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 and 14 objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 14, “…a fluorine-based secondary additive s …” should recite “…a fluorine-based secondary additive…” for purposes of clarity. In claim 6, “…(FSO 2 ) 2 Nli.” Should recite “…( FSO 2 ) 2 N L i .” for purposes of clarity. Appropriate correction is required. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim FILLIN "Enter claim indentification information" \* MERGEFORMAT 15 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. Claim 15, dependent upon claim 1, recites the limitation "the fluorine-based secondary additive" and “the non-fluorine-based secondary additive”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim or claim 1. Examiner suggest amending the claim 15 to recite “The composition of claim 14 …” or similar. 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- 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) FILLIN "Insert either \“(a)(1)\” or \“(a)(2)\” or both. If paragraph (a)(2) of 35 U.S.C. 102 is applicable, use form paragraph 7.15.01.aia, 7.15.02.aia or 7.15.03.aia where applicable." \d "[ 2 ]" as being anticipated by Ito et al. (US 2016/0211553). Regarding Claim 1, Ito et al. teaches a nonaqueous electrolytic solution including an electrolyte and a nonaqueous solvent (i.e. an electrolyte composition comprising a non-aqueous organic solvent) (Para. [0020]), a lithium salt (Para. [0389]), a phosphorus-containing organic compound (Para. [0171]) (i.e. a primary additive) comprising the formula (Para. [0174]) wherein the phosphorus-containing organic compound is tris(2-acryloyloxyethyl)phosphate (Para. [0192]) (i.e. reading on a compound represented by Formula 1 of the instant claim, as R 1 is an alkylene group having 2 carbon atoms, and R 2 is an acrylate group) as an additive (Para. [0211]) and comprises monofluoroethylene carbonate (i.e. fluoroethylene carbonate or FEC) (Para. [0100]) as an additive (Para. [0102]) (i.e. a secondary additive comprising fluoroethylene carbonate). Regarding Claim 2, Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Ito et al. further teaches the phosphorus-containing organic compound is tris(2-acryloyloxyethyl)phosphate (Para. [0192]) (i.e. reading on a compound represented by Formula 1 of the instant claim, as R 1 is a methylene group ). Regarding Claim 3 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. wherein the phosphorus-containing organic compound is tris(2-acryloyloxyethyl)phosphate (Para. [0192]) (i.e. reading on a compound represented b y, at least, Structural Formula 1 ) . Regarding Claim 4 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Ito et al. further teaches the phosphorus-containing organic compound is 0.01 mass % or above and 5 mass % or less in 100 mass% of the electrolytic solution (Para. [0211]) (i.e. wherein the primary additive is included in an amount of 0.01 to 5 wt% with respect to a total weight of the electrolytic composition). Regarding Claim 5 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Ito et al. further teaches the fluorinated cyclic carbonate (i.e. the second additive) is 0.01 mass % or above and 5 mass % or less in 100 mass% of the electrolytic solution (Para. [ 0102 ]) (i.e. wherein the secondary additive is included in an amount of 0.01 to 5 wt% with respect to a total weight of the electrolytic composition). Regarding Claim 6 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Ito et al. further teaches the lithium salt includes at least LiPF 6 , LiBF 4 , LiClO 4 , LiSbF 6 , CH 3 SO 3 Li, LiN(CF 3 SO 2 ) 2, LiN(FSO 2 ) 2 , CF 3 CO 2 Li, (Para. [0389]). Regarding Claim 7 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Ito et al. further teaches the nonaqueous solvent includes ethylene carbonate, propylene carbonate, butylene carbonate (Para. [0439], [0443]), dimethyl carbonate, diethyl carbonate (Para. [0448]), 2-methyltetrahydrofuran (Para. [0466]) (i.e. the non-aqueous organic solvent comprises at least ethylene carbonate, propylene carbonate, butylene carbonate , dimethyl carbonate, diethyl carbonate and 2-methyltetrahydrofuran). Regarding Claim 8 , Ito et al. teaches a nonaqueous electrolyte battery including a negative electrode and a positive electrode capable of storing and releasing lithium ions (Para. [0040]) (i.e. a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode) and a separator disposed between (i.e. interposed between) the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Para. [0656]) a nonaqueous electrolytic solution including an electrolyte and a nonaqueous solvent (i.e. an electrolyte composition comprising a non-aqueous organic solvent) (Para. [0020]), a lithium salt (Para. [0389]), a phosphorus-containing organic compound (Para. [0171]) (i.e. a primary additive) comprising the formula (Para. [0174]) wherein the phosphorus-containing organic compound is tris(2-acryloyloxyethyl)phosphate (Para. [0192]) (i.e. reading on a compound represented by Formula 1 of the instant claim, as R 1 is an alkylene group having 2 carbon atoms, and R 2 is an acrylate group) as an additive (Para. [0211]) and comprises monofluoroethylene carbonate (i.e. fluoroethylene carbonate or FEC) (Para. [0100]) as an additive (Para. [0102]) (i.e. a secondary additive comprising fluoroethylene carbonate). Regarding Claim 9 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 8 as explained above. Ito et a. further teaches the positive electrode comprise s a slurry applied to an aluminum foil (i.e. a positive electrode mixture layer applied to a positive electrode current collector (Para. [01023]) wherein the slurry comprises a positive electrode active material (Para. [0605]) containing LiNi 0.5 Mn 0.3 Co 0.2 O 2 (Para. [0608]) (i.e. a lithium metal oxide represented by instant claim Formula 2, wherein x = 1.0, y = 0.5, z = 0.2, w = 0.3, v = 0 and y+z+w+v=1). Regarding Claim 10 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 9 as explained above. Ito et al. further teaches the positive electrode active material comprises LiMn 1.5 Ni 0.5 O 4 (i.e. LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.4 O 4 ) (Para. [0608]). Regarding Claim 11 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 8 as explained above Ito et al. further teaches the negative electrode comprises a current collector on which the negative electrode active material is held (Para. [0580]) (i.e. the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode current collector and a negative electrode mixture layer that comprises a negative electrode active material ) wherein the negative electrode active material comprises natural graphite (Para. [0510]), artificial graphite, acetylene black and furnace black (i.e. carbon black) (Para. [0515]). Regarding Claim 12 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 11 as explained above Ito et al. further teaches the negative electrode active material contains elemental silicon (i.e. Si) (Para. [0519]). Regarding Claim 13 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 12 as explained above Ito et al. further teaches a negative electrode active material comprises a silicon content of 2.0 mass % (Para. [0885]) (i.e. wherein the silicon material is included in an amount of 1 to 20 wt% with respect to a total weight of the negative electrode active material ). Regarding Claim 14 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above Ito et al. further teaches an unsaturated cyclic carbonate used in an amount of 0.1 mass% or above, and 5 mass% or less (Para. [ 0332 ]) (i.e. the secondary additive comprises a non-fluorine-based secondary additive) comprising vinylene carbonate and vinylethylene carbonate (Para. [0329]) and comprises monofluoroethylene carbonate (i.e. fluoroethylene carbonate or FEC) (Para. [0100]) as an additive (Para. [0102]) (i.e. a secondary additive comprising fluoroethylene carbonate). Regarding Claim 16 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above Ito et al. further teaches the phosphorus-containing organic compound is tris(2-acryloyloxyethyl)phosphate (Para. [0192]) (i.e. all three R 2 are each an acrylate group) as an additive (Para. [0211]) . 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. 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. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 2016/0211553) in view of Zhao et al. (US 2023/0420661) Regarding Claim 15 , Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above Ito et al. does not explicitly teach the secondary additive comprises 50 to 200 parts by weight of the fluorine-base secondary additive with respect to 100 parts by weight of the non-fluorine-based secondary additive. However, Zhao et al. teaches when an electrolyte solution contains fluoroethylene carbonate and vinylene carbonate, the mass ratio of the content of the fluoroethylene carbonate to the content of vinylene carbonate (i.e. the fluorine-based secondary battery to the non-fluorine-based secondary additive), the mass ratio to the content of the fluoroethylene carbonate to the content of the vinylene carbonate can be within 0.5 and 2.0 (i.e. equivalent to the secondary additive comprises 50 to 200 parts by weight of the fluorine-based secondary additive with respect to 100 parts by weight of the non-fluorine-based secondary additive) (Para. [0121]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ito et al. to incorporate the teaching of the mass ratio to the content of the fluoroethylene carbonate to the content of the vinylene carbonate can be within 0.5 and 2.00 (i.e. equivalent to the secondary additive comprises 50 to 200 parts by weight of the fluorine-based secondary additive with respect to 100 parts by weight of the non-fluorine-based secondary additive) , as it would have the effect of improving cycling performance of the battery (Para. [0121]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ARMINDO CARVALHO JR. whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5292 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday 7:30a.m.-5p.m. . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Ula Ruddock can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571 272-1481 . 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. /ARMINDO CARVALHO JR./ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729