1. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.).
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.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and in view of Kim et al., WO-2019168376-A1, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO 2010016521 A1,.
CHAE in view of Oguni and Kim teach a lithium ion battery as described in the rejection recited hereinabove.
` CHAE does not teach or suggest: the electrolyte further comprising one or more organosilicon additives (claim 23).
Hayashi teaches that it is well known in the art to employ organosilicon additives in the electrolyte for low initial battery resistance (claim 23). See ADVANTAGEOUS-EFFECTS, paragraph 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ organosilicon additives of Hayashi, in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni and further in view of Kim, for low initial battery resistance.
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.
Claim(s) 24, 29, 30-32 & 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and in view of Kim et al., WO-2019168376-A1, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO 2010016521 A1 (‘521), and even further in view of Hayashi et al. WO2019150895 (‘895).
CHAE in view of Oguni and Kim teach a lithium ion battery as described in the rejection recited hereinabove. The electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; Example 1), propylene carbonate (PC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), diethyl carbonate (DC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), ethylene carbonate (EC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), a LiPF6; (<Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), and vinylene carbonate (VC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 13).
CHAE does not teach or suggest: the electrolyte comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 0 vol% to 50 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 24); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 20 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 29); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 30); the electrolyte comprising 6 vol% to 8 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 8 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 18 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 27 vol% to 29 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 36 vol% to 38 vol%polypropylene (PP) (claim 31); the electrolyte comprising 7 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 9 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 19 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 28 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 32); the electrolyte comprising 1 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 35 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 36).
Hayashi (‘521) teaches it is well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 24); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 20 vol% to 30 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 29); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 5 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 15 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 25 vol% to 30 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 30); the electrolyte comprising 6 vol% to 8 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 8 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 18 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 27 vol% to 29 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12) (claim 31); the electrolyte comprising 7 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 9 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 19 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 28 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12) (claim 32); the electrolyte comprising 1 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 25 vol% to 35 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12)(claim 36).
Hayashi et al. (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ 0 vol% to 50 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 24); 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 29); and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 30); and 36 vol% to 38 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 31); and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 32); and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the electrolyte comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), (claim 24) of Hayashi (‘521), in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni and Kim, to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘521) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), (claim 24). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 20 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 29); the electrolyte comprising 5 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 30 vol% [[DEC]] diethyl carbonate (DC), and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 30); the electrolyte comprising 6 vol% to 8 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 8 vol% to 10 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 18 vol% to 20 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 27 vol% to 29 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 36 vol% to 38 vol%polypropylene (PP) (claim 31); the electrolyte comprising 7 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 9 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 19 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 28 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 32); the electrolyte comprising 1 vol% to 10 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), 5 vol% to 15 vol% propylene carbonate (PC), 15 vol% to 25 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC), 25 vol% to 35 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC), and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (claim 36); it would have been obvious in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni, Kim & Hayashi (‘521), to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘521) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising 0 vol% to 20 vol% fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; 0.001% - 30%; <Fluorine-containing alkali metal salt>, paragraphs 10-11), 0 vol% to 20 vol% propylene carbonate (PC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0 vol% to 40 vol% ethylene carbonate (EC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12), 0vol% to 40 vol% diethyl carbonate (DC; the mixing ratio of at least one cyclic carbonate represented by the general formula [2a] or the general formula [2b] and at least one chain carbonate is Expressed by mass ratio, it is 0: 100 to 100: 0 <Nonaqueous solvent>, paragraphs 11-12). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to 0 vol% to 50 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 24); it would have been obvious to employ the polypropylene of Hayashi et al. (‘895), in the electrolyte of CHAE, in view of Oguni, Kim & Hayashi (‘521), in order to form a gel electrolyte. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 29); and 35 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 30); and 36 vol% to 38 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 31); and 37 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 32); and 30 vol% to 40 vol% polypropylene (PP) (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples; claim 36); it would have been obvious to employ the polypropylene of Hayashi et al. (‘895), in the electrolyte of CHAE, in view of Oguni, Kim & Hayashi (‘521), in order to form a gel electrolyte. Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
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.
Claim(s) 27 & 39-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAE et al. EP 3793005 A1 in view of Oguni US Pub. 2021/0104744, and in view of Kim et al., WO-2019168376-A1, and further in view of Hayashi et al. WO2019150895 (‘895).
CHAE in view of Oguni and Kim teach a lithium ion battery as described in the rejection recited hereinabove. The electrolyte comprises fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; Example 1), propylene carbonate (PC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), diethyl carbonate (DC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), ethylene carbonate (EC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 12), a LiPF6; (<Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 11), and vinylene carbonate (VC; <Pre-lithiation of negative electrode assembly>, paragraph 13).
CHAE does not teach or suggest: the electrolyte comprising polypropylene (PP) in a LiPF6 solution comprising adiponitrile (ADN), succinonitrile (SN), 1,3-propane sultone (PS), and vinylene carbonate (VC) and organosilicon additive (claim 27); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 39); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% 1,3- propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 40); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration of 1M and comprises 1 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% [[PS]] 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 1 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 2 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 41); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 1 wt% to 3 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% to 4 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt%vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 42).
Hayashi et al. (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ the electrolyte comprising polypropylene (polypropylene may be used in the electrolyte; Examples) in a LiPF6 (Examples 1-8) solution comprising adiponitrile (AND; general formula (1a)), succinonitrile (SN; general formula (1a)), 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%; ), and vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more) and organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 27); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 39); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprising 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 1 wt% to 3 wt% 1,3- propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0).5 wt% to 1.5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 40); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration of 1M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 1 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 1 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 2 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 1 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 2 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 41); the LiPF6 solution (1.0M; Examples 1-8) has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 1 wt% to 3 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 1 wt% to 3 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 2 wt% to 4 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt%vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 39); of Hayashi (‘895), in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni and Kim, to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising the LiPF6 solution having a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples ; claim 39). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With respect to the LiPF6 solution having a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% 1,3- propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 40); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration of 1M and comprises 1 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% [[PS]] 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 1 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC), and 2 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 41); the LiPF6 solution has a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M and comprising 1 wt% to 3 wt% adiponitrile (ADN), 1 wt% to 3 wt% succinonitrile (SN), 2 wt% to 4 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS), 0.5 wt% to 1.5 wt%vinylene carbonate (VC), and 1 wt% to 3 wt% organosilicon additive (claim 42); it would have been obvious in the electrolyte of CHAE in view of Oguni, Kim & Hayashi (‘895) , to increase the ion conductivity of the electrolyte. Hayashi (‘895) teaches its well known in the art to employ electrolytes comprising the LiPF6 solution having a concentration in a range of 0.5M to 1.5M (1.0M; Examples 1-8) and comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% adiponitrile (AND; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7% ), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% succinonitrile (SNl; nitrile compound is preferably 0.2 to 7%), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% 1,3-propane sultone (PS; 0.001% by mass or more and 3.0%;), 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% vinylene carbonate (VC; 0.001% by mass or more), and 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% organosilicon additive (Examples). 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). Furthermore, "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." See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The discovery of an optimum value of a known result effective variable, without producing any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of a person of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980) (see MPEP § 2144.05, II.). Lastly, selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Response to Arguments
Applicant asserts that Chae, Oguni, nor any proper combination thereof teaches or suggests "wherein the binder is a mixture of carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC) and polyacrylic acid (PAA) in a weight ratio of about 1 to 4," as recited by independent claims 1, 13, 22. The Office Action relies on paragraph [0037] of Chae to disclose a list of binder materials, including CMC and PAA. Chae, however, does not describe or suggest a mixture of CMC and PAA, or a ratio of these or any two binders. This assertion is correct and all previously pending rejections are overcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MONIQUE M WILLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1309. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Tiffany Legette, may 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Monique M Wills/
Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723