DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/18/2026 has been entered.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi (US 20160079582 A1) and further in view of Burns (US 20160204469 A1), with evidence by Saito (US 20170331115 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takeuchi teaches:
a lithium-ion secondary battery (para. 0040) comprising:
a negative electrode (para. 0015),
a positive electrode (para. 0015),
a non-aqueous electrolyte (the non-aqueous electrolyte is made up of an intermediate layer as described in para. 0014-0015) (para. 0148, [the non-aqueous electrolyte solution is a solution formed by dissolving an electrolyte in a non-aqueous solvent]) including a lithium salt (para. 0150, [examples of the electrolyte include … lithium salts such as LiPF6, LiAsF6, LiBF4, and etc. ]) having water repellency (para. 0150, [VDF-HFP copolymer]) (Saito, para. 0065, [The water repellent material is not particularly limited as long as it has water repellency. Here, water repellency refers to a property of having low affinity with water and repelling water. As the water repellent material, for example, … VDF (vinylidene fluoride)-HFP (hexafluoropropylene) copolymer])
and an aqueous solid electrolyte (the aqueous electrolyte is made up of an intermediate layer as described in para. 0014-0015) (para. 0015, an intermediate layer]); (para. 0125, that the intermediate layer is normally formed using an aqueous dispersion containing vinylidene fluoride polymer particles)
wherein the aqueous solid electrolyte is in contact with only the positive electrode between the negative electrode and the positive electrode (para. 0015, an intermediate layer (intermediate layer 2) formed between the positive electrode and the separator])
the non-aqueous electrolyte is in contact with at least the negative electrode between the negative electrode and the positive electrode (Takeuchi, para. 0015, an intermediate layer (herein referred to in this office action as intermediate layer 1) formed between the positive electrode and the separator])
Takeuchi does not teach that the aqueous solid electrolyte includes a lithium salt.
Burns, in the same field of endeavor, electrolyte solutions for lithium ion batteries that include water, teaches an electrolyte solution that includes a cyclic carbonate, a lithium imide salt, and water (Burns, para. 0020).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have added a lithium salt and a cyclic carbonate to Takeuchi’s aqueous solution, used for the aqueous electrolyte, as taught by Burns, in order to induce small changes in voltage drop during storage, improve capacity retention during long term cycling, and to reduce manufacturing costs (Burns, para. 0021).
Therefore, Takeuchi teaches:
the aqueous solid electrolyte is a solid electrolyte (Takeuchi, para. 0127-0132, - Takeuchi teaches that the intermediate layer can be formed by one of four ways, each way describes a layer that has a drying step which signals that the electrolyte/intermediate layer is a solid electrolyte)
in which the lithium salt (Burns, para. 0021) and an aqueous solvent (para. 0125, [aqueous dispersion]) are dispersed or dissolved (para. 0125, [note that in the aqueous dispersion, the vinylidene fluoride polymer particles are normally present in the dispersed state, and the other components may be dissolved or dispersed]) in a matrix polymer (para. 0123, [the intermediate layer preferably has a structure in which the polymer particles join directly to each other]) (Examiner notes the structure developed by the joining of the polymer particles as a matrix),
and the lithium salt, the aqueous solvent, and the matrix polymer are combined (para. 0128-0131 teach ways that the aqueous dispersion [which includes the lithium salt in modified Takeuchi] and the matrix polymer [matrix is formed when the polymer particles join directly to each other] are combined to form the intermediate layer)
Regarding claim 3, modified Takeuchi teaches the lithium-ion secondary battery according to claim 1, and further teaches:
wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte is a non-aqueous solid electrolyte (Takeuchi, para. 0020-0024, - Takeuchi teaches that the intermediate layer can be formed by one of four ways, each way describes a layer that has a drying step which signals that the electrolyte/intermediate layer is a solid electrolyte)
Regarding claim 4, modified Takeuchi teaches the lithium-ion secondary battery according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein the non-aqueous solid electrolyte includes the lithium salt (see claim 1 above), an organic solvent (Takeuchi, para. 0149, [organic solvents]) (Takeuchi, para. 0150, [these electrolytes may be used alone or in a combination of two or more types thereof])and a matrix polymer (para. 0151, [VDF-HFP copolymer] there is a tendency for the intermediate layer to act as a gel electrolyte when a polymer such as VDF-HFP copolymer .. is used).
Regarding claim 5, modified Takeuchi teaches the lithium ion secondary battery according to claim 4, wherein the organic solvent contains a cyclic organic solvent (Takeuchi, para. 0149, [organic solvents]) (Takeuchi, para. 0150, [these electrolytes may be used alone or in a combination of two or more types thereof]), and the organic solvent contains 80 vol% or more of the cyclic organic solvent based on a total volume of the organic solvent (Takeuchi, para. 0149, teaches that the organic solvent may include ethylene carbonate and further teaches that examples which include ethylene carbonate may be used alone … and therefore teaches that the organic solvent may contain 100 vol% of the cyclic organic solvent – ethylene carbonate).
Regarding claim 6, modified Takeuchi teaches the lithium-ion secondary battery according to claim 1, and further teaches wherein:
the positive electrode includes a positive electrode active material containing a lithium-containing transition metal oxide (Takeuchi, para. 0041, LiMY2), and the lithium-containing transition metal oxide contains at least one element of Ni, Co, or Mn (Takeuchi, para. 0041, LiMY2 M= Co, Ni, or Mn)
Regarding claim 7, modified Takeuchi teaches the lithium-ion secondary battery according to claim 6, and further teaches:
- wherein the lithium-containing transition metal oxide contains elements including a Ni element (Takeuchi, para. 0041, [LiMY2 M= Co, Ni, or Mn]) or a Co element (Takeuchi, para. 0041, [LiMY2 M= Co, Ni, or Mn]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Takeuchi teaches the lithium-ion secondary battery according to claim 1, and further teaches:
wherein the negative electrode includes a negative electrode active material containing a carbon material (Takeuchi, para. 0066, [include carbon materials]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERITA E GRANNUM whose telephone number is (571)270-1150. The examiner can normally be reached 10-5 EST / 7-2 PST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/V.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1721 /ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights