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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because much of the text and details are blurry and not clearly readable.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 5 recites the broad recitation “x is 2 or 3”, and claim 1, upon which it depends, also recites “x and y are each independently 0, 1, or 2” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. For purposes of examination the examiner is interpreting the limitation of claim 5 as “x is 2”.
Claim 20 line 3 provides the subscript “n” without additional limitations do define the metes and bounds of “n”. In order to advance prosecution, the examiner is interpreting it as “n is 1, 2 or 3” following claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by Song WO2023113253A1 (with a filing date of 15 November 2022; using machine English translation provided).
Regarding claim 19, Song discloses an electrochemical cell (Song, [0089]) comprising:
a cathode (Song, [0089]), an anode (Song, [0089]), a separator (Song, [0089]), and an electrolyte (Song, [0050], [0089]) comprising:
a lithium salt (Song, [0051]),
a cathode stabilizing additive selected from the group consisting of vinylene carbonate, vinyl ethylene carbonate (Song, [0078]),
LiBF2(C2O4), LiB(C2O4)2, LiPF2(C2O4)2, LiPF4(C2O4) (Song, [0079]),
LiPF6 (Song, [0085]),
Li2(B12X12-iHi), wherein each X is independently at each occurrence a halogen, i is an integer from 0 to 12 (Song, [0081], i = 6, X = F),
or a mixture of any two or more thereof (Song, [0078-0079], [0081], [0085]),
wherein the cathode stabilizing additive is not the same as the lithium salt (Song, [0051]),
and a fluorinated organosulfate compound (Song, [0072]) represented by Formula II
PNG
media_image1.png
130
153
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R6 is OR8, R7 is OR8’, R8 is a fluorinated alkyl and R8’ is optionally fluorinated alky (Song, [0072]).
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.
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, 4-6, 8, 13-15 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwaya US20110020700A1 in view of Meng US20160285130A1.
Regarding claim 1, Iwaya discloses a electrochemical cell (Iwaya, [0034]) comprising:
a cathode comprising a cathode active material (Iwaya, [0034]),
an anode comprising an anode active material (Iwaya, [0034]),
and an electrolyte (Iwaya, [0034]) comprising
a sulfonyl solvent (Iwaya, [0088], propanesultone),
a salt (Iwaya, [0022]), and
a terminally fluorinated glycol ether (Iwaya, [0050-0051]),
wherein the terminally fluorinated glycol ether is represented by Formula (I) (Iwaya, [0050], formula/compound (2)):
R1(O(CH2)m)x(O(CH2)n)yOR2 (I)
wherein: R1 and R2 are individually -(CH2)q(CR4R5)pC(R3)3, R3 is F, R4 and R5 are each independently H or F, m is 1, 2, or 3, n is 1, 2, or 3, q is 0, 1, 2, or 3, p is 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6, and x and y are each independently 0, 1, or 2, with the provisos that both x and y are not 0 and x+y ≤ 3 (Iwaya, [0051], “each of R1 and R2 which are independent of each other, is a…C1-10 fluorinated alkyl group having an etheric oxygen atom between a carbon atom and a carbon atom, provided that one or each of R1 and R2 is a partially fluorinated above group. R1 and R2 may be the same or different. In this specification, a fluorinated alkyl group is a group having some or all of hydrogen atoms in an alkyl group substituted by fluorine atoms.”, [0056], nonlimiting examples 2-B2, 2-B6, 2-B7, 2-B8).
Iwaya however does not disclose wherein the sulfonyl solvent comprises a compound represented by the following formula
PNG
media_image1.png
130
153
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein:R6 is a C1-C8 fluorinated alkyl, R7 is H, F, Cl, Br, I, OR8, alkyl, alkenyl, alkynyl, silyl, siloxy, aryl, aralkyl, heterocyclyl, heterocyclylalkyl, cycloalkyl, cycloalkylalkyl, -C(O)R11, -C(O)OR11, or -OC(O)R11, wherein any of the alkyl, alkenyl, alkynyl, silyl, siloxy, aryl, aralkyl, heterocyclyl, heterocyclylalkyl, cycloalkyl, and cycloalkylalkyl may be substituted or unsubstituted; R8 is H or alkyl; and R11 is fluorinated C1-C6 alkyl; and
Meng teaches wherein the sulfonyl solvent comprises a compound represented by the following formula (Meng, [0117], RSO3H)
PNG
media_image1.png
130
153
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein: R6 is a C1-C8 fluorinated alkyl (Meng, [0117], R is alkyl or aryl or alkyl or aryl substituted by one to three halogens, for example trifluoromethane), R7 is OR8, R8 is H (Meng, [0117], OH). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the sulfonyl solvent of Meng to Iwaya, thereby exhibiting a nominal open-circuit voltage of about 1.2 V to about 6.0 V (Meng, [0011]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Iwaya also teaches wherein q is 1 or 2; and p is 0 (Iwaya, [0051], R1—O—R2, “each of R1 and R2 which are independent of each other, is a…C1-10 fluorinated alkyl group having an etheric oxygen atom between a carbon atom and a carbon atom, provided that one or each of R1 and R2 is a partially fluorinated above group. R1 and R2 may be the same or different. In this specification, a fluorinated alkyl group is a group having some or all of hydrogen atoms in an alkyl group substituted by fluorine atoms.”, R1 = F3C-(CH2)q=1-2(O(CH2)m=1-3)x=0-2(O(CH2)n=1-3)y=0-2 or F3C-(CH2)q=1-2(O(CH2)m=1-3)x=0-2 and R2 = F3C-(CH2)q=1-2(O(CH2)n=1-3)y=0-2 or F3C-(CH2)q=1-2(O(CH2)n=1-3)y=0-2(O(CH2)m=1-3)x=0-2).
Regarding claim 5, modified Iwaya additionally teaches wherein y is 0 and x is 2 (Iwaya, [0051], R1—O—R2, “each of R1 and R2 which are independent of each other, is a…C1-10 fluorinated alkyl group having an etheric oxygen atom between a carbon atom and a carbon atom, provided that one or each of R1 and R2 is a partially fluorinated above group. R1 and R2 may be the same or different. In this specification, a fluorinated alkyl group is a group having some or all of hydrogen atoms in an alkyl group substituted by fluorine atoms.”, R1 = F3C-(CR4R5)p=0-6-(CH2)q=1-2(O(CH2)m=1-3)x=2 and R2 = F3C-(CR4R5)p=0-6-(CH2)q=1-2).
Regarding claim 6, modified Iwaya further teaches wherein R1 and R2 are -CH2CF3, m is 2, x is 2, y is 0 (Iwaya, [0051], R1—O—R2, “each of R1 and R2 which are independent of each other, is a…C1-10 fluorinated alkyl group having an etheric oxygen atom between a carbon atom and a carbon atom, provided that one or each of R1 and R2 is a partially fluorinated above group. R1 and R2 may be the same or different. In this specification, a fluorinated alkyl group is a group having some or all of hydrogen atoms in an alkyl group substituted by fluorine atoms.”, R1 = F3C-CH2-O(CH2)m=2 and R2 = F3C-CH2-O(CH2)m=2).
Regarding claim 8, modified Iwaya also teaches wherein R7 is OR8, R8 = H (Meng, [0117], OH)
Regarding claim 13, modified Iwaya additionally teaches wherein the cathode comprises sulfur, a spinel, an olivine, LiMn0.5Ni0.5O2, LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiNi1-xCoyMezO2, LiNiαMnßCoγ, LiMn2O4, LiFeO2, LiNi0.5Me1.5O4, Li1+x’NihMnkColMe2y’O2-z’Fz’, LiNimMnnO4, wherein Me is Al, Mg, Ti, Ga, Si, Mn or Co, Me2 is Zn, Al, Ga, Zr or Ti, 0 ≤ x ≤ 0.3, 0 ≤ y ≤ 0.5, 0 ≤ z ≤ 0.5, 0 < m ≤ 2, 0 < n ≤ 2, x’ = y’ = z’ = 0, with the provisos that at least one of h, k and l is greater than 0, and at least one of x, y and z is greater than 0 (Iwaya, [0116-0117], [0123]).
Regarding claim 14, modified Iwaya further teaches herein the salt comprises LiN(SO2F)2, LiClO4, LiBF4, LiPF6, or a mixture of any two or more thereof (Iwaya, [0041]).
Regarding claim 15, modified Iwaya also teaches wherein the salt comprises LiN(SO2F)2 (Iwaya, [0041]).
Regarding claim 21, modified Iwaya additionally teaches wherein the electrolyte further comprises a stabilizing additive (Iwaya, [0075]) comprising vinylene carbonate (Iwaya, [0081]).
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwaya US20110020700A1 in view of Meng US20160285130A1 and further in view of Lee US20260038886A1.
Regarding claim 16, modified Iwaya does not explicitly teach the electrochemical cell of claim 1 that is free of carbonate solvents, lactone solvents, and non-fluorinated ethers.
Lee teaches an electrochemical cell free of carbonate solvents, lactone solvents, and non-fluorinated ethers (Lee, [0009], [0050]). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan to modify the electrochemical cell of modified Iwaya with the teaching of Lee thereby having thermal stability compared to existing carbonate-based electrolytes (Lee, [0047]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Iwaya does not teach wherein the sulfonyl solvent and the terminally fluorinated glycol ether are present in the electrolyte in a ratio of from about 5:1 to about 2:1.
Lee teaches wherein the sulfonyl solvent and the terminally fluorinated glycol ether are present in the electrolyte in a ratio of from about 5:1 to about 2:1 (Lee, [0068], 1:3 to 3:1). Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the ratio of Lee in modified Iwaya thereby sufficiently reducing the viscosity of the electrolyte and preventing ion conductivity decreases (Lee, [0069]).
Regarding claim 18, modified Iwaya does not teach wherein the salt, sulfonyl solvent, and terminally fluorinated glycol ether are present in the electrolyte in a ratio of about 2:4:1.
Lee teaches wherein the salt, sulfonyl solvent, and terminally fluorinated glycol ether are present in the electrolyte in a ratio of about 2:4:1 (Lee, [0064], 2:1 to 5:1 (sulfone:salt); [0068], 1:3 to 3:1 (sulfone:fluorinated ether) giving the encompassing range of 1:2:6 to 3:15:5). Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the ratio of Lee in modified Iwaya thereby sufficiently reducing the viscosity of the electrolyte and preventing ion conductivity decreases (Lee, [0069]) and preventing a problem of decreased ion conductivity and decrease in viscosity (Lee, [0065]).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song WO2023113253A1 (with a filing date of 15 November 2022; using machine English translation provided) in view of Iwaya US20110020700A1.
Regarding claim 20, Song does not disclose further comprising a terminally fluorinated glycol ether represented by Formula I:
R1(O(CH2)m)x(O(CH2)n)yOR2 (I)
wherein: R1 is a fluorinated alkyl and R2 is a fluorinated alkyl, m is 1, 2, or 3, n is 1, 2, or 3, x and y are each independently 0, 1, or 2, with the provisos that both x and y are not 0 and x+y ≤ 3.
Iwaya teaches a terminally fluorinated glycol ether (Iwaya, [0050-0051]), represented by Formula (I) (Iwaya, [0050], formula/compound (2)):
R1(O(CH2)m)x(O(CH2)n)yOR2 (I)
wherein: R1 is a fluorinated alkyl and R2 is a fluorinated alkyl, m is 1, 2, or 3, n is 1, 2, or 3, x and y are each independently 0, 1, or 2, with the provisos that both x and y are not 0 and x+y ≤ 3. (Iwaya, [0051], “each of R1 and R2 which are independent of each other, is a…C1-10 fluorinated alkyl group having an etheric oxygen atom between a carbon atom and a carbon atom, provided that one or each of R1 and R2 is a partially fluorinated above group. R1 and R2 may be the same or different. In this specification, a fluorinated alkyl group is a group having some or all of hydrogen atoms in an alkyl group substituted by fluorine atoms.”).
Therefore it would be obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the terminally fluorinated glycol ether of Iwaya to Song thereby imparting nonflammability to the nonaqueous electrolyte (Iwaya, [0050]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 19 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.
The examiner notes that while applicant argues that while Shi was presented on May 11, 2022, however, the date on the title page of Shi is June 2022, and it should be assumed that it was publicly available only as of that date. This is not persuasive as applicant has not presented evidence showing the presentation, of which the dissertation is a representation, does not constitute prior art. Further, the examiner further notes a co-inventor, Dr. Chi-Cheung Su, was on the Dissertation Committee and thus appears to be a disclosure of a third part to a co-inventor of the Instant application outside the one year grace period of the Instant application, and would therefore not be an exemption under 102(b).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Besenhard US5916708A (discloses a terminally fluorinated glycol ether added to the electrolyte),
Chen US20120323036A1 (discloses a sulfone-based electrolyte further comprising a terminally fluorinated glycol ether).
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 JARED HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4590. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tiffany Legette can be reached at 571-270-7078. 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.
/JARED HANSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights