Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/212,735

SULFIDE SOLID ELECTROLYTE AND SOLID STATE BATTERY

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 22, 2023
Examiner
CONLEY, OI K
Art Unit
1752
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
597 granted / 858 resolved
+4.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
896
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
37.2%
-2.8% vs TC avg
§102
34.5%
-5.5% vs TC avg
§112
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 858 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/22/23, 6/27/23, 12/20/23 are considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings submitted on 6/22/23 has been considered. 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 1-9 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. The limitation “type” is unknown if it is referring to intrinsic or extrinsic properties of LGPS. Appropriate corrections are required. Claim Analysis Table 1 of Applicant’s specification discloses comparative examples and examples of the claimed invention comprising the same structure but different intrinsic properties. The specification discloses the change in rpm and temperature will yield different properties, however, since the specification does not disclose the specific comparative example rpm and temperature, one of skill in the art would not have enough evidence to conclude that the prior art does not also teach the claimed invention. As best understood, please see the claim rejections below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 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 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. 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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kato et al. (US 10,388,985). Regarding claims 1-6, the Kato et al. reference discloses a process comprising starting materials, a lithium sulfide (Li2S, from Nippon Chemical Industrial Co., Ltd.), phosphorous pentasulfide (P2S5, from Aldrich), and a tin sulfide (SnS2, from Kojundo Chemical Laboratory Co., Ltd.) were used. The powders were mixed in a glove box under argon atmosphere at a ratio the same as the Applicants. The raw material was put in a zirconia pot together with zirconia ball and hermetically seal the post with an argon atmosphere and mixed by ball milling at 40 hrs at 370 rpm. The Kato et al. reference also disclose milling at rpms between 250 to 400 rpm can be used in the process. Next, powder of the obtained ion conductive material was put in a carbon-coated quartz tube and vacuum-sealed. The pressure of the quartz tube for vacuum-sealing was approximately 30 Pa. Next, the quartz tube was placed in a burning furnace, heated from room temperature to 550° C. over 6 hours, maintained at 550° C. for 8 hours, and thereafter slowly cooled to room temperature. Thus, a crystalline sulfide solid electrolyte material having a composition of Li3.275Sn0.275P0.725S4 was obtained. The Kato reference does not explicitly disclose the intrinsic properties of 31P-NMR measurement, when y (ppm) designates a half value width of a peak having an apex at a position of 77ppm± 1ppm, and x (%) designates a rate of impurity phase wherein x is 10 or more, the sulfide solid electrolytes satisfies a formula (1): y≤-0.0431x+4.28 (1), satisfies a formula (2) y≤-0.0489x+4.09 (2), satisfies a formula (3) y≤-0.156x+4.57 (3) and further satisfies (4) y≤-0.00431x+3.30 (4), however, these intrinsic properties are inherently disclosed by the Kato reference, since the process of making the solid electrolyte disclosed by the Applicant is the same as the prior art. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established (Please see MPEP2112.01). Regarding claim 7, the Kato et al. reference disclose the sulfide solid electrolyte contains at least a Sn element as the M element. Regarding claim 8, the Kato reference does not explicitly disclose the ion conductivity of the sulfide solid electrolyte at 25°C is 1.0 mS/cm or more which would include 5.0 mS/cm. Regarding claim 9, the Kato et al. reference discloses a solid state battery comprising a cathode layer containing a cathode active material, an anode layer containing an anode active material, and a solid electrolyte layer arranged between the cathode layer and the anode layer wherein at least one of the cathode layer, the anode layer and the solid electrolyte layer contains the sulfide solid electrolyte according to claim 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN OI CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5162. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at 5712728760. 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. /Helen Oi K CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 22, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592400
CELL STACK DEVICE, MODULE, AND MODULE HOUSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12580257
BATTERY, MANUFACTURING METHOD AND MANUFACTURING SYSTEM THEREOF, AND ELECTRIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580280
NEGATIVE ELECTRODE SHEET, SECONDARY BATTERY, BATTERY MODULE, BATTERY PACK, AND ELECTRIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567598
PROTON EXCHANGE MEMBRANES FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL REACTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12542277
CATHODE ACTIVE MATERIAL, METHOD FOR PREPARING SAME, AND SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING CATHODE COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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
70%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+7.8%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 858 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