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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/13/2026 have been fully considered but not all arguments are persuasive.
Regarding Navarro fails to disclose “at least three monomers”:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the number of monomers of Navarro’s polymer have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding Navarro fails to disclose the polymer is a straight chain:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the straight chain of Navarro’s polymer have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Examiner notes that polymeric nomenclature for branched structures is written with a number to indicate where the branch attaches to the backbone.
Regarding the end capping of Navarro’s polymer:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to end capping of Navarro’s polymer have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding the number-average molecular weight of Navarro
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the number-average molecular weight of Navarro’s polymer have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding Andersen does not teach at least three monomers
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Andersen teaches three monomers (caprolactone, valerolactone, and trimethylene carbonate) within the polymer of “poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate”.
Regarding the molecular weight of Andersen’s polymer
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the molecular weight of Andersen’s polymer have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding the polyester straight chain of Andersen
Examiner notes that polymeric nomenclature for branched structures is written with a number to indicate where the branch attaches to the backbone. The polymer expressed in para. 0031 of Andersen is not written in such way and therefore represents a straight-chain polymer.
Regarding the end-capped inert group of Andersen
Andersen does teach the polymer of “poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate” which contains the trimethylene carbonate unit at the end of the polymer. Trimethylene carbon contains an ester group and the instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031. The claim does not mention the term “end capped”.
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.
Claims 1, 5, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the machine translation of Navarro (WO 2018158545 A1), in view of Zheng (US 20130331927 A1) and Hong (US 20230170525 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Navarro teaches a polymer, which is a composition of a battery
(para. 0019, [a polymer electrolyte composition intended to be used in a battery]),
wherein the polymer is polymerized by a polymeric precursor (para. 0019, [a thermoplastic polymer obtained by polymerization of at least one cyclic monomer of lactone, carbonate or lactide type]),
Examiner notes that the instant specification (instant, para. 0006-0007) defines the polymeric precursor as a polymer that includes at least three monomers, each of the monomers is a lactone, a lactone cyclic ester or a carbonate ester, and the polymer includes a polyester.
Navaro teaches that the polymeric precursor contains at least one cyclic monomer of a lactone, a lactone cyclic ester, or a carbonate ester. However, he does not teach that the polymeric precursor comprises at least three monomers.
Zheng, in the same field of endeavor, polymers, teaches
wherein the polymer is polymerized by a polymeric precursor (Zheng, para. 0291, [the biodegradable polymer is … poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate)]) (Examiner notes that to obtain the aforementioned polymer, the precursors of their monomers were polymerized),
Examiner notes that the instant specification (instant, para. 0006-0007) defines the polymeric precursor as a polymer that includes at least three monomers, each of the monomers (lactide, glycolide, and trimethylene carbonate) is a lactone, a lactone cyclic ester or a carbonate ester, and the polymer includes a polyester.
and the polymeric precursor comprises: at least three monomers (Zheng, para. 0291, [the biodegradable polymer is poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate]),
wherein each of the monomers is a lactone (each of lactide, caprolactone, and glycolide is a lactone), or
a lactone cyclic ester (each of lactide, caprolactone, and glycolide is a lactone),
the polyester is a straight chain (poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate)is a straight chain),
Examiner notes that polymeric nomenclature for branched structures is written with a number to indicate where the branch attaches to the backbone. The polymer expressed in para. 0049 of Navarro is not written in such way and therefore represents a straight-chain polymer.
an end of the polymer has an inert group (trimethylene carbonate is an inert group. The instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031),
and the polymer is represented by the following structure: B-C, wherein B is the polyester (para. 0291, B is glycolide from the polymer: poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate), and
C is the inert group (para. 0291, C is trimethylene carbonate from the polymer: poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate) and trimethylene carbonate is an inert group. The instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031).
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 biodegradable polymer comprised of at least three monomers for Navarro’s polymer, as taught by Zheng, in order to control crystallinity and/or Tg, as taught by Zheng (Zheng, abstract, [a biodegradable polymeric wherein the polymeric material is treated to control crystallinity and/or Tg]).
Additionally, Hong, in the same field of endeavor, polymers, teaches the use of biodegradable polymer electrolytes for batteries (Hong, para. 0080 and para. 0082).
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 biodegradable polymer for Navarro’s polymer, as taught by Hong, in order to use a material that is eco-friendly and has the ability to prevent environmental pollution, as taught by Hong (Hong, para. 0080).
Regarding claim 5, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 1, wherein a total mole number of the lactone and the lactone cyclic ester in the polymeric precursor is Mlc, a total mole number of the carbonate ester in the polymeric precursor is Me, and the following condition is satisfied:
2 ≤ M1c/Me < 50.
(Zheng, para. 0193, [the biodegradable poly(L-lactide) copolymer comprises L-lactide in at least about 90%, 95% or 99% by weight or molarity, and each of the one or more other monomers in no more than about 1% 5% or 10% by weight or molarity]).
Examiner notes that when lactide is 90% then the other monomers can each be 5%. Therefore, the mol percentage of M1c (90%) and Me (glycolide and trimethylene carbonate = 10%), satisfies the equation of claim 5. 2 ≤ M1c/Me < 50.)
Regarding claim 12, modified Navarro teaches an electrolyte, which is a composition of a battery (para. 0038, [thus, at least the cathode 20 of the battery, for example, comprises in its composition such a polymer electrolyte composition]) comprising:
The polymer of claim 1 (see claim 1)
a metal salt (para. 0039, [the polymer electrolyte comprises … one or more lithium salts]),
wherein the polymer is uniformly mixed with the metal salt (para. 0055, [mixing, in the melt, the monomer(s) (co) to be (co)polymerized, the electrolyte salt]);
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the machine translation of Navarro (WO 2018158545 A1), in view of Zheng (US 20130331927 A1), and Hong (US 20230170525 A1), with evidence by Barker (US 20090054619 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the polymer is represented by the following structure:
A1-B-C (Zheng, para. 0291, [poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate]); A1 = lactide; B = glycolide; C = trimethylene carbonate),
wherein a polymeric precursor (Barker, para. 0035, 2-hydroxypropanoic acid) of A1 (Barker, para. 0035, A1 = a polymer of lactide) is a monobasic acid (instant, para. 0033, describes a monobasic acid as a carboxylic acid including a monoprotic acid, and there is a carboxyl group in the compound of the carboxylic acid) (Examiner notes that 2-hydroxypropanoic acid has a carboxyl group in the carboxylic acid)
a carbon number of the monobasic acid is at least larger than or equal to two (Examiner notes that 2-hydroxypropanoic acid has 3 carbons),
B is the polyester (B is the polyester as described above in claim 1), and
C is the inert group (C as described in claim 1 above).
Claims 6-8, 16-18, 21-23, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the machine translation of Navarro (WO 2018158545 A1), in view of Zheng (US 20130331927 A1) and Hong (US 20230170525 A1), and further in view of Kono (US 6218053 B1).
Regarding claim 6, Modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 1.
Modified Navarro does not teach wherein a number-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mn, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mn ≤ 3000 Dalton.
Kono, in the same field of endeavor, polymers used in batteries, teaches that the molecular weight can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time (Kono, column 3, lines 59 - 67) and teaches that the reaction conditions has an effect on the weight average molecular weight and number average molecular weight.
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have optimized the number average molecular weight of modified Navarro’s polymer, in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64). It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the instant invention was filed, to have arrived at a number-average molecular weight of 100 Dalton ≤ Mn ≤ 3000 Dalton, particularly given that Navarro teaches the use of a polymer having a number-average molecular weight of less than … 20,000 g/mol (Navarro, para. 0020) within his battery, is desirable.
Regarding claim 7, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 6.
Navarro does not teach wherein a weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mw ≤ 3000 Dalton.
Kono, in the same field of endeavor, polymers used in batteries, teaches that the molecular weight can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time (Kono, column 3, lines 59 - 67) and teaches that the reaction conditions has an effect on the weight average molecular weight and number average molecular weight. Kono further teaches that the polymer can have a Mw (weight-average molecular weight)/Mn (number-average molecular weight) ratio of 1.05 to 1.40.
Examiner notes that this satisfies the relationship between Mw and Mn as described in para. 0020 of the instant specification, and since Navarro teaches the range for the number-average molecular weight as explained in claim 6, modified Navarro teaches wherein a weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mw ≤ 3000 Dalton.
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 modified the number-average molecular weight of modified Navarro’s polymer according to reaction conditions so that the ratio of Mw/Mn is 1.05 to 1.40, as taught by Kono, which would result in a weight-average molecular weight of 100 Dalton ≤ Mw ≤ 3000 Dalton. Satisfying this relationship would be advantageous in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64).
Regarding claim 8, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 7, wherein the weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, the number-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mn, and the following condition is satisfied: 1< Mw/Mn ≤ 2.0 (Kono, column 5, lines 7-8, Mw/Mn = 1.05-1.40).
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 modified the number-average molecular weight of modified Navarro’s polymer according to reaction conditions, as taught by Kono, thereby resulting in a weight-average molecular such as 800 and 500,000, as taught by Kono for the number-average molecular weight, in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64, [molecular weight of living polypropylene produced can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time. It is possible to produce polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of the monodisperse system by keeping the polymerization temperature low, in particular -30.degree. C. or lower. When produced at -50.degree. C. or lower, the living polymer can have a Mw (weight-average molecular weight)/Mn (number-average molecular weight) ratio of 1.05 to 1.40.]).
Regarding claim 16, Navarro teaches a polymer, which is a composition of a battery (para. 0019, [a polymer electrolyte composition intended to be used in a battery]), wherein the polymer is polymerized by a polymeric precursor (para. 0019, [a thermoplastic polymer obtained by polymerization of at least one cyclic monomer of lactone, carbonate or lactide type]),
Examiner notes that the instant specification (instant, para. 0006-0007) defines the polymeric precursor as a polymer that includes at least three monomers, each of the monomers is a lactone, a lactone cyclic ester or a carbonate ester, and the polymer includes a polyester.
Navaro teaches that the polymeric precursor contains at least one cyclic monomer of a lactone, a lactone cyclic ester, or a carbonate ester. However, he does not teach that the polymeric precursor comprises at least three monomers.
Zheng, in the same field of endeavor, polymers, teaches
wherein the polymer is polymerized by a polymeric precursor (Zheng, para. 0291, [the biodegradable polymer is … poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate)]) (Examiner notes that to obtain the aforementioned polymer, the precursors of their monomers were polymerized),
Examiner notes that the instant specification (instant, para. 0006-0007) defines the polymeric precursor as a polymer that includes at least three monomers, each of the monomers (lactide, glycolide, and trimethylene carbonate) is a lactone, a lactone cyclic ester or a carbonate ester, and the polymer includes a polyester.
and the polymeric precursor comprises: at least three monomers (Zheng, para. 0291, [the biodegradable polymer is poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate]),
wherein each of the monomers is a lactone (each of lactide, caprolactone, and glycolide is a lactone), or
a lactone cyclic ester (each of lactide, caprolactone, and glycolide is a lactone),
the polyester is a straight chain (poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate)is a straight chain),
Examiner notes that polymeric nomenclature for branched structures is written with a number to indicate where the branch attaches to the backbone. The polymer expressed in para. 0049 of Navarro is not written in such way and therefore represents a straight-chain polymer.
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 biodegradable polymer comprised of at least three monomers for Navarro’s polymer, as taught by Zheng, in order to control crystallinity and/or Tg, as taught by Zheng (Zheng, abstract, [a biodegradable polymeric wherein the polymeric material is treated to control crystallinity and/or Tg]).
Additionally, Hong, in the same field of endeavor, polymers, teaches the use of biodegradable polymer electrolytes for batteries (Hong, para. 0080 and para. 0082).
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 biodegradable polymer for Navarro’s polymer, as taught by Hong, in order to use a material that is eco-friendly and has the ability to prevent environmental pollution, as taught by Hong (Hong, para. 0080).
Modified Navarro does not teach:
a number-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mn, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mn ≤ 3000 Dalton.
Kono, in the same field of endeavor, polymers used in batteries, teaches that the molecular weight can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time (Kono, column 3, lines 59 - 67) and teaches that the reaction conditions has an effect on the weight average molecular weight and number average molecular weight.
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have optimized the number average molecular weight of modified Navarro’s polymer, in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64). It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the instant invention was filed, to have arrived at a number-average molecular weight of 100 Dalton ≤ Mn ≤ 3000 Dalton, particularly given that Navarro teaches the use of a polymer having a number-average molecular weight of less than … 20,000 g/mol (Navarro, para. 0020) within his battery, is desirable.
Regarding claim 17, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 16, and further teaches wherein an end of the polymer has an inert group (see claim 1) (Trimethylene carbonate is an inert group. The instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031).
Regarding claim 18, Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 17, and further teaches wherein the polymer is represented by the following structure: A1-B-C,
A1-B-C (Zheng, para. 0291, [poly(lactide-co-glycolide-co-trimethylene carbonate]); A1 = lactide; B = glycolide; C = trimethylene carbonate),
wherein a polymeric precursor (Barker, para. 0035, 2-hydroxypropanoic acid) of A1 (Barker, para. 0035, A1 = a polymer of lactide) is a monobasic acid (instant, para. 0033, describes a monobasic acid as a carboxylic acid including a monoprotic acid, and there is a carboxyl group in the compound of the carboxylic acid) (Examiner notes that 2-hydroxypropanoic acid has a carboxyl group in the carboxylic acid)
a carbon number of the monobasic acid is at least larger than or equal to two (Examiner notes that 2-hydroxypropanoic acid has 3 carbons),
B is the polyester (B is the polyester as described above in claim 1), and
C is the inert group (C as described in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 21, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 16, wherein a total mole number of the lactone and the lactone cyclic ester in the polymeric precursor is Mlc, a total mole number of the carbonate ester in the polymeric precursor is Me, and the following condition is satisfied:
2 ≤ M1c/Me < 50.
(Zheng, para. 0193, [the biodegradable poly(L-lactide) copolymer comprises L-lactide in at least about 90%, 95% or 99% by weight or molarity, and each of the one or more other monomers in no more than about 1% 5% or 10% by weight or molarity]).
Examiner notes that when lactide is 90% then the other monomers can each be 5%. Therefore, the mol percentage of M1c (90%) and Me (glycolide and trimethylene carbonate = 10%), satisfies the equation of claim 5. 2 ≤ M1c/Me < 50.)
Regarding claim 22, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 16.
Modified Navarro does not teach wherein a weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mw ≤ 3000 Dalton.
Kono, in the same field of endeavor, polymers used in batteries, teaches that the molecular weight can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time (Kono, column 3, lines 59 - 67) and teaches that the reaction conditions has an effect on the weight average molecular weight and number average molecular weight. Kono further teaches that the polymer can have a Mw (weight-average molecular weight)/Mn (number-average molecular weight) ratio of 1.05 to 1.40.
Examiner notes that this satisfies the relationship between Mw and Mn as described in para. 0020 of the instant specification, and since Navarro teaches the range for the number-average molecular weight as explained in claim 16, modified Navarro teaches wherein a weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mw ≤ 3000 Dalton.
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 modified the number-average molecular weight of Navarro’s polymer according to reaction conditions so that the ratio of Mw/Mn is 1.05 to 1.40, as taught by Kono, which would result in a weight-average molecular weight of 100 Dalton ≤ Mw ≤ 3000 Dalton. Satisfying this relationship would be advantageous in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64).
Regarding claim 23, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 22, and further teaches wherein the weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, the number-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mn, and the following condition is satisfied: 1< Mw/Mn ≤ 2.0 (Kono, column 5, lines 7-8, Mw/Mn = 1.05-1.40).
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 modified the number-average molecular weight of Navarro’s polymer according to reaction conditions, as taught by Kono, thereby resulting in a weight-average molecular such as 800 and 500,000, as taught by Kono for the number-average molecular weight, in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64, [molecular weight of living polypropylene produced can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time. It is possible to produce polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of the monodisperse system by keeping the polymerization temperature low, in particular -30.degree. C. or lower. When produced at -50.degree. C. or lower, the living polymer can have a Mw (weight-average molecular weight)/Mn (number-average molecular weight) ratio of 1.05 to 1.40.]) wherein the weight-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mw, the number-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mn, and the following condition is satisfied: 1< Mw/Mn<2.0.
Regarding claim 27, modified Navarro teaches an electrolyte, which is a composition of a battery (para. 0038, [thus, at least the cathode 20 of the battery, for example, comprises in its composition such a polymer electrolyte composition]), comprising: the polymer of claim 16; and
a metal salt (para. 0039, [the polymer electrolyte comprises … one or more lithium salts]),
wherein the polymer is uniformly mixed with the metal salt (para. 0055, [mixing, in the melt, the monomer(s) (co) to be (co)polymerized, the electrolyte salt]);
Claims 9 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the machine translation of Navarro (WO 2018158545 A1), in view of Zheng (US 20130331927 A1) and Hong (US 20230170525 A1), and further in view of Kono (US 6218053 B1) and Sato (US 20040076885 A1), herein after referred to as Sato 885.
Regarding claim 9, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 1.
Modified Navarro is silent regarding the viscosity of the polymer.
Sato 885, in the same field of endeavor, polymer electrolytes, teaches wherein a viscosity of the polymer is VC, and the following condition is satisfied:
5cp < VC < 5500 cP
(Sato 885, para. 0076, [it is desirable to adjust the polymer gel electrolyte composition … to a … viscosity … of preferably not more than 100 cps]).
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 adjusted the viscosity of Navarro’s polymer, as taught by Sato 885, in order to have a polymer with a composition to easily penetrate into the cell assembly and thus provide better productivity and performance, as taught by Sato 885 (para. 0018, [compositions having a low viscosity easily penetrate uniformly and rapidly into the cell assembly and thus provide better productivity and performance]).
Regarding claim 24, modified Navarro teaches the polymer of claim 16.
Modified Navarro is silent regarding the viscosity of the polymer.
Sato 885, in the same field of endeavor, polymer electrolytes, teaches wherein a viscosity of the polymer is VC, and the following condition is satisfied:
5cp < VC < 5500 cP
(Sato 885, para. 0076, [it is desirable to adjust the polymer gel electrolyte composition … to a … viscosity … of preferably not more than 100 cps]).
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 adjusted the viscosity of Navarro’s polymer, as taught by Sato 885, in order to have a polymer with a composition to easily penetrate into the cell assembly and thus provide better productivity and performance, as taught by Sato 885 (Sato 885, para. 0018, [compositions having a low viscosity easily penetrate uniformly and rapidly into the cell assembly and thus provide better productivity and performance]).
Claims 13 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the machine translation of Navarro (WO 2018158545 A1), in view of Zheng (US 20130331927 A1) and Hong (US 20230170525 A1), and further in view of Kono (US 6218053 B1) and Sato (US 20020035903 A1), herein referred to as Sato 903.
Regarding claim 13, modified Navarro teaches the electrolyte of claim 12.
Modified Navarro does not teach wherein an electrical conductivity of the electrolyte is Ci, and the following condition is satisfied: 1 x 10-6 S cm-1 ≤ Ci.
Sato 903, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches an ion conductive polymer used to cover an electrode active material (Sato 903, para. 0031, [the powdery electrode active material 13 of FIG. 1(A) is covered with an ion conductive polymer]). Sato 903 further teaches that the polymer has an electrical conductivity of 10-3 S cm-1 to 10-5 S cm-1 (Sato 903, para. 0060, [preferably it is an ion conductive polymer, which at least dissolves an ion conductive salt, such as lithium salt, … and exhibits electrical conductivity of 10-3 S cm-1 to 10-5 S cm-1 ]).
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 Navarro’s electrolyte polymer to have a conductivity between 10-3 S cm-1 to 10-5 S cm-1 , as taught by Sato 903, in order to enhance the electrical conductivity between the electrode materials, as taught by Sato 903, (Sato 903, para. 0032, [the conductive material arranged in the electrode structure enhances electrical and electronic conductivity between the electrode materials]).
Regarding claim 28, Modified Navarro teaches the electrolyte of claim 27.
Modified Navarro does not teach wherein an electrical conductivity of the electrolyte is Ci, and the following condition is satisfied: 1 x 10-6 S cm-1 ≤ Ci.
Sato 903, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches an ion conductive polymer used to cover an electrode active material (Sato 903, para. 0031, [the powdery electrode active material 13 of FIG. 1(A) is covered with an ion conductive polymer]). Sato 903 further teaches that the polymer has an electrical conductivity of 10-3 S cm-1 to 10-5 S cm-1 (Sato 903, para. 0060, [preferably it is an ion conductive polymer, which at least dissolves an ion conductive salt, such as lithium salt, … and exhibits electrical conductivity of 10-3 S cm-1 to 10-5 S cm-1 ]).
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 Navarro’s electrolyte polymer to have a conductivity between 10-3 S cm-1 to 10-5 S cm-1 , as taught by Sato 903, in order to enhance the electrical conductivity between the electrode materials, as taught by Sato 903, (Sato 903, para. 0032, [the conductive material arranged in the electrode structure enhances electrical and electronic conductivity between the electrode materials]).
Claims 1, 3-4, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andersen (US 20040156949 A1) and further in view of Gavelin (US 20010033974 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Anderson teaches a polymer,
wherein the polymer is polymerized by a polymeric precursor (para. 0013, [a polyester polymer obtainable by the polymerization of two or more different cyclic ester monomers]),
Examiner notes that ‘2 or more’ includes 3 monomers
and the polymeric precursor comprises: at least three monomers (para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)]),
wherein each of the monomers is
a lactone (para. 0031 caprolactone and valerolactone of the aforementioned polymer), or a carbonate ester (para. 0031 trimethylene carbonate of the aforementioned polymer),
wherein the polymer comprises a polyester (para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)]),
the polyester is a straight chain (para. 0041 says that the crystallinity may be depressed by incorporating chain branching, thereby inferring that the polymer represented in the art is a straight chain polymer),
an end of the polymer has an inert group (Trimethylene is at the end of the polymer and has the inert ester group. The instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031.),
and the polymer is represented by the following structure: B-C, wherein B is the polyester ((para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)] B = valerolactone in the polymer)), and C is the inert group (para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)]C = trimethylene carbonate). Trimethylene carbonate is at the end of the polymer and has the inert ester group. The instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031.)
Andersen does not teach that the polymer is part of a battery.
Gavelin, in the same field of endeavor, polymer materials, teaches a polymer electrolyte comprised of a lactone, cyclic ester, and a carbonate ester (Gavelin, para. 0060).
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 Andersen’s polymer in part of a battery polymer electrolyte, as taught by Gavelin (Gavelin, para. 0061), in order to prevent accidental contacts between the electrodes (Gavelin, para. 0061).
Regarding claim 3, modified Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 1, wherein the polymer is represented by the following structure: C-A2-B-C,
(Andersen, para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)])
(Examiner notes that in the aforementioned polymer; A2=caprolactone; B= valerolactone; C= trimethylene carbonate)
Examiner notes that the polymer is a repeating unit and thus the polymer in para. 0031 of Andersen satisfies C-A2-B-C.
wherein a polymeric precursor (Andersen, para. 0033, [propylene glycol] used to prepare poly caprolactone – co-valerolactone) of A2 (Andersen, para. 0049, A2 = caprolactone) is a polyol (Examiner notes that propylene glycol is a polyol) a carbon number of the polyol is at least larger than or equal to two (Examiner notes that propylene glycol contains 3 carbons),
B is the polyester (B is the polyester as described above in claim 1), and
C is the inert group (C as described in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 4, modified Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 1, wherein a total mole number of the lactone and the lactone cyclic ester in the polymeric precursor is M1c, a total mole number of the carbonate ester in the polymeric precursor is Me, and the following condition is satisfied:
0 < M1c/Me ≤ 1.
(Andersen, para. 0046, [the mol percentage of trimethylene carbonate in poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate) may be in the range of 1-50 mol%. Examiner notes that when trimethylene carbonate is 50% then the mol percentage of Me (caprolactone and valerolactone) is equal to 50% which satisfies the equation of claim 4. 0 < M1c/Me = 50/50 ≤ 1.
Regarding claim 10, modified Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 1, wherein a glass transition temperature of the polymer is Tg, and the following condition is satisfied: -80°C< Tg <0°C.
(Andersen, para. 0103 and Table 3: Tg = -65°C )
Regarding claim 11, modified Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 10, wherein the polymer is without a melting point in a temperature range, the temperature range is Tr, and the following condition is satisfied: -80°C< Tr < 20°C.
(para. 0103 and Table 3: Tr = 8°C )
Claim 16-17, 19-20, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andersen (US 20040156949 A1) and in view of Kono (US 6218053 B1), and further in view of Gavelin (US 20010033974 A1).
Anderson teaches a polymer,
wherein the polymer is polymerized by a polymeric precursor (para. 0013, [a polyester polymer obtainable by the polymerization of two or more different cyclic ester monomers]),
Examiner notes that ‘2 or more’ includes 3 monomers
and the polymeric precursor comprises: at least three monomers (para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)]),
wherein each of the monomers is
a lactone (para. 0031 caprolactone and valerolactone of the aforementioned polymer), or a carbonate ester (para. 0031 trimethylene carbonate of the aforementioned polymer),
wherein the polymer comprises a polyester (para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)]),
the polyester is a straight chain (para. 0041 says that the crystallinity may be depressed by incorporating chain branching, thereby inferring that the polymer represented in the art is a straight chain polymer),
Modified Andersen does not teach:
a number-average molecular weight of the polymer is Mn, and the following condition is satisfied: 100 Dalton ≤ Mn ≤ 3000 Dalton.
Kono, in the same field of endeavor, polymers used in batteries, teaches that the molecular weight can be controlled by controlling reaction temperature and time (Kono, column 3, lines 59 - 67) and teaches that the reaction conditions has an effect on the weight average molecular weight and number average molecular weight.
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have optimized the number average molecular weight of modified Navarro’s polymer, in order to produce a polymer having a molecular weight distribution dose to that of a monodisperse system (Kono, column 3, lines 61-64). It is the Examiner’s position that this routine optimization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the instant invention was filed, to have arrived at a number-average molecular weight of 100 Dalton ≤ Mn ≤ 3000 Dalton, particularly given that Navarro teaches the use of a polymer having a number-average molecular weight of less than … 20,000 g/mol (Navarro, para. 0020) within his battery, is desirable.
Andersen does not teach that the polymer is part of a battery.
Gavelin, in the same field of endeavor, polymer materials, teaches a polymer electrolyte comprised of a lactone, cyclic ester, and a carbonate ester (Gavelin, para. 0060).
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 Andersen’s polymer in part of a battery polymer electrolyte, as taught by Gavelin (Gavelin, para. 0061), in order to prevent accidental contacts between the electrodes (Gavelin, para. 0061).
Regarding claim 17, modified Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 16, wherein an end of the polymer has an inert group (Andersen, para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)] C = trimethylene carbonate. Trimethylene carbonate is at the end of the polymer and has the inert ester group. The instant specification recognizes ester groups as inert group – instant specification, para. 0031.
Regarding claim 19, modified Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 17, wherein the polymer is represented by the following structure: C-A2-B-C,
(Andersen, para. 0031, [poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate)])
Examiner notes that the polymer is a repeating unit and thus the polymer in para. 0031 of Andersen satisfies C-A2-B-C.
wherein a polymeric precursor (Andersen, para. 0033, [propylene glycol] used to prepare poly caprolactone – co-valerolactone) of A2 (Andersen, para. 0049, A2 = caprolactone) is a polyol (Examiner notes that propylene glycol is a polyol) a carbon number of the polyol is at least larger than or equal to two (Examiner notes that propylene glycol contains 3 carbons),
B is the polyester (B is the polyester as described above in claim 1), and
C is the inert group (C as described in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 20, Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 16, wherein a total mole number of the lactone and the lactone cyclic ester in the polymeric precursor is M1c, a total mole number of the carbonate ester in the polymeric precursor is Me, and the following condition is satisfied:
0 < M1c/Me ≤ 1.
(Andersen, para. 0046, [the mol percentage of trimethylene carbonate in poly (epsilon-caprolactone-co-delta-valerolactone-co-trimethylene carbonate) may be in the range of 1-50 mol%. Examiner notes that when trimethylene carbonate is 50% then the mol percentage of Me (caprolactone and valerolactone) is equal to 50% which satisfies the equation of claim 4. 0 < M1c/Me = 50/50 ≤ 1.
Regarding claim 25, Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 16, wherein a glass transition temperature of the polymer is Tg, and the following condition is satisfied: -80°C< Tg <0°C.
(Andersen, para. 0103 and Table 3: Tg = -65°C )
Regarding claim 26, Andersen teaches the polymer of claim 25, wherein the polymer is without a melting point in a temperature range, the temperature range is Tr, and the following condition is satisfied: -80°C< Tr < 20°C.
(Andersen, para. 0103 and Table 3: Tr = 8°C )
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
Prosecution Insights