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.
Claims 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 20200194786).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a lithium secondary battery, comprising: a positive electrode 120; a negative electrode 110; a separator 130 disposed between the positive electrode 120 and the negative electrode 110; and a non-aqueous electrolyte 140 (P41), wherein the negative electrode, at least in a charged state, includes a lithium alloy containing magnesium, at the negative electrode, a lithium metal deposits during charge, and the lithium metal dissolves during discharge (P35-37.48-51.69-72.96), and the non-aqueous electrolyte contains a hydrofluoroether and lithium ions (P66).
Regarding claim 2, Wang teaches the hydrofluoroether includes a compound represented by R1—O—R2, where R1 is a fluoroalkyl group, R2 is an alkyl group or a fluoroalkyl group, at least one of R1 and R2 has at least one hydrogen atom, and a total number n of carbon atoms in R1 and R2 is 10 or less, or includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (P66). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. MPEP 2112.01 II
Regarding claim 3, Wang teaches R1 and R2 each independently have at least one hydrogen atom, or includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (P66). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. MPEP 2112.01 II
Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches a fluorination rate of the hydrofluoroether is 60% or more or includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (P66), wherein the fluorination ratio is the number of the fluorine atoms included in one fluorinated ether/the sum of the numbers of the fluorine atoms and the hydrogen atoms included in the fluorinated ether and thus over 60%. Further, a chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. MPEP 2112.01 II
Regarding claim 5, Wang teaches the hydrofluoroether includes 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether (P66).
Regarding claim 8, Wang teaches a content of magnesium in the lithium alloy is 0.1 mass % or more and 30 mass % or less, or 0.1-10% by weight (P51), falling within the claimed range. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. MPEP 2144.05- I
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.
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 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied to at least claim 1 above, and further in view of Jeon et al. (KR 20140038676 A).
Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the electrolyte system may comprise additives that may improve capacity (P71.78), but is silent in teaching a fluorinated alcohol with a fluoroalkyl group; however, Jeon, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a lithium battery using a non-aqueous electrolyte and an anode comprising magnesium (L261-272).
Jeon teaches when a halogenated alcohol, such as 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol is added to an electrolyte the capacity and lifespan are improved and resistance decreases (L88-94.168-170.402-430).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include a fluorinated alcohol represented by R—OH, where R is a fluoroalkyl group, or ,2,2-trifluoroethanol, in the battery of Wang to improve the capacity, as taught by Jeon.
Regarding claim 7, modified Wang in view of Jeon teaches the fluorinated alcohol includes 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (L88-94.168-170.402-430).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amanda Rosenbaum whose telephone number is (571)272-8218. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5 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 A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/Amanda Rosenbaum/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights