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 claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 10/23/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 17-20 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II and Group III, the method for forming an electrode for an electrochemical device, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/23/2025.
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.
Claims 1,2,6-9,12,13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yamazaki (US 20160226094 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yamazaki discloses an electrode for an electrochemical device (para. 0023, [when the electrode composite body, which is manufactured as described above, is applied to a battery …]), the electrode comprising: a lithium host material (para. 0049, [the active material molded body [2] includes an active material particle [21] which includes a lithium composite oxide]); and a porous coating on the lithium host material (Fig. 1 shows that the solid electrolyte layer [3] and particles [31] coat the surfaces of the active material body [2] and particles [21])(para. 0065, [the solid electrolyte layer [3] uses a solid electrolyte as a formation material, and is provided to come into contact with the surface, which includes a surface inside the core of the active material molded body 2, of the active material molded body [2])) (para. 0067, [the solid electrolyte layer [3] is also constituted by a porous body]), the porous coating comprising a solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material selected from the group consisting of (para. 0066, examples of the solid electrolyte includes …):
(i) lithium aluminum oxides (para. 0066, [LiI—Al2O3] , [LiF—Al2O3] , [LiBr—Al2O3]),
(ii) lithium containing phosphates (para. 0066, [Li1.3Ti1.7Al0.3(PO4)3]),
(iii) LixPON wherein x is 1, (para. 0066, LiPON)
Regarding claim 2, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the porous coating comprising the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material is formed from one or more precursors that form the porous coating comprising the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material (para. 0067, [the solid electrolyte layer is generated by baking a precursor of the solid electrolyte as described in a method of manufacturing the lithium secondary battery …]) upon cycling of the electrochemical device (para. 0022 – 0023, [applying a liquid Substance including a precursor of a solid electrolyte to a surface, which includes a surface inside the communication hole of the active material molded body, substance to form a solid electrolyte layer, forming an electron conduction layer having electron conductivity so as to cover at least one of the active material molded body and the solid electrolyte layer to form a composite body; and joining a current collector to the one surface of the composite body. When the electrode composite body, which is manufactured as described above, is applied to a battery, the battery can stably maintain the high output and the high capacity for a long period of time).
Regarding claim 6, Yamazaki discloses the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the electrode is a cathode (para. 0053, [… in a case where the current collector [1] is set as the positive electrode, … a known lithium composite oxide can be used as a positive electrode active material]), and the lithium host material comprises a cathode active material selected from
(i) lithium metal oxides wherein the metal is one or more cobalt, iron, manganese, nickel and vanadium (para. 0055)
(ii) lithium-containing phosphates having a general formula LiMPO4 wherein M is one or more of iron or manganese (para. 0055, LiFePO4, Li2FeP2O7, LiMnPO4)
Regarding claim 7, Yamazaki discloses the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises a lithium aluminum oxide (para. 0066, [LiI—Al2O3] , [LiF—Al2O3] , [LiBr—Al2O3]).
Regarding claim 8, Yamazaki discloses the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises a lithium containing phosphate (para. 0066, [Li1.3Ti1.7Al0.3(PO4)3]).
Regarding claim 9, Yamazaki discloses the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises LixPON wherein x is 1 (para. 0066, LiPON).
Regarding claim 12, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises the ceramic electrolyte material (para. 0133, [in addition, as a formation material of the solid electrolyte layer, Li7La3Zr2O12, can be appropriately used]).
Regarding claim 13, Yamazaki discloses the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the electrode is an anode (para. 0056, [in a case where the current collector is set as the negative electrode]), and the lithium host material is selected from the group consisting of lithium titanium oxides (para. 0056, [Li4Ti5O12, Li2Ti3O7]) and silicon-containing materials (para. 0056, [a material such as Si or SiO].
Regarding claim 15, Yamazaki discloses an electrochemical device comprising: the electrode of claim 1 as a cathode (para. 0046, item 1); an anode (para. 0092, item 20); and an electrolyte positioned between the cathode and the anode (Fig. 1 shows the electrolyte [item 3], positioned between the cathode [item 2] and the anode [item 20]).
Regarding claim 16, Yamazaki discloses an electrochemical device comprising: the electrode of claim 1 as an anode (para. 0056, [in a case where the current collector is set as the negative electrode]); a cathode (para. 0092, based on the description of the battery item 20 would function as a cathode when item 1 functions as an anode); and an electrolyte positioned between the cathode and the anode (Fig. 1 shows the electrolyte [item 3], positioned between the cathode [item 2] and the anode [item 20]).
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.
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US 20160226094 A1) and further in view of Zhang (Zhang, Xinyu, et al. “Lixsion (x = 2, 4, 6): A novel solid electrolyte system derived from agricultural waste.” Green Chemistry, vol. 22, no. 21, 2020, pp. 7491–7505).
Regarding claim 3, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1 wherein the electrode comprises: a plurality of first particles (Fig. 1, item [21] of body [2]) (para. 0056, in a case where the collector is set as the negative electrode, the first particles for the active material molded body [2] can be Li4Ti5O12) comprising a porous coating of one of the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte materials on the lithium host material (Fig. 1, item 31), and a plurality of second particles (para. 0056, in a case where the collector is set as the negative electrode, the second particles for the active material molded body [2] can be Li2Ti3O7).
Yamazaki does not teach that the second particles comprise a porous coating of another of the solid- state ion conducting electrolyte materials on the lithium host material.
The Third Embodiment/Fig. 8 of Yamazaki teaches that the second particles comprise a porous coating of “another electrolyte material” on the lithium host material (para. 0168, [filling layer [30] (second solid electrolyte layer)] (para. 0168, the solid electrolyte is from a lithium oxide that has lithium ion conductivity and includes Si (for example Li4SiO4).
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 constructed Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell to have a second electrolyte layer, as taught by Yamazaki’s Third Embodiment, in order to fill the voids that remain through the formation of the composite body of Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell [first embodiment], as taught by Yamazaki’s third embodiment (para. 0167, [in other words, the composite body further includes the filling layer [30] that is provided to fill the void that remains in the composite body of the first embodiment).
Modified Yamazaki teaches the use of Li4SiO4 as the second electrolyte material (para. 0168) and does not teach that the “another electrolyte material” is the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte materials from the group listed in claim 1.
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches the use of Li4SiON as a preferred coating/precursor over Li4SiO4 (Table 6 and para. 7503, first full paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second solid state electrolyte of modified Yamazaki by replacing Li4SiO4 for Li4SiON as taught by Zhang. The simple substitution of a known element (Li4SiO4) for another (Li4SiON) would achieve the predictable result of providing a solid electrolyte material in which its [Li4SiON] synthesis is easily scalable, has a dense microstructure, and has an optimum conductivity, as taught by Zhang (pg. 7503, first column, first full paragraph) compared to the other synthesis and processing methods listed [Li4SiO4] in Table 6 of Zhang. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US 20160226094 A1) and further in view of Zhang (Zhang, Xinyu, et al. “Lixsion (x = 2, 4, 6): A novel solid electrolyte system derived from agricultural waste.” Green Chemistry, vol. 22, no. 21, 2020, pp. 7491–7505) and Christensen (US 20210098820 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 3.
Modified Yamazaki does not teach wherein: the one of the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material is present in the first particles at a weight percentage between 5% and 30% based on a total weight of the one of the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material and the lithium host material in the first particles, and the another of the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte materials is present in the second particles at a weight percentage between 5% and 30% based on a total weight of the another of the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte materials and the lithium host material in the second particles.
Christensen, in the same field of endeavor, batteries and solid electrolytes such as LiSiON materials, teaches that the weight percent of the solid electrolyte [catholyte] is approximately 15 to 35% based on the cathode (para. 0024).
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) [MPEP 2144.05].
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 the first and second solid electrolytes of modified Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell at a weight percentage between 15 to 35%, as taught by Christensen, in order to allow sufficient electrolyte-cathode interfacial area for a desired design, as taught by Christensen (para. 0024).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US 20160226094 A1) and further in view of Temeche (Temeche, Eleni, et al. “Polymer precursor derived lixpon electrolytes: Toward Li–S Batteries.” ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, vol. 12, no. 18, 13 Apr. 2020, pp. 20548–20562.) and Gaben (US-20190173129-A1).
Regarding claim 5, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1 wherein: the electrode has a thickness between 1 and 200 micrometers (para. 0094, [1µm - 100 µm]).
Yamazaki is silent regarding the thickness of the porous coating.
Temeche, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches coating using LixPON polymer precursors and teaches that the porous coating has a thickness between about 20 nanometers and about 10 micrometers (pg. 20553, section 3.3, first paragraph] the coatings are optimal with average coating thicknesses of 5-10 µm).
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) [MPEP 2144.05].
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 utilized a coating thickness of 5 to 10 microns for Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell, as taught by Temeche, as that range was considered optimal for polymer electrolytes in all solid state batteries, as taught by Temeche (pg. 20553, section 3.3, first paragraph] the coatings are optimal with average coating thicknesses of 5-10 µm).
Yamazaki is silent regarding the particle size of the porous coating.
Gaben, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches a porous coating comprises particles having an average particle size between 1 and 100 nanometers (para. 0034, [the average size … of particles of solid electrolyte material is less than 1 micron, preferably less than 100 nm and even more preferably less than or equal to 30 nm]) (para. 0037, materials are selected in the group including lithium compounds based on LiPON]).
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) [MPEP 2144.05].
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 made Yamazaki’s porous coating out of nanoparticles, as taught by Gaben (para. 0034, [the average size … of particles of solid electrolyte material is less than 1 micron) in order to reduce the consolidation temperature [upon fabrication/synthesis], as taught by Gaben, (para. 0034).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US 20160226094 A1) and further in view of Temeche (Temeche, Eleni, et al. “Polymer precursor derived lixpon electrolytes: Toward Li–S Batteries.” ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, vol. 12, no. 18, 13 Apr. 2020, pp. 20548–20562.).
Regarding claim 10, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1.
Yamazaki does not teach wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises LixSiPON wherein x is 1,1.5,3,or 6.
Temeche, in the same field of endeavor, batteries teaches wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises LixSiPON wherein x is 3 or 6. (Table 2, Li3SiPON and Li6SiPON).
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 included the solid electrolyte of Li3SiPON as an option for Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell, as taught by Temeche, in order to provide an electrolyte that offers properties anticipated to be similar or superior to LiPON (Temeche, abstract, first sentence) and in order to use a composition polymer electrolyte that exhibits excellent cycle performance (Temeche, abstract, final sentence).
Claims 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki (US 20160226094 A1) and further in view of Zhang (Zhang, Xinyu, et al. “Lixsion (x = 2, 4, 6): A novel solid electrolyte system derived from agricultural waste.” Green Chemistry, vol. 22, no. 21, 2020, pp. 7491–7505. ).
Regarding claim 11, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1.
Yamazaki does not teach wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises LixSiON wherein x is 2, 4, or 6.
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises LixSiON wherein x is 2, 4, or 6 (abstract, first sentence, [a set of LixSiON (x = 2, 4, 6) polymer precursors to a novel solid-state electrolyte system]).
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 included LixSiON wherein x is 4 or 6 as an option for a solid electrolyte material in Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell, as taught by Zhang, in order to utilize a precursor in which its synthesis is easily scalable, that has a dense microstructure, and has an optimum conductivity, as taught by Zhang (pg. 7503, first column, first full paragraph).
Regarding claim 14, Yamazaki teaches the electrode of claim 1.
Yamazaki does not teach that the electrode further comprises: silica depleted rice hull ash.
Zhang teaches wherein: the solid-state ion conducting electrolyte material comprises silica depleted rice hull ash (abstract, first sentence, [a set of LixSiON (x = 2, 4, 6) polymer precursors to a novel solid-state electrolyte system were synthesized starting from rice hull ash (RHA)]).
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 , to have included LixSiON wherein x is 4 or 6 as an option for a solid electrolyte material in Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell, as taught by Zhang, in order to utilize a precursor in which its synthesis is easily scalable, that has a dense microstructure, and has an optimum conductivity, as taught by Zhang (pg. 7503, first column, first full paragraph).
Zhang teaches that the LixSiON wherein x is 4 or 6, was synthesized starting from rice hull ash (RHA). 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 also synthesized the precursor material/solid electrolyte of LixSiON of Modified Yamazaki’s electrochemical cell with RHA, in order to provide a green route towards the assembly of all solid-state batteries, as taught by Zhang (abstract, first sentence).
Other Pertinent Art
Electrochemical Performance of LixSiON Polymer Electrolytes Derived from an Agriculture Waste Product, Rice Hull Ash. Temeche. March 30, 2021.
US 20070224513 A1
US 20160104882 A1
Conclusion
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