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 Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the 1st line of claim 6, replace “claim 5” with “claim 1” (since claim 5 has been cancelled in this amendment). 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.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2018/225526 A1, of which a copy of the Japanese document with an English abstract was provided with the Information Disclosure Statement dated June 2, 2023, with an English equivalent to Nakata et al. (US 2021/0075056) for use in reference to translated text (rather than a machine translation of WO 2018/225526 A1), and further in view of JP 2018-156835 A, of which a copy of the Japanese document with an English abstract was provided with the Information Disclosure Statement dated June 2, 2023, and with a machine translation provided with the Office Action mailed December 12, 2025.
Regarding independent claim 1, WO ‘526 (refer to equivalent US 2021/0075056) discloses a method of preparing a solid electrolyte for a secondary battery (abstract; paragraphs [0027]-[0031], [0077]-[0094], and [0158]-[0164] (Example 1)), in which the method comprises the following steps:
preparing a raw material composition comprising phosphorus sulfide (P2S3), a lithium halide (LiCl and/or LiBr), and lithium sulfide (Li2S) – see paragraph [0159] of Example 1 in US ‘056;
mechanically milling the raw material composition in a milling container (via a planetary ball mill) to obtain a compound (see paragraph [0160] of Example 1 in US ‘056); and
calcining the compound obtained through the mechanical milling via heat treatment in a sealed electric furnace, wherein an inert gas (argon (Ar)) is used during the calcining (see paragraph [0162] of Example 1 in US ‘056).
In the calcining step, WO ‘526 (US ‘056) further discloses the following steps: a) providing the compound obtained through the mechanical milling in a calcining furnace (sealed electric furnace); b) heating and c) maintaining the calcining furnace to a temperature of 430°C for 8 hours; and d) gradually cooling the furnace to room temperature (see paragraph [0162] of Example 1 in US ‘056).
WO ‘526 (US ‘056) does not explicitly disclose a purge process during the calcining, as well as step c) (in its entirety) that the calcining furnace is heated to 500°C to 600°C for between 4 hours and 10 hours.
However, JP ‘835 discloses a method for manufacturing an inorganic material for use in lithium ion batteries (abstract; pages 9-11 of translation; and Figures 1 and 2), in which the method includes a step of heating the inorganic material (inorganic solid electrolyte material in the last paragraph on page 9 of translation beginning with “Subsequently, by heating…”) in a firing furnace (but not limited thereto) at desired ranges of temperatures and times (see the first four paragraphs on page 10 of translation), wherein inert gas (argon) is purged while heating the inorganic material via continuous introduction of a constant amount of inert gas, and in which the firing furnace is heated to 500°C for up to 24 hours, for the purpose of preventing impurities from entering the inorganic material used in an inorganic solid electrolyte, thus obtaining an inorganic material with desired properties (see the 2nd paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “The time for heating…”, as well as the 4th paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “Examples of the inert gas…”). With regard to the ranges of temperature and time, these ranges would be obvious since these ranges would be readily contemplated by one of ordinary skill in the art. In this instance, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the obviousness of the ranges in view of the combination of WO ‘526 (US ‘056) and JP ‘835, as set forth in MPEP 2144.05. “In the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists.”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (1980).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the applicant’s invention was made to modify the method of preparing a solid electrolyte for a secondary battery, as disclosed by WO ‘526 (US ‘056), by using a purge process using an inert gas (argon) taught by JP ‘835, during the calcining (heat treatment), in order to prevent impurities from entering the inorganic material used in an inorganic solid electrolyte, thus obtaining an inorganic material with desired properties (JP 835; see the 2nd paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “The time for heating…”, as well as the 4th paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “Examples of the inert gas…”).
In addition to the combined teachings of WO ‘526 (US ‘056) and JP ‘835 disclosing/suggesting the limitations of amended independent claim 1 above, JP ‘835 further discloses that the purge process using an inert gas (argon) includes that “a constant amount of inert gas is continuously introduced” (see the 4th paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “Examples of the inert gas…”), of which the disclosure of “continuously introduced” would be all inclusive of during heating of step b), during maintaining of step c), and during cooling of step d).
Regarding claim 6, and in addition to the combined teachings of WO ‘526 (US ‘056) and JP ‘835 disclosing/suggesting the limitations of amended independent claim 1 above, JP ‘835 further discloses that the purge process using an inert gas (argon) includes that “a constant amount of inert gas is continuously introduced” (see the 4th paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “Examples of the inert gas…”), of which the disclosure of “continuously introduced” would be inclusive of during heating of step b). Although the range of heating to be obtained by JP ‘835 is discloses as being from 200°C to 500°C, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applicant’s claim 6 limitation of “the purge process is performed at a temperature of 150°C or lower” would be disclosed by JP ‘835 since inert gas being “continuously introduced” would not only occur between 200°C to 500°C, but would also apply from a start time that the heating is initialized (at room temperature) and through temperatures at or below 150°C until a desired heating temperature (200°C to 500°C) is reached, wherein the purge process of JP ‘835 including that “a constant amount of inert gas is continuously introduced” would be advantageous for further preventing impurities from entering the inorganic material used in an inorganic solid electrolyte (see the 4th paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “Examples of the inert gas…”).
Response to Arguments
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s amendment received by the USPTO on March 2, 2026. Also, an Information Disclosure Statement dated February 26, 2026 has been considered and initialed, and a copy is provided with this Office Action. Although the amendment overcomes the prior objections to the abstract and claims, a new objection to claim 6 is raised (see above section 1). The applicant has cancelled claims 2-5, 7, and 8. Claims 1 and 6 are currently under consideration in the application.
Applicant's arguments filed March 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the applicant’s remarks/arguments on pages 4-7 of the amendment, the applicant first argues (in referring to the italicized amendments to independent claim 1 bridging pages 4 and 5 of the REMARKS section) that the claimed invention is “characterized by its selective purge process within the calcination step” and that the claimed invention operates by “selectively limiting the argon purge to the S3-b heating step and the S3-d cooling step, while maintaining a closed system during the S3-c maintaining step, so as to effectively remove H2S while minimizing the loss of P2S5”, including performing the purge in the heating step “at a temperature of 150°C or lower…the loss of the phosphorus sulfide compound is minimized” (see the 1st and 2nd full paragraphs on page 5 of the REMARKS section). Although the examiner agrees with the applicant regarding the advantages mentioned above, neither the removal of H2S nor the minimizing the loss of P2S5 is commensurate with the scope of applicant’s independent claim 1 (as well as claim 6).
With regard to the applicant’s arguments provided throughout the last paragraph on page 5 and the first three paragraphs on page 6 of the REMARKS section, although the examiner agrees with the applicant that WO ‘526 (US ‘056) does not explicitly disclose a purge process during the calcining, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s statement that use of argon (Ar) gas disclosed by WO ‘526 (US ‘056) is not carried out in heating and cooling steps, both of which would fall within the calcining step of independent claim 1, as well as obtained from applicant’s cancelled claims 2-5 incorporated therein. Specifically, WO ‘526 (US ‘056) discloses that an inert gas (argon) is used during the calcining step (see paragraph [0162] of Example 1 in US ‘056). Moreover, the teachings of JP ‘835 are not deemed by the examiner to be “fundamentally different from that of the claimed invention” since JP ‘835 discloses that inert gas (argon) is purged while heating the inorganic material via continuous introduction of a constant amount of inert gas, wherein such a purging process with inert argon (Ar) gas would be advantageous for further preventing impurities from entering the inorganic material used in an inorganic solid electrolyte (see JP ‘835 in the 4th paragraph on page 10 of translation beginning with “Examples of the inert gas…”).
In addition, applicant’s independent claim 1 does not preclude a purge process in the “maintaining” step, as argued by the applicant in the REMARKS section (in the last full paragraph on page 6, as well as in the paragraph bridging pages 6 and 7), since the claim does not distinctly set forth any “absence” of a purge process in “maintaining” step S3-c. Moreover, and as discussed above, there is/are an absence of explicit claim limitation(s) pertaining to a “selective purge process” that maximizes H2S removal and minimizes P2S5 loss, and the applicant is respectfully suggested to include one or more such limitations to independent claim 1 that distinguish over the combined teachings of the prior art in a subsequent amendment.
In view of the above 35 USC 103 rejection and for these additional reasons, claims 1 and 6 remain rejected.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KEVIN P KERNS whose telephone number is (571)272-1178. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN P KERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735 March 31, 2026