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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 29 December 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites “a Li2S-P2S5-MCl-MX’ (X’ is a halogen other than Cl)-based sulfide-based solid electrolyte and has an argyrodite-type crystal structure” in line 2-3, which appears to be “a Li2S-P2S5-MCl-MX’ based sulfide-based solid electrolyte and has an argyrodite-type crystal structure, wherein X’ is a halogen other than Cl”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites a formula Li2S-P2S5-MCl-MX’, which renders the claim indefinite. The element M in the formula is not defined by the claim, and it is not clear to one of ordinary skill what M represents. Additionally, claim 1 recites “halogen element (X)”, which is not in the formula or defined in the claim, i.e., it is not clear for one of ordinary skill whether the halogen element (X) refers to Cl, X’ or a combination of Cl and X’. For prior art purpose, the “halogen element (X)” has been interpreted as a combination of Cl and X’.
Claims 2-7 are rejected as depending upon rejected claim 1 and fail to remedy the 112(b) issue.
Further, claim 2 recites the limitation "halogens" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US2019/0140313A1 (Terai).
Regarding claims 1 and 3, Terai teaches a sulfide solid electrolyte comprises lithium (Li), phosphorus (P), sulfur (S) and two or more halogen elements and has argyrodite type crystal structure ([0017] and [0042]), wherein the raw material is exemplified as Li2S, P2S5, LiCl and LiBr ([0087] and [0187]), which anticipates the claimed Li2S-P2S5-MCl-MX’ type of solid electrolyte wherein X’ is Br, M is Li.
Terai exemplifies the elemental ratio of the sulfide solid electrolyte as (Table 5, Example 31): Li/P is 5.8, which meets the claimed Li/P ratio; S/P is 4.8, Cl/P is 1.1 and Br/P is 0.1, thus the sum of S/P and (CL+Br)/P is 6 (i.e., 4.8+1.1+0.1) , which meets the claimed sum of molar ratio (S/P) and (X/P); and (Cl +Br) /S is 0.25 (i.e.(1.1+0.1)/4.8) , which meets the claimed X/S ratio.
Regarding claim 2, Terai teaches the number of the halogen elements X contained in the sulfide solid electrolyte is preferably two or more and four or less with one of the element is chlorine ([0041]-[0042] and [0058]), which anticipates the presence of chlorine and iodine when all four halogen elements are contained.
Regarding claim 4, Terai teaches the sulfide solid electrolyte can be represented by ([0055]):
Lia(P1-αMα)SbXc
wherein α is preferably 0 ([0059]), thus a formula LiaPSbXc,
Terai exemplifies X is Cl and Br, a is 5.8, b is 4.8, Cl/P is 1.1 and Br/P is 0.1 (Table 5, Ex. 31), thus c is 1.2 and c/b is 0.25, thus a sulfide solid electrolyte of formula Li5.8PS4.8X1.2, which meets the claimed formula, wherein a, b, c and c/b meets the claimed range of 7-x-y, 6-x and x+y, and (x+y)/(6-x) in the claimed formula(I), respectively, i.e., 5 ≤7-x-y≤6.2, 4.5≤6-x≤5.2 and 0.8≤x+y≤2 since 0.8≤x≤1.5 and 0<y≤0.5.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, in the same example 31 as cited above for claim 4 (Table 5, Example 31), Terai exemplifies the Cl/(Cl+Br) is 0.92 thus Cl/P to (Cl+Br)/P is 0.92, which meets the claimed range; and the molar ratio Cl/P is 1.1, Br/P is 0.1, thus the molar ratio of (Cl+Br)/P is 1.2, i.e., the sum of Cl/P and Br/P, which meets the claimed range.
Regarding claim 7, Terai further exemplifies X is Cl and Br, a is 5.7, b is 4.7, Cl/P is 0.35 and Br/P is 1.05 (Table 5, Ex. 33), thus c is 1.4 (=0.35+1.05) and c/b is 0.298 (=(0.35+1.05)/4.7), thus a sulfide solid electrolyte of formula Li5.7PS4.7X1.4, which meets the claimed formula, wherein a, b, c and c/b meets the claimed range of 7-x-y, 6-x, x+y, and (6-x)/(x+y) in the claimed formula(I), respectively, i.e., 5 ≤7-x-y≤6.2, 4.5≤6-x≤5.2 and 0.8≤x+y≤2 since 0.8≤x≤1.5 and 0<y≤0.5 .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIQUN LI whose telephone number is (571)270-7736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am -4:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-2721302. 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.
/AIQUN LI/Ph.D., Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766