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 with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-8, drawn to a method for preparing a nonaqueous battery electrolyte formation, claim 9, drawn to a battery electrolyte formulation and claim 11, drawn to a battery comprising the battery electrolyte formulation in the reply filed on 3-4-2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claims 10 and 12-26 should not be restricted and therefore also should be searched. This is not found persuasive because a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories listed as (1)-(5). (1) A product and a process specifically adapted for the manufacture of said product; or(2) A product and process of use of said product; or(3) A product, a process specifically adapted for the manufacture of said product, and a use of the said product; or(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or(5) A product, a process specifically adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
In this application, the contribution that was used in considering unity of invention was (3) a product, claim 9, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, claims 1-8 and the use of the said product, claim 11. See MPEP 1893.03 (d).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 10 and 12-26 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3-4-2026. Claim Objections
Claims 1-9 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1, 9 and 11 are objected to because the phrase should be “wherein R1 and R2 are selected from the group consisting of CF3,” because of the use of “and”. Claims 1, 9 and 11 are objected to because the phrase should be “R3 and R4 are selected from the group consisting of H, … and haloalkyl”.
Claims 1, 9 and 11 are objected to because the phrase should be “R5 is selected from the group consisting of CF3, …haloalkyl and perfluorohaloalkyl”. Claim 3 is objected to because the claim needs to cite “wherein the formulation further comprises a metal electrolyte salt” because this claim further limits the claim and does not further define claim 1. Claim 5 is objected to because the claim should cite “selected from the group consisting of lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6), …and lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI, Li(CF3SO2)2N). Claim 6 is objected to because the claim needs to cite “wherein the formulation further comprises one or more solvents” because this claim further limits the claim and does not further define claim 1. Claim 7 is objected to because the claim should cite “selected from the group consisting of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), and acetonitrile. Claim 8 is objected to because the claim should cite “comprises the compound of Formula I”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 11 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. There is no support for amending compound of Formula I, where R1 is CF3, alkyl, fluoroalkyl or haloalkyl because the only ethers mentioned show R1=H. There is no support for amending compound of Formula I, where R2 allows for an alkyl group because the only ethers mentioned show R2=CF3.
Claims 1-9 and 11 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, 9 and 11 are rejected because the claims comprise a method of making an electrolyte formulation, the electrolyte formulation and a battery comprising the electrolyte formulation but the claims are instead only claiming an additive component. An electrolyte formulation (solution) comprises a solvent, a salt and can comprise an additive. Claims 1, 9 and 11 are rejected because it is unclear where the metal ion is positioned on the compound of Formula 1. Claim 2 is rejected because the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claim 4 is rejected because “quaternary ammonium” salt does not comprise a “metal salt”. Claim 5 is rejected because tetraethylammonium tetrafluoroborate needs to be removed from the claim because the claim depends from claim 4. Claim 8 is rejected because there is no antecedent basis for “the negative electrode” and “the electrolyte comprises”. Claim 11 is rejected because the claim is claiming a battery but the claim only claims an additive component. A battery comprising an anode, a cathode and an electrolyte solution comprising a solvent, a salt and can comprise an additive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhu et al. (CN 103456993, machine translation). Zhu et al. teaches a lithium battery comprising an electrolyte solution comprising a second additive comprising a fluoro-ether of the structure represented by formula (2), specifically teaching in [0011], CF3-CFH(CF2) -C- (CH3)2[OCF2CHFCF2CF2CF3]. Zhu et al. teaches in [0014], where the solution comprises two or a mixture of non-aqueous solvents comprising propylene carbonate, etc. in an amount of 12-90 wt% and teaches in [0015], wherein the lithium salt can be LiPF6, LiBF4, etc. Zhu et al. teaches in [0007], a high-voltage lithium-ion battery comprising the electrolyte solution.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Costello et al. (US 2007/0054186). Costello et al. teaches in Examples 1-65 an electrolyte solution comprising LiPF6 in EC, DEC and EMC and a hydrofluoroether (HFE) comprising CF3CFHCF2 -C-H(CH3)[O-CF2CFHCF3] or Compound 3. Costello et al. teaches in claims 29 and 31-32, where the battery comprises a negative electrode comprising lithium, etc. Costello et al. teaches that at least one hydrofluoroether compound can comprise:
PNG
media_image1.png
130
245
media_image1.png
Greyscale
. Costello et al. teaches in claims 15-17, where the electrolyte solution can comprise PC, EC, DEC, EMC, dimethoxyethane, dioxolane, FEC, etc. in an amount of up to 80 vol%.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Segawa (US 2009/0130567). Segawa teaches in [0038], a fluorinated ether comprising:
PNG
media_image2.png
223
221
media_image2.png
Greyscale
. Segawa teaches in the Examples electrolyte solutions comprising BETI or LiPF6 in solvents comprising the fluorinated ether and 50 vol% of a mixture of EC and DEC.Example A48 teaches an electrolyte solution comprising the lithium salt (TFSI) lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfone)imide and in Example A53 teaches an electrolyte solution comprising PC and (DME) dimethoxyethane. Segawa teaches on pages 9-10 a battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode and the electrolyte solution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Segawa (US 2009/0130567) in view of Hashizume et al. (JP 2012-033346, machine translation). Segawa teaches in [0038], a fluorinated ether comprising:
PNG
media_image2.png
223
221
media_image2.png
Greyscale
. Segawa teaches in the Examples electrolyte solutions comprising BETI or LiPF6 in solvents comprising the fluorinated ether and 50 vol% of a mixture of EC and DEC.Example A48 teaches an electrolyte solution comprising the lithium salt (TFSI) lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfone)imide and in Example A53 teaches an electrolyte solution comprising PC and (DME) dimethoxyethane. Segawa teaches on pages 9-10 a battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode and the electrolyte solution. Segawa teaches in [0033], that in a lithium ion secondary, when a carbon material capable of desorbing/inserting lithium such as graphite is used for the negative electrode, EC is used. Segawa discloses the claimed invention teaching a battery comprising an electrolyte solution comprising a compound of Formula 1, a solvent comprising dimethoxyethane and a lithium salt comprising lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfone)imide but teaches a negative electrode comprising carbon instead of lithium metal. Hashizume et al. teaches a battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode and an electrolyte solution. The negative electrode can comprise a negative electrode active material comprising a lithium metal, a carbon material, etc. and that the electrolyte solution comprises EC/DEC/EMC and fluorinated ether. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use lithium metal instead of a carbon material as the active material because Hashizume et al. teaches that both these negative electrode active materials can be used in the anode as explained above and one would expect therefore that these negative electrode active materials would function in a similar way and give similar results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Raman et al. (US 2017/0256368) teaches in [0043], additives comprising fluorinated compounds such as hydro fluorinated ether having the structures of Formula III:
PNG
media_image3.png
137
169
media_image3.png
Greyscale
. Raman et al. teaches in claim 1, an additive comprising a hydro fluorinated ether (HFE), hydro fluorinated ether branched cyclic carbonate, etc. in an amount of 0.5-5 wt%. Raman et al. teaches in claims 1 and 7-8, a lithium cell comprising a cathode, an anode, a separator and an electrolyte comprising a solvent, a lithium salt and at least one additive where the lithium salt is LiPF6 in an amount of 0.8 to 1.4 M. Raman et al. teaches in claims 2-5, where the solvent comprises one or more carbonates selected from EC, PC, DEC, DMC, EMC and combinations thereof.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laura Weiner whose telephone number is (571)272-1294. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 pm EST M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/LAURA S. WEINER/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/Laura Weiner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights