Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/210,411

SOLID-STATE ELECTROLYTE BATTERY INCLUDING PLASTIC CRYSTAL ELECTROLYTE INTERLAYER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 15, 2023
Examiner
SLIFKA, SARAH A
Art Unit
1759
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Giner Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
522 granted / 694 resolved
+10.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
708
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
52.2%
+12.2% vs TC avg
§102
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 694 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 1, 12, 13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tong et al (Matchmaker of Marriage between a Li Metal Anode and a NASICON-Structured Solid-State Electrolyte: Plastic Crystal Electrolyte and Three-Dimensional Host Structure; ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 44754-44761). Regarding claim 1, Tong teaches a solid-state electrolyte battery (abstract) comprising an anode (figure in abstract); a LiFePO4 cathode (44755 col 2, paragraph 4 and figure in abstract); a nonflammable solid-state electrolyte which is taught as LAGP (figure in abstract and abstract and 44754 col 1 paragraph 1). The figure in the abstract of Tong shows the LAGP electrolyte being between the LiFePO4 cathode and the anode. The figure in the abstract also shows that the LAGP is spaced away from the anode via a plastic crystal electrolyte PCE. Regarding claim 12, Tong teaches the solid-state electrolyte battery to include succinonitrile (44755 col 1, paragraph 2). Regarding claim 13, Tong teaches the solid-state electrolyte battery to include succinonitrile (44755 col 1, paragraph 2). Regarding claim 18, Tong teaches a solid-state electrolyte battery (abstract) comprising an anode (figure in abstract); a LiFePO4 cathode (44755 col 2, paragraph 4 and figure in abstract); a nonflammable solid-state electrolyte which is taught as LAGP (figure in abstract and abstract and 44754 col 1 paragraph 1). The figure in the abstract of Tong shows the LAGP electrolyte being between the LiFePO4 cathode and the anode. The figure in the abstract also shows that the LAGP is spaced away from the anode via a plastic crystal electrolyte PCE. Claim(s) 27, 28, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al (CN113991174). Regarding claim 27, Liu teaches a solid-state electrolyte membrane (abstract) usable in a lithium ion battery (0015). The solid electrolyte membrane includes a slurry (0007) including an organic-inorganic composite composed of PEO (0007) wherein the ratio of PEO to the LiTFSI is 5:1-15:1, and the ZiF modified by active inorganic filler accounts for 1-50% of the total mass of the PEO and the LiTFSI (0013); an active inorganic filler which is preferable LLZO garnet-type solid electrolyte powder (0008) wherein the ratio of PEO to the LiTFSI is 5:1-15:1, and the ZiF modified by active inorganic filler accounts for 1-50% of the total mass of the PEO and the LiTFSI (0013); and LiTFSI (0007). Regarding claim 28, Liu teaches a solid-state electrolyte membrane (abstract) usable in a lithium ion battery (0015). The solid electrolyte membrane includes a slurry (0007) including an organic-inorganic composite composed of PEO (0007) wherein the ratio of PEO to the LiTFSI is 5:1-15:1, and the ZiF modified by active inorganic filler accounts for 1-50% of the total mass of the PEO and the LiTFSI (0013); an active inorganic filler which is preferable LLZO garnet-type solid electrolyte powder (0008) wherein the ratio of PEO to the LiTFSI is 5:1-15:1, and the ZiF modified by active inorganic filler accounts for 1-50% of the total mass of the PEO and the LiTFSI (0013); and LiTFSI (0007). Regarding claim 29, Liu teaches a solid electrolyte used in a lithium ion battery (0015) including an anode and a cathode (0016) including an electrolyte therebetween, as discussed above. 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. Claim(s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong et al (Matchmaker of Marriage between a Li Metal Anode and a NASICON-Structured Solid-State Electrolyte: Plastic Crystal Electrolyte and Three-Dimensional Host Structure; ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 44754-44761) in view of Angell et al (US 2020/0112057). Regarding claim 8, Tong teaches the battery as discussed above. Tong does not explicitly teach the instantly claimed plastic crystal electrolyte formula. Angell teaches a plastic crystal electrolyte of the formula SiX3SO4Li in Table 1, specifically including LiSi(CH3)3(so4) wherein X is a hydrocarbon moiety (0003 and Table 1). This plastic crystal electrolyte is taught to exhibit a higher conductivity than typical plastic crystals (0007). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize the plastic crystal electrolyte of Angell with the battery of Tong in order to provide for an electrolyte exhibiting higher conductivity. Regarding claim 9, Angell teaches a plastic crystal electrolyte of the formula SiX3SO4Li in Table 1, specifically including LiSi(CH3)3(so4) wherein X is a hydrocarbon moiety (0003 and Table 1). This plastic crystal electrolyte is taught to exhibit a higher conductivity than typical plastic crystals (0007). Regarding claim 10, Tong teaches the battery as discussed above. Tong does not explicitly teach the first plastic crystal electrolyte interlayer comprises an inorganic salt as claimed. Angell teaches a plastic crystal electrolyte comprised of an inorganic salt (0003) such as lithium sulfate which becomes a plastic crystal at high temperatures and exhibits good conductivity (0103). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize the plastic crystal electrolyte of Angell with the battery of Tong in order to provide for an electrolyte exhibiting good conductivity. Regarding claim 11, Angell teaches a plastic crystal electrolyte comprised of an inorganic salt (0003) such as lithium sulfate which becomes a plastic crystal at high temperatures and exhibits good conductivity (0103). Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong et al (Matchmaker of Marriage between a Li Metal Anode and a NASICON-Structured Solid-State Electrolyte: Plastic Crystal Electrolyte and Three-Dimensional Host Structure; ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 44754-44761) in view of Mitsuyama et al (JP 2020068081). Regarding claim 14, Tong teaches the battery as discussed above. Tong does not explicitly teach the plastic crystal electrolyte interlay comprising an organic ionic plastic crystal. Mitsuyama teaches plastic crystal electrolytes (abstract) including pyrrolidinium ions (0016) which improves lithium ion conductivity (0006). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize the pyrrolidinium of Mitsuyama with the electrolyte of Tong in order to improve lithium ion conducitivity. Regarding claim 15, Mitsuyama teaches plastic crystal electrolytes (abstract) including pyrrolidinium ions (0016) which improves lithium ion conductivity (0006). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-7, 16, 17, 19-26, and 30-33 are 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. The closest prior art of record is considered to be Tong, as discussed above. Tong neither teaches, nor renders obvious, the claimed inventions of claims 2-7, 16, 17, 19-26, and 30-33. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH A SLIFKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm EST. 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. /SARAH A. SLIFKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759 February 25, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 15, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603333
CIRCUIT STRUCTURE, BATTERY, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597659
BATTERY UNIT AND FEEDTHROUGH ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586821
LEAD-ACID BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586776
LEAD-ACID BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586810
Pressure Jig of Battery Cell and Gas Removal Method Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+11.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 694 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month