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 .
Remarks
Claims 1-6 are as previously presented. Claim 7 is newly added. Claims 1-7 are currently examined.
Status of Objections and Rejections
The rejection as set forth within the previous office action has been modified as necessitated by the applicants arguments.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2023/0411601), and further in view of Mitsunaga (JP 2020 161364, see attached translation sent on 1/15/2026).
As to claims 1 and 2, Choi discloses an electrode for an all-solid state battery ([0014], discussed throughout), comprising: composite particles of 100 parts by mass (figure 2, [0008], [0032], discussed throughout); wherein: the composite particle includes a core particle and a coating layer (figure 2 #20 is the core and #22 is the coating layer, [0032], discussed throughout); the coating layer covers at least a part of a surface of the core particle (figure 2 #20 is the core and #22 is the coating layer, [0032], discussed throughout); the core particle contains an active material (figure 2 #20, [0032], discussed throughout); and the coating layer contains a fluoride solid electrolyte (figure 2 #22, [0012], [0050], fluoride is a halogen).
Choi is silent to wherein an imidazoline-based compound of more than 0 parts by mass and 0.3 parts by mass or less (claim 1); and 0.05 parts by mass to 0.1 parts by mass, (claim 2). Mitsunaga discloses an all solid state battery (page 1) wherein imidazoline-based compound is used (page 4, 8 and general formula 1) as a dispersant for the solid electrolyte within the positive electrode mixture (page 5), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the dispersant from Mitsunaga within Choi because aggregation on the conductive agent is suppressed and improvements can be expected (page 5 and 6, Mitsunaga).
While modified Choi does not specifically state the amount of the dispersant i.e. imidazoline-based compound. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to adjust the amount of the dispersant as a result effective variable as enough has to be added to perform the function of the dispersant and if too much is added it would lower the amount of active material and conductive material within the electrode (see MPEP 2144.05 II).
As to claim 3, modified Choi discloses wherein, further comprising a sulfide solid electrolyte of 10 parts by mass to 100 parts by mass ([0069], discussed throughout, Choi).
As to claim 4, modified Choi discloses wherein, wherein that the imidazoline-based compound is represented by Formula (1):
PNG
media_image1.png
221
825
media_image1.png
Greyscale
R1 is an alkyl group or a hydroxyalkyl group and has 1 to 22 carbon atoms, and R2 is an alkyl group or an alkenyl group and has 10 to 22 carbon atoms (general formula 1 and pages 4 and 8 of Mitsunaga).
As to claim 6, modified Choi does not state wherein, a ratio of a specific surface area of the composite particle to a specific surface area of the core particle is more than 1.07 and 3.27 or less. However, Choi does discuss the amount of the solid electrolyte (shell) on the active material (core) which is directly proportional to the ratio of surface areas, thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art to adjust the ration of specific surface areas as a result effective variable of the because if the ratio is to small then the thickness of the solid electrolyte would be to thin and if the area is to large then the thickness would start to serve as a resistive layer ([0046], discussed throughout Choi, and see MPEP 2144.05 II).
As to claim 7, modified Choi does not state wherein, the fluoride solid electrolyte includes Li and F (figure 2 #22, [0012], [0050], fluoride is a halogen).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments, filed 3/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-7 under Choi have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of modified Choi, please see undated rejection above.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724