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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-7 are currently pending.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kushida (US 2020/0243903 A1).
Regarding claims 1 & 3-4, Kushida teaches a method of producing a method of producing a sulfide solid electrolyte, the method comprising: a step of mixing a Li element source, a P element source and a S element source, thereby obtaining a raw material composition ([0326]-[0329]); a step of firing the raw material composition, thereby obtaining a sulfide ([0061] & [0327]); a step of milling a slurry containing a solvent having fluorine atoms and the sulfide ([0178], [0180] & [0245]); and a step of drying the slurry ([0282]-[0283]). While Kushida does not explicitly teach the step of firing, Kushida discloses that the sulfide can be non-crystalline (glass) or crystallized (made into glass ceramic) ([0061]) and cites Ohtomo for a method of synthesizing a sulfide in a glass state ([0327]). However, Ohtomo discloses that a sulfide glass ceramic is produced by firing a raw material composition comprising a Li source, a P source and a S source to obtain a sulfide in a glass ceramic state (See 2. Experimental of Ohtomo).
Regarding claim 2, Kushida teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the sulfide in the slurry has a concentration of 3 to 40 mass% (Table 2: Components S-10, S-11).
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kushida (US 2020/0243903 A1) in view of Oto (US 2023/0343998 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Kushida teaches the method claim 1 but is silent as the sulfide having a crystalline phase with an argyrodite-type crystal structure. Oto teaches a method of producing a sulfide solid electrolyte in which a sulfide solid electrolyte having a crystalline phase with an argyrodite-type crystal structure is mixed with an organic solvent to produce a sulfide solid electrolyte ([0146]-[0153], [0166]-[0170] & [0240]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to use a sulfide having a crystalline phase with an argyrodite-type crystal structure in order to increase the ion conductivity thereby reducing a decrease in energy density in battery using the sulfide electrolyte as taught by Oto ([0152]).
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strauss (“Investigations into the superionic glass phase of Li4PS4I for improving the stability of high-loading all-solid-state batteries”) in view of Kushida (US 2020/0243903 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 3-4 & 6-7, Strauss teaches a method of producing a method of producing a sulfide solid electrolyte, the method comprising: a step of mixing a Li element source, a P element source and a S element source, thereby obtaining a raw material composition (see Materials and synthesis section); a step of firing the raw material composition, thereby obtaining a sulfide having a crystalline phase with an argyrodite-type crystal structure (see Experimental section and Materials and synthesis section); a step of dry milling the sulfide and mixing the dry milled sulfide and an organic solvent, thereby preparing a slurry (see Electrode preparation and cell testing section); and a step of drying the slurry (see Electrode preparation and cell testing section). Strauss is silent as to the solvent having fluorine atoms. Kushida teaches a method of preparing a sulfide, the method comprising mixing an organic solvent having fluorine atoms and a dispersion medium such as xylene (as used in Strauss) along with an active material, a sulfide, a binder and a conductive aid ([0177]-[0180] & [0245]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to include an organic solvent having fluorine atoms because the polarization of the solvent due the presence of fluorine allows interaction with oxygen atoms in the binder and functional groups on the surface of the sulfide electrolyte which improves dispersibility of the sulfide in combination with the dispersion medium as taught by Kushida ([0179]).
Regarding claim 2, Strauss teaches the solids content in the slurry being 64 wt%, wherein the solids include the active material, the sulfide, a conductive aid and a binder mixed in a weight ratio of 6.9:2.9:0.1:0.1 (see Electrode preparation and cell testing section) such that the resulting content of the sulfide in the slurry is 18.6 mass%.
Regarding claim 5, Strauss teaches the step of milling being performed in an argon environment (see Electrode preparation and cell testing section) but does not explicitly teach an environment with a temperature which is -20°C or lower than a dew point. However, argon has a dew point of around -70°C where the milling Strauss is assumed to take place at room temperature in the absence of any heating during the milling step. Accordingly, the milling step being performed at room temperature would correspond to a temperature which is -20°C or lower than a dew point.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Peng (US 2022/0272293 A1) and JP 2016062709 A (as cited in the IDS) each disclose a step of milling a sulfide with an organic solvent having fluorine atoms to produce a sulfide solid electrolyte.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (EST).
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, BARBARA GILLIAM can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727