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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraphs [0015] and [0047], “lithium bix(oxalate)-borate (LiBOB)” appears to spell “bis” incorrectly, and should be amended to “lithium bis(oxalate)borate (LiBOB)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 15, and 24 are objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 of each claim, “lithium bix(oxalate)-borate (LiBOB)” appears to spell “bis” incorrectly, and should be amended to “lithium bis(oxalate)borate (LiBOB)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7-10, 13, 15-19, 22, and 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (WO 2020/181244) in view of Kim et al. (US 2021/0151743).
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 18, Wang discloses a rechargeable li-ion battery with a halogen intercalated graphite electrode (title, abstract). The lithium battery comprises: (i) a composite cathode comprising a lithium salt and graphite [carbon material]; (ii) an electrolyte; and (iii) an anode ([0009]). The composite cathode comprises a plurality of lithium salts, such as lithium halide salts, including lithium chloride, lithium bromide, lithium iodide, lithium fluoride, and other halogen salts or a combination thereof ([0012]). In one particular embodiment, the composite cathode comprises a combination of lithium chloride LiCl [either HCC-1 or HCC-2] and lithium bromide LiBr [the other of HCC-1 or HCC-2] ([0012]). Therefore, HCC-1 contains a different halogen atom from HCC-2. Further, during battery charge, an interhalogen compound [BrCl] is reversibly formed within the cathode, and upon battery discharge, the interhalogen compound dissociates for continued cycling and energy storage ([0066]).
Further, in an embodiment, a lithium anode is used with the LBC-G cathode ([0078]); and therefore Wang discloses a lithium-containing anode.
Wang discloses that the electrolyte can include concentrated carbonates (e.g., ethylene carbonate, fluorocarbonate, and/or propylene carbonate) ([0015]). Because Wang teaches that carbonate electrolyte can be “highly concentrated”, it is considered that the electrolyte has >1% by weight of the carbonate/compound (i).
Wang discloses that the electrolyte further comprises a fluoride-based electrolyte, and said electrolyte [(ii) ionic salt] can be lithium nitrate (LiNO3), lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulphonyl)imide (LiTFSI), lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI), lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) ([0013]).
However, while Wang discloses that lithium chloride and lithium bromide [HCC-1 and HCC-2] are in the cathode, Wang does not explicitly disclose (claim 1) the two chemical distinct halogen-containing compounds, HCC-1 and HCC-2 each with a molar concentration of >0.2 mol/L in the electrolyte, (claim 10) a halogen-containing compound (either HCC-1 and HCC-2) with a molar concentration of >0.2 mol/L in the electrolyte, or (claim 18) HCC-1 and HCC-2 each have a molar concentration of >0.2 mol/L in the electrolyte.
Kim discloses a battery including a cathode with a metal halide and an electrically conductive material, an anode, and an electrolyte (abstract). The electrolyte 14 can be aqueous or non-aqueous, and includes a solvent, a metal halide, and an optional oxidizing gas ([0030]). The electrolyte includes a metal halide, MX, where M is a metal and X is a halogen element, where the metal halide provides ionic conductivity to the electrolyte ([0032]). The halogen X can be I, Br, Cl, or F ([0032]). The electrolyte can further include additional salts that dissociates into a respective metal ion and a respective counter anion; including a metal ion of Li, and a counter anion which can be one more of nitrate (NO3-), hexafluorophosphate (PF6-), tetrafluoroborate (BF4-), bisoxalato borate (BOB-), difluorooxalato borate (DFOB-), trifluoromethanesulfonate (TF-), and trifluorosulfonylimide (TFSI-) ([0033]). Therefore, Kim teaches the electrolyte including metal halides and additional salts. The metal halide can be in a concentration of about 0.1 M to about 20 M, about 0.5 M and about 10 M, or about 1 M and about 5 M ([0044]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the metal halide(s) in the electrolyte, in an amount between 0.5 M and about 10 M, as taught by Kim with the electrolyte of Wang for the purpose of providing and increasing the ionic conductivity.
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the same metal halides (LiCl and/or LiBr, and therefore HCC-1 and/or HCC-2) in the cathode of Wang as the metal halide(s) in the electrolyte because such compounds are already present.
Regarding claims 2 and 19, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang discloses that the lithium salt is a mixture of lithium bromide (HCC-2, and is heavier) and lithium chloride (HCC-1, and is lighter), wherein the molar ratio of lithium bromide to lithium chloride is most often about 1:1 ([0020]). Therefore, Wang provides that HCC-1/HCC-2 (LiCl/LiBr) is equal to 1. In addition, Wang uses the term “about” to describe the molar ratio, and therefore allows for embodiments where one compound (e.g., LiCl, HCC-1) is more than the other (e.g., LiBr, HCC-2), and therefore allows for ranges where HCC-1/HCC-2 is >1. Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the same molar ratios of lithium bromide to lithium chloride in the electrolyte for consistency.
Regarding claims 5, 13, and 22, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang discloses that organic electrolytes can include ethylene carbonate, fluorocarbonate, and/or propylene carbonate ([0015]).
Regarding claims 7, 15, and 24, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang discloses that the electrolyte comprises a fluoride-based electrolyte, and said electrolyte [ionic salt] can be lithium nitrate (LiNO3), lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulphonyl)imide (LiTFSI), lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI), lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) ([0013]).
Regarding claims 8, 16, and 25, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Wang discloses organic electrolytes such as ethylene carbonate, fluorocarbonate, and/or propylene carbonate ([0015]), Wang does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrolyte comprises an either selected from the group consisting of dimethoxyethane (DME), tetraglyme (G4), dioxolane (DOL), tetrahydrofuran (THF), and combinations thereof.
Kim further teaches that the electrolyte may be aqueous or non-aqueous, and includes a solvent, where the solvent can be organic solvents such as an ether, a glyme, a carbonate, a nitrile, an amide, an amine, an organosulfur solvent, an organophosphorus solvent, an organosilicon solvent, a fluorinated solvent, adiponitrile (APN), propylene carbonate (PC), dimethoxyethane (DME), and mixtures and combinations thereof ([0030]). Kim further teaches that the electrolyte may include a heterocyclic compound, and includes tetrahydrofuran ([0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use dimethoxyethane (DME) or tetrahydrofuran (THF) solvent of the electrolyte as taught by Kim with the electrolyte of Wang because Kim teaches that these electrolyte solvents can be used in a battery including a cathode with a metal halide, and would amount to a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claims 9, 17 and 26, modified Wang disclose all of the claim limitations as set forth above. However, Wang does not explicitly disclose the battery further comprising an oxidizing gas that reacts with the electrolyte to form an SEI layer on a surface of the lithium-containing anode.
Kim discloses an oxidizing gas dissolved in the solvent of the electrolyte, which helps induce the redox reactions of the batteries, and helps achieve highly reversible redox reactions, which may contribute to enhanced electrochemical performance of the battery ([0035]). The oxidizing gas in the battery provides a relatively fast charging rate, high energy efficiency, high power density, high reversibility, high cyclability, or combinations thereof ([0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the oxidizing gas in the solvent of the electrolyte as taught by Kim with the electrolyte of Wang for the purpose of helping induce the redox reactions, achieving highly reversible redox reactions, and contributing to enhanced electrochemical performance of the battery.
Therefore, because Wang teaches a lithium anode ([0078]), and Kim teaches an oxidizing gas in the electrolyte ([0035[), the materials of the anode and electrolyte are the same as claimed, and therefore results in an SEI layer formed on the surface of the lithium-containing anode.
Claim(s) 3, 11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (WO 2020/181244) in view of Kim et al. (US 2021/0151743), as applied to claims 1, 10, or 18 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2013/0323592).
Regarding claims 3, 11, and 20, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Wang discloses organic electrolytes such as ethylene carbonate, fluorocarbonate, and/or propylene carbonate ([0015]), Wang does not explicitly disclose wherein the imidazolidinones are selected from the group consisting of 1,3-dimethyl-2-imidazolidinone (DMI), N,N'-dimethyl propylene urea (DMPU), 2-imidazolidinone, 4-imidazolidinone, and combinations thereof.
Lee discloses a lithium battery 30 including an anode 22, a cathode 23, and an electrolyte ([0028]). The anode active material may be a lithium metal ([0063]). The non-aqueous electrolyte can include propylene carbonate, ethylene carbonate (EC), butylene carbonate, and 1,3-dimethyl-2-imidazolidinone, among others ([0082]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use 1,3-dimethyl-2-imidazolidinone solvent for the electrolyte as taught by Lee with the electrolyte of Wang because Lee teaches that these electrolyte solvents can be used in a lithium battery, and would amount to a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Claim(s) 4, 6, 12, 14, 21, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (WO 2020/181244) in view of Kim et al. (US 2021/0151743), as applied to claims 1, 10, or 18 above, and further in view of Xu et al. (US 2018/0277903).
Regarding claims 4, 6, 12, 14, 21, and 23, modified Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. While Wang discloses organic electrolytes such as ethylene carbonate, fluorocarbonate, and/or propylene carbonate ([0015]), Wang does not explicitly disclose (claims 4, 12, or 21) wherein the N-alkylated ureas are 1,1,3,3-tetramethylurea (TMU) and/or 1,1,3,3-tetraethylurea (TEU); or (claims 6, 14, or 23) wherein the nitriles are selected from the group consisting of acetonitrile, propionitrile, isovaleronitrile, pivalonitrile, and combinations thereof.
Xu discloses method of making electrolytes and using the electrolytes in batteries (abstract). The electrolyte comprises at least one metal salt, and a solvent ([0009]-[0011]). The solvent comprises at least one non-aqueous solvent ([0021]), and the non-aqueous solvent can include carbonates (ethylene carbonate, fluoroethylene carbonate, propylene carbonate, γ-butyrolactone, and vinylene carbonate [0026]), tetramethylurea (TMU) ([0128], [0130]), or a nitrile such as acetonitrile (AN), a higher nitrile, propionitrile, succinonitrile, or butyronitrile ([0130]). The electrolyte can be used in a lithium battery where the anode is lithium, and the cathode comprises metal halides ([0157]-[0158]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use tetramethylurea (TMU), acetonitrile, or propionitrile solvent of the electrolyte as taught by Xu with the electrolyte of Wang because Xu teaches that these electrolyte solvents can be used in a battery, and would amount to a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB BUCHANAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM (ET).
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/JACOB BUCHANAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725