DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-13 are presented for examination.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikato (JP 2019/186129).
Regarding independent claim 1, Chikato teaches small spherical sulfide solid electrolyte particles used as materials for electrodes and solid electrolyte layers in an all-solid-state lithium-ion battery,
wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles may have compositions of e.g. Li2S-SiS2-P2S5-LiI, Li2S-P2S5-ZmSn (where m and n are positive numbers, and Z is Ge, Zn, or Ga), Li2S-SiS2-Li3PO4, and 75Li2S-25P2S5,
wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles are formed by two pulverizing stages:
in a first stage, sulfide solid electrolyte particles are pulverized with high energy so as to form flat particles, noting sulfide solid electrolyte particles have ductility, and therefore, when pulverized with high kinetic energy, they are characterized by forming flat particles; and,
in a second stage, said flat particles are pulverized with low energy to form spherical particles, which may be either a wet or dry pulverization in a ball mill and in an Ar atmosphere, wherein said ball mill may use ZrO2 balls with a diameter of 0.3mm in a relative ratio of 485 g of said 0.3mm diameter ZrO2 balls to 50 g sulfide solid electrolyte material for 1 hour
wherein a number average particle diameter of said small spherical sulfide solid electrolyte particles resulting after said second pulverizing step may be 1.0 µm, or less,
wherein a non-limiting example of said solid electrolyte layer may be formed by incorporating 6.0 g of solid electrolyte particles with 0.05 g of a 5% by mass butyl butyrate resin solution to form a paste, applying said paste was to an Al foil substrate using a blade as an applicator, drying, laminating said solid electrolyte material to form a current collector-cathode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate positioned at a center of a current collector-negative electrode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate, and applying a pressure of 200 MPa at 130°C for a minute to said laminate comprising said current collector-cathode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate positioned at said center of said current collector-negative electrode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate; and,
wherein a non-limiting example of said all-solid-state lithium-ion battery comprises said laminate comprising
a positive electrode including a positive electrode composite comprising e.g. LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2 particles coated on an Al foil current collector,
a negative electrode including a negative electrode composite comprising e.g. Si particles coated on a Cu foil current collector, and
said solid electrolyte layer comprising said solid electrolyte particles
(e.g. ¶¶ 0001-02, 07, 12-14, 27, 32-36, 48-52, 61-63, and 67), reading on “inorganic solid electrolyte material” said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles comprising:
said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles may have compositions of e.g. Li2S-SiS2-P2S5-LiI, Li2S-P2S5-ZmSn (where m and n are positive numbers, and Z is Ge, Zn, or Ga), Li2S-SiS2-Li3PO4, and 75Li2S-25P2S5 (e.g. supra), reading on “sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte particles,”
wherein said number average particle diameter of said small spherical sulfide solid electrolyte particles (i.e. after said second pulverizing step) may be 1.0 µm, or less (e.g. supra), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed range, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a number-based median size d50 of the particles in the material is 0.1 to 10 μm.”
Chikato teaches said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles may have said compositions of e.g. Li2S-SiS2-P2S5-LiI, Li2S-P2S5-ZmSn (where m and n are positive numbers, and Z is Ge, Zn, or Ga), Li2S-SiS2-Li3PO4, and 75Li2S-25P2S5,
wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles are formed by two pulverizing stages, wherein in said second stage, said flat particles are pulverized with low energy to form spherical particles, which may be either said wet or dry pulverization in said ball mill and in said Ar atmosphere, wherein said ball mill may use ZrO2 balls with said diameter of 0.3mm in said relative ratio of 485 g of said 0.3mm diameter ZrO2 balls to 50 g sulfide solid electrolyte material for 1 hour (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitation “in a frequency distribution of circularity of the particles where the circularity of the particles in the material is plotted on a horizontal axis and a number-based frequency is plotted on a vertical axis, a 10% cumulative value D10 is 0.54 to 0.80.”
However, Chikato teaches a substantially identical small sulfide solid electrolyte particles (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0060, 104, and 153-154), processed by a substantially identical process (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0096 and 119-128), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitation, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claims 2-4, Chikato teaches the sulfide solid electrolyte particles of claim 1, wherein Chikato teaches said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles may have said compositions of e.g. Li2S-SiS2-P2S5-LiI, Li2S-P2S5-ZmSn (where m and n are positive numbers, and Z is Ge, Zn, or Ga), Li2S-SiS2-Li3PO4, and 75Li2S-25P2S5, wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles are formed by two pulverizing stages, wherein in said second stage, said flat particles are pulverized with low energy to form spherical particles, which may be either said wet or dry pulverization in said ball mill and in said Ar atmosphere, wherein said ball mill may use ZrO2 balls with said diameter of 0.3mm in said relative ratio of 485 g of said 0.3mm diameter ZrO2 balls to 50 g sulfide solid electrolyte material for 1 hour (e.g. supra), but does not expressly teach the limitations “a 50% cumulative value D50 in the frequency distribution is less than 0.85” (claim 2), “a 90% cumulative value D90 in the frequency distribution is 0.95 or less” (claim 3), and “when a 50% cumulative value in the frequency distribution is represented by D50 and a 90% cumulative value in the frequency distribution is represented by D90, a value (D90−D10)/D50 is 0.10 to 0.45” (claim 3).
However, Chikato teaches a substantially identical small sulfide solid electrolyte particles (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0060, 104, and 153-154), processed by a substantially identical process (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0096 and 119-128), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitation, see also e.g. MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claims 5-6, Chikato teaches the sulfide solid electrolyte particles of claim 1, wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles may have compositions of e.g. Li2S-SiS2-P2S5-LiI, Li2S-P2S5-ZmSn (where m and n are positive numbers, and Z is Ge, Zn, or Ga), Li2S-SiS2-Li3PO4, and 75Li2S-25P2S5 (e.g. supra), reading on “further comprising: Li, P, and S as constituent elements” (claim 5) and severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a molar ratio Li/P of a content of Li to a content of P in the inorganic solid electrolyte material is 1.0 or higher and 5.0 or lower, and a molar ratio S/P of a content of S to the content of P in the inorganic solid electrolyte material is 2.0 or higher and 6.0 or lower” (claim 6).
Regarding claim 7, Chikato teaches the sulfide solid electrolyte particles of claim 1, wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles are used as materials for electrodes and solid electrolyte layers in all-solid-state lithium-ion batteries (e.g. supra), reading on “the inorganic solid electrolyte material is used for a lithium ion battery.”
Regarding claims 8-13, Chikato is applied as provide supra, with the following modifications.
Still regarding independent claim 8, Chikato teaches said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles (e.g. supra), reading on “A solid electrolyte comprising: the inorganic solid electrolyte material according to claim 1.”
Still regarding independent claim 9, Chikato teaches said solid electrolyte layer comprising said small sulfide solid electrolyte particles, wherein said small sulfide solid electrolyte layer is used in said all-solid-state lithium-ion batteries (e.g. supra), wherein said layer is interpreted to read on the claimed “membrane,” see also the instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0161 and 163, reading on “solid electrolyte membrane comprising: the solid electrolyte according to claim 8 as a main component.”
Still regarding claim 10, Chikato teaches the said solid electrolyte layer of claim 9, wherein Chikato teaches said solid electrolyte layer may be formed by applying said pressure of 200 MPa at 130°C for said minute to said laminate comprising said current collector-cathode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate positioned at said center of said current collector-negative electrode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate (e.g. supra), wherein said solid electrolyte layer may be composed of a substantially identical particle composition (e.g. supra) processed by a substantially identical pressure of 200 MPa (e.g. supra, compared with instant specification, at e.g. ¶0176), establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed limitation “compact,” reading on “the solid electrolyte membrane is a compact obtained by compression-molding the particle-shaped solid electrolyte,” see also instant specification, at e.g. ¶0176; alternatively, the process litigation “obtained by compression-molding the particle-shaped solid electrolyte” does not patentably distinguish the instantly claimed product from the art, see also e.g. MPEP § 2113, see further instant specification, at e.g. ¶¶ 0166 and 175-176.
Still regarding claims 11-12, Chikato teaches the said solid electrolyte layer of claim 9, wherein Chikato teaches a non-limiting example of said solid electrolyte layer may be formed by incorporating 6.0 g of solid electrolyte particles with 0.05 g of a 5% by mass butyl butyrate resin solution to form a paste, applying said paste was to an Al foil substrate using a blade as an applicator, drying, then laminating said solid electrolyte material to form a current collector-cathode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate positioned at a center of a current collector-negative electrode composite-solid electrolyte material laminate (e.g. supra), severably establishing a prima facie case of obviousness of the claimed ranges, see also e.g. MPEP § 2144.05(I), reading on “a content of a binder resin in the solid electrolyte membrane is less than 0.5 mass % with respect to 100 mass % as a total amount of the solid electrolyte membrane” (claim 11) and “a content of the inorganic solid electrolyte material in the solid electrolyte membrane is 50 mass % or more with respect to 100 mass % as a total amount of the solid electrolyte membrane” (claim 12).
Still regarding independent claim 13, Chikato teaches said non-limiting example of said all-solid-state lithium-ion battery comprises said laminate comprising said positive electrode including said positive electrode composite comprising e.g. LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2 particles coated on said Al foil current collector, said negative electrode including said negative electrode composite comprising e.g. Si particles coated on said Cu foil current collector, and said solid electrolyte layer comprising said solid electrolyte particles (e.g. supra), wherein said positive electrode composite and said negative electrode composite are each formed by coating and are components of said laminate, so are each understood to be a “layer,” reading on “lithium ion battery comprising a positive electrode including a positive electrode active material layer; an electrolyte layer; and a negative electrode including a negative electrode active material layer, wherein at least one of the positive electrode active material layer, the electrolyte layer, and the negative electrode active material layer includes the inorganic solid electrolyte material according to claim 1.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shibata et al (US 2021/0242496);
Utsuno et al (US 2020/0006808); and,
Meguro et al (US 2017/0125842).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5828. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-6.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TIFFANY LEGETTE-THOMPSON can be reached at (571)270-7078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YOSHITOSHI TAKEUCHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723