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
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.
1. Claim(s) 1-20,29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Park et al. (KR20180057437).
As to claim 1, Park et al. discloses a hybrid-ether electrolyte, comprising: at least one salt comprising a total number of cations, M, of an active metal, wherein the active metal has a solvation number, SN (paragraph 0071-0072, LiFSI is the lithium salt that has a solvation number of 4 and cation of 1); and a nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system that consists of at least one nonfluorinated cyclic ether (paragraph 0024, dioxane) and at least one nonfluorinated linear ether (paragraph 0025, diethoxyethane), wherein the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system has a total number of oxygen atoms, O (dioxane has 2 and diethoxyethane has 2, therefore O is 4); and wherein the at least one salt and the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system are present in respective amounts such that the hybrid-ether electrolyte has an M:O (1:4 which is 1 cation and 4 oxygen atoms) molar ratio in a range of about 1:(SN - 3) to about 1:(SN + 3). (1: (4-3) which is 1:1 and 1:(4+3) is 1:7 so the range is 1:1 to 1:7).
As to claim 2, Park et al. discloses wherein the M:0 molar ratio is in a range of about 1:(SN - 2) to about 1:(SN + 2). (as seen above 1:(4-2) is 1:2 and 1:(4+2) is 1:6 so the range is 1:2-1:6 and Park et al teaches 1:4)
As to claim 3, Park et al. discloses wherein the M:0 molar ratio is in a range of about 1:(SN - 0.5) to about 1:(SN + 0.5). (as seen above 1:(4-0.5) is 1:3.5 and 1(4+0.5) is 1:4.5 and Park et al. teaches 1:4)
As to claim 4, Park et al. discloses wherein the M:0 molar ratio is about 1:SN (as seen above Park et al. discloses 1:4).
As to claim 5, Park et al. discloses wherein the active metal is lithium, and the M:0 molar ratio is in a range of about 1:1 to about 1:7. (as seen above Park et al. discloses 1:4).
As to claim 6, Park et al. discloses wherein the active metal is lithium, and the M:0 molar ratio is in a range of about 1:2 to about 1:5. (as seen above Park et al. discloses 1:4).
As to claim 7, Park et al. discloses wherein the active metal is lithium, and the M:0 molar ratio is in a range of about 1:3.5 to about 1:4.5. (as seen above Park et al. discloses 1:4).
As to claim 8, Park et al. discloses wherein the active metal is lithium, and the M:0 molar ratio is about 1:4. (as seen above Park et al. discloses 1:4).
As to claim 9, Park et al. discloses wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a total salt to nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system concentration in a range of about 3.5 moles/L to about 5 moles/L (paragraph 0072).
As to claim 10, Park et al. discloses, wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a total salt to nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system concentration in a range of about 3.5 moles/L to about 4.5 moles/L (paragraph 0072).
As to claim 11, Park et al. discloses, wherein the active metal is lithium (paragraph 0073).
As to claim 12, Park et al. discloses further comprising one or more fluorinated ethers (paragraph 0054).
As to claim 13, Park et al. discloses wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a volumetric ratio for the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system to the one or more fluorinated ethers is in a range of about 70:30 to about 40:60 (paragraph 0067).
As to claim 14, Park et al. discloses, wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a volumetric ratio for the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system to the one or more fluorinated ethers is in a range of about 65:35 to about 55:45 (paragraph 0067).
As to claim 15, Park et al. discloses wherein the active-metal is lithium, andat least one nonfluorinated cyclic ether is selected from the group consisting of 1,4-dioxane, 1,3-dioxane, tetrahydropyran, tetrahydrofuran, 1,3-dioxolane, 2,4-dimethyltetrahydrofuran,3,4-dimethyltetrahydrofuran, 2,5-dimethyltetrahydrofuran, 2,2-dimethyltetrahydrofuran, 3,3- dimethyltetrahydrofuran, 2-methyltetrahydrofuran, 3-methyltetrahydrofuran, and 2-ethyl-5- methyltetrahydrofuran (paragraph 0024).
As to claim 16, Park et al. discloses wherein the active- metal is lithium, and at least one nonfluorinated linear ether is selected from the group consisting of methyl propyl ether, methyl butyl ether, ethyl propyl ether, ethyl butyl ether,propyl butyl ether, diethyl ether, dipropyl ether, dibutyl ether, 1,2-diethoxy ethane, 1,2- dimethoxy ethane, 1,2-dipropoxy ethane, and 1,2-dibutoxy ethane, bis(2-methoxyethyl) ether and 2-ethoxyethyl ether, and bis[2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethyl] ether (paragraph 0025).
As to claim 17, Park et al. discloses wherein the active-metal is lithium, and at least one fluorinated ether is selected from the group consisting of CHF2CF2OCH2 CH2OCF2CHF2, CHF2CF2OCH2CF2CHF2, CHF2CF2CH2OCF2CHFCF3,CHF2CF2OCH2CF2CF2CF2CHF2, CHF2CF2OCH(CH3)2, CF3CH2OCF2CH(CH3)CF3,CH30CF2CF2OCH3, CF3CH2OCH2CH2OCH2CF3, CF3CHFOCH2CH2OCHFCF,CHF2CF2OCH2CH3, CHF2CF2OCH2CF3, and CF3CH2OCH2CF3 (paragraph 0053).
As to claim 18, Park et al. discloses wherein the active- metal is lithium, and at least one fluorinated ether is selected from the group consisting of CHF2CF2OCH2 CH2OCF2CHF2, CHF2CF2OCH2CF2CHF2, CHF2CF2CH2OCF2CHFCF3,CHF2CF2OCH2CF2CF2CF2CHF2, CHF2CF2OCH(CH3)2, CF3CH2OCF2CH(CH3)CF3,CH30CF2CF2OCH3, CF3CH2OCH2CH2OCH2CF3, CF3CHFOCH2CH2OCHFCF,CHF2CF2OCH2CH3, CHF2CF2OCH2CF3, and CF3CH2OCH2CF3 (paragraph 0053).
As to claim 19, Park et al. discloses wherein the at least one salt is selected from the group consisting of LiFSI, LiTFSI, LiClO4, LiBF4, LiPF6, LiAsF6, LiTf, LiBETI,LiCTFSI, LiTDI, LiPDI, LiDCTA, LiB(CN)4, LiBOB, and LiDFOB (paragraph 0055).
As to claim 20, Park et al. discloses wherein the at least one salt is selected from the group consisting of LiFSI, LiTFSI, LiClO4, LiBF4, LiPF6, LiAsF6, LiTf, LiBETI, LiCTFSI, LiTDI, LiPDI, LiDCTA, LiB(CN)4, LiBOB,and LiDFOB.
As to claim 29, Park et al. discloses further comprising at least one additional solvent selected from the group consisting of carbonates, sulfonates, and phosphates, each of which may be either fluorinated or nonfluorinated (paragraph 0056).
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.
2. Claim(s) 21-22,24,30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (KR20180057437).
Park et al. discloses the hybrid ether electrolyte described above. Park et al. discloses wherein: the at least one salt is a lithium-based salt; the at least one nonfluorinated cyclic ether comprises either 1,4-dioxane, 1,3-dioxane, or both (paragraph 0068).
Park et al. fail to disclose at least one nonfluorinated linear ether comprises 1,2-diethoxy ethane (DEE). Park et al. discloses diethoxyethane (paragraph 0025) therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to 1,2 diethoxyethane for the purpose of providing optimal results in absence of unexpected results.
As to claim 22, Park et al. discloses wherein the at least one salt is LiFSI (paragraph 0072).
As to claim 23, Park et al. fail to disclose, wherein the at least one nonfluorinated ether is 1,4 dioxane. Park et al. discloses 1,3 dioxane (paragraph 0068) therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to 1,4 dioxane for the purpose of providing optimal value in absence of unexpected results.
As to claim 24, Park et al. discloses wherein the at least one nonfluorinated ether is 1,3 dioxane (paragraph 0068).
3. Claim(s) 25-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. in view of Bo et al. (US20200099100).
Park et al. discloses the hybrid ether electrolyte described above. As to claim 25,27, Park et al. fail to disclose further comprising 1,2-(1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethoxy) ethane (TFE), and wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a volumetric ratio for the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system to the TFE is in a range of about 65:35 to about 55:45. Bo et al. teaches further comprising 1,2-(1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethoxy) ethane (TFE), and wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a volumetric ratio for the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system to the TFE is in a range of about 65:35 to about 55:45 (paragraph 0015-0016) for the purpose of providing an electrolyte which improves the cycle performance, rate performance and floating charge performance of a lithium ion battery (paragraph 0004).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to provide Park et al. with further comprising 1,2-(1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethoxy) ethane (TFE), and wherein the hybrid-ether electrolyte has a volumetric ratio for the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system to the TFE is in a range of about 65:35 to about 55:45 (paragraph 0015-0016) for the purpose of providing an electrolyte which improves the cycle performance, rate performance and floating charge performance of a lithium ion battery (paragraph 0004).
As to claim 26, Park et al. discloses wherein the M:O molar ratio is about 1:4 (as seen in claim 1 above).
As to claim 28, Park et al. discloses, wherein the nonfluorinated hybrid-ether cosolvent system has a volumetric ratio of the at least one nonfluorinated cyclic ether to the at least one nonfluorinated linear ether is in a range of about 10:90 to about 25:75 (paragraph 0067).
As to claim 30, Park et al. fail to disclose wherein all of the at least one additional solvent have a combined volume that composes about 5% or less than a total volume of the hybrid-ether electrolyte. Bo et al. teaches wherein all of the at least one additional solvent have a combined volume that composes about 5% or less than a total volume of the hybrid-ether electrolyte for the purpose of providing an electrolyte which improves the cycle performance, rate performance and floating charge performance of a lithium ion battery (paragraph 0004,0058).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time applicant's invention was made to Park et al. with wherein all of the at least one additional solvent have a combined volume that composes about 5% or less than a total volume of the hybrid-ether electrolyte for the purpose of providing an electrolyte which improves the cycle performance, rate performance and floating charge performance of a lithium ion battery (paragraph 0004,0058).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANE J RHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1499. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (10-6:30).
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.
/JANE J RHEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724