DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received 12/29/2025, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 2 and 3 have been withdrawn from the previous office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 10 recites the same limitation as in claim 1 of "the ethylene carbonate is contained in a concentration range of less than 8 mass% relative to the entirety of the solvent", which therefore fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Published Application US20230268555A1, hereafter Zhao, in view of Published Application US20170018818A1, hereafter Miura.
Regarding claim 1, Zhao discloses a lithium-ion battery (100) ([0060] lithium ion battery) comprising:
a positive electrode (105) having a positive electrode current collector ([0016] current collector 107B) and a positive electrode active material layer ([0087] cathode active materials coated on foil);
a negative electrode (101) having a negative electrode current collector (107A) and a negative electrode active material and facing the positive electrode ([0087] anode active material slurry coated on current collector); and
an electrolyte layer (103) disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode and containing an electrolytic solution ([0021] separator 103 wet with liquid electrolyte; [0020] electrolyte solution),
wherein, the electrolytic solution comprises, a solvent containing 1,2- dimethoxyethane and a fluorinated ether ([0060] electrolyte solution includes solvents comprising dimethoxy ethane (DME) and 1,1,2,2- tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether) and a lithium imide compound that dissolves in the solvent ([0071] electrolyte salt may be lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide),
the lithium imide compound is contained in a concentration range of 1 mol/L or more and 4 mol/L or less relative to the entirety of the electrolytic solution ([0071] salt concentration can be higher than 1M; [0110] lithium salts may be present in concentrations up to 4M, which overlaps with the claimed range of 1 mol/L or more and 3 mol/L or less. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05 (I))),
ethylene carbonate is further contained in the solvent ([0060] ethylene carbonate (EC) may also be a co-solvent), and
wherein the ethylene carbonate is contained in a concentration range of less than 8 mass% relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0067] additive of the electrolyte refers to a component that makes up less than 10% by weight of the electrolyte; additive may be present in an amount from about 1 wt% to about 8 wt%; [0076] electrolyte composition includes solvent additive)..
Zhao is silent on wherein at least some of particle surfaces of a positive electrode active material are coated with a membrane containing fluorine.
In the analogous art of lithium ion batteries, Miura discloses wherein at least some of particle surfaces of a positive electrode active material are coated with a membrane containing fluorine ([0136] positive electrode active material particles 24 has film 25 formed on surface from fluorine containing compounds 41 in the electrolyte solution 40 to prevent oxidative decomposition of the electrolyte solution 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to modify the invention of Zhao to use a membrane containing fluorine on the surfaces of the positive electrode active material particles in order to prevent oxidative decomposition of the electrolyte solution, as suggested by Miura ([0136]).
Regarding claim 4, Zhao further discloses wherein the 1,2-dimethoxyethane is contained in a proportion of 10 mass% or more and 50 mass% or less relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0064] a co-solvent in the electrolyte may be about 20 wt% of the electrolyte composition, amounts may be measured as percent of total solvent).
Regarding claim 5, Zhao further discloses wherein the fluorinated ether is contained in a proportion of 50 mass% or more and 90 mass% or less relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0064] co-solvent may be about 80 wt% of the electrolyte composition, amounts may be measured as percent of total solvent).
Regarding claim 6, Zhao further discloses wherein the fluorinated ether is contained in a proportion of 75 mass% or more and 90 mass% or less relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0064] co-solvent may be about 80 wt% of the electrolyte composition, amounts may be measured as percent of total solvent).
Regarding claim 7, Zhao further discloses wherein the lithium imide compound is lithium bis fluorosulfonylimide (LiFSI) or lithium bis trifluoromethanesulfonylimide (LiTFSI) ([0071] electrolyte salt may be lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide).
Regarding claim 8, Zhao further discloses wherein the fluorinated ether is 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (TTE) ([0060] electrolyte solution includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether as solvent).
Regarding claim 9, Zhao further discloses wherein the ethylene carbonate is contained in a concentration range of 2 mol/L or less relative to the 1,2-dimethoxyethane ([0067] additive may be as low as 0.2 wt% or less; the examiner notes the ‘or less’ and the very low 0.2 wt% are considered to include amounts that meet the claimed concentration range of 2 mol/L or less, especially since ‘or less’ necessarily includes values approaching zero).
Regarding claim 10, Zhao further discloses wherein the ethylene carbonate is contained in a concentration range of less than 8 mass% relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0067] additive of the electrolyte refers to a component that makes up less than 10% by weight of the electrolyte; additive may be present in an amount from about 1 wt% to about 8 wt%; [0076] electrolyte composition includes solvent additive).
Regarding claim 11, Zhao further discloses wherein the lithium imide compound is lithium bis fluorosulfonylimide (LiFSI) or lithium bis trifluoromethanesulfonylimide (LiTFSI) ([0071] electrolyte salt may be lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide), and wherein the fluorinated ether is 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (TTE) ([0060] electrolyte solution includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether as solvent).
Regarding claim 12, Zhao discloses a lithium-ion battery (100) ([0060] lithium ion battery) comprising:
a positive electrode (105) having a positive electrode current collector ([0016] current collector 107B) and a positive electrode active material layer ([0087] cathode active materials coated on foil);
a negative electrode (101) having a negative electrode current collector (107A) and a negative electrode active material and facing the positive electrode ([0087] anode active material slurry coated on current collector); and
an electrolyte layer (103) disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode and containing an electrolytic solution ([0021] separator 103 wet with liquid electrolyte; [0020] electrolyte solution),
wherein, the electrolytic solution comprises, a solvent containing 1,2- dimethoxyethane and a fluorinated ether ([0060] electrolyte solution includes solvents comprising dimethoxy ethane (DME) and 1,1,2,2- tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether) and a lithium imide compound that dissolves in the solvent ([0071] electrolyte salt may be lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide),
the lithium imide compound is contained in a concentration range of 1 mol/L or more and 4 mol/L or less relative to the entirety of the electrolytic solution ([0071] salt concentration can be higher than 1M; [0110] lithium salts may be present in concentrations up to 4M, which overlaps with the claimed range of 1 mol/L or more and 3 mol/L or less. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05 (I))),
ethylene carbonate is further contained in the solvent ([0060] ethylene carbonate (EC) may also be a co-solvent), and
wherein the fluorinated ether is contained in a proportion of 50 mass% or more and 90 mass% or less relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0064] co-solvent may be about 80 wt% of the electrolyte composition, amounts may be measured as percent of total solvent).
Zhao is silent on wherein at least some of particle surfaces of a positive electrode active material are coated with a membrane containing fluorine.
In the analogous art of lithium ion batteries, Miura discloses wherein at least some of particle surfaces of a positive electrode active material are coated with a membrane containing fluorine ([0136] positive electrode active material particles 24 has film 25 formed on surface from fluorine containing compounds 41 in the electrolyte solution 40 to prevent oxidative decomposition of the electrolyte solution 40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to modify the invention of Zhao to use a membrane containing fluorine on the surfaces of the positive electrode active material particles in order to prevent oxidative decomposition of the electrolyte solution, as suggested by Miura ([0136]).
Regarding claim 13, Zhao further discloses wherein the 1,2-dimethoxyethane is contained in a proportion of 10 mass% or more and 50 mass% or less relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0064] a co-solvent in the electrolyte may be about 20 wt% of the electrolyte composition, amounts may be measured as percent of total solvent).
Regarding claim 14, Zhao further discloses wherein the fluorinated ether is contained in a proportion of 75 mass% or more and 90 mass% or less relative to the entirety of the solvent ([0064] co-solvent may be about 80 wt% of the electrolyte composition, amounts may be measured as percent of total solvent).
Regarding claim 15, Zhao further discloses wherein the lithium imide compound is lithium bis fluorosulfonylimide (LiFSI) or lithium bis trifluoromethanesulfonylimide (LiTFSI) ([0071] electrolyte salt may be lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide).
Regarding claim 16, Zhao further discloses wherein the fluorinated ether is 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (TTE) ([0060] electrolyte solution includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether as solvent).
Regarding claim 17, Zhao further discloses wherein the ethylene carbonate is contained in a concentration range of 2 mol/L or less relative to the 1,2-dimethoxyethane ([0067] additive may be as low as 0.2 wt% or less; the examiner notes the ‘or less’ and the very low 0.2 wt% are considered to include amounts that meet the claimed concentration range of 2 mol/L or less, especially since ‘or less’ necessarily includes values approaching zero).
Regarding claim 18, Zhao further discloses wherein the lithium imide compound is lithium bis fluorosulfonylimide (LiFSI) or lithium bis trifluoromethanesulfonylimide (LiTFSI) ([0071] electrolyte salt may be lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide or lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide), and wherein the fluorinated ether is 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (TTE) ([0060] electrolyte solution includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether as solvent).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument regarding claim 1 on page 7 of applicant's remarks that Zhao does not conceive of the challenge of simultaneously achieving both suppression of cathode heat generation and the aforementioned resistance suppression, and therefore there would have been no motivation to replace Zhao's configuration with Miura's membrane to obtain unpredictable results nor is there any motivation to modify with a reasonable expectation of success, the examiner disagrees, and notes [[results not contemplated by prior art]]. In this case, and as stated in the rejection, the motivation to modify the invention of Zhao with the membrane containing fluorine on the surfaces of the positive electrode active material particles is in order to prevent oxidative decomposition of the electrolyte solution, as suggested by Miura ([0136]).
In response to applicant's argument regarding claim 1 on page 8 of applicant's remarks that based on Zhao's disclosure, it is not possible to select a lithium imide compound and adjust its content to fall within the scope of a concentration range of 1 mol/L or more and 3 mol/L or less relative to the entirety of the electrolytic solution as recited by claims 1 and 12, the examiner disagrees, and notes "the use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain", and “a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including nonpreferred embodiments” (MPEP 2123 (I)). In this case, and as stated in the rejection, Zhao discloses in [0071] that the electrolyte salt may be LiFSI or LiTFSI and that the salt concentration may be higher than 1M, and lists examples of lithium salts being present in concentrations up to 4M, thus disclosing a range of 1M-4M, which overlaps and encompasses the claimed range of 1M-3M. In the cases where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
In response to applicant's argument regarding claim 1 on page 8 of applicant's remarks that the additive referred to in paragraph [0067] of Zhao does not refer to ethylene carbonate, the examiner disagrees. First, the examiner notes, as stated in the rejection, this paragraph of Zhao states that Zhao's definition of 'additive' refers to a component that makes up less than 10% by weight of the electrolyte, and thus, any solvent below this threshold would be considered an additive. Since [0076] of Zhao also states the electrolyte composition includes solvent as an additive, and ethylene carbonate is disclosed to be a possible solvent, one skilled in the art would understand and easily envision ethylene carbonate to be present in an amount of 1 to 8 wt% as stated in paragraph [0067]. Further, [0062] of Zhao also discloses the electrolyte composition may comprise ethylene carbonate at a concentration of 5% or more.
In response to applicant's argument regarding claims 5 and 12 on page 9 of applicant's remarks that Zhao discloses the fluorinated ether solvent only to be present at a concentration of 10-30 vol% compared to the 50-90 mass% claimed, the examiner disagrees, and notes, as stated in the rejection, that according to Zhao, the solvents may include 1,1,2,2- tetrafluoroethyl 2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether ([0061]), and that a co-solvent may have a concentration from about 10 wt to 90 wt%, including about 80 wt% ([0064]).
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 TIMOTHY HEMINGWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-0235. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6-4.
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, Susan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1487. 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.
/T.G.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1754
/SUSAN D LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1754
Prosecution Insights