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 § 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.
Claims 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asano (JP 2008181831 and translation within IDS sent on 4/4/2024).
As to claim 8, Asano discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte liquid ([0001], nonaqueous electrolyte, discussed throughout), comprising:
a non-aqueous solvent ([0008]-[0009], organic solvent, discussed throughout);
an electrolyte salt dissolved in the non-aqueous solvent ([0008]-[0009]electrolyte salt, discussed throughout); and
a silane compound represented by the following general formula (1),
Si(R1)l(R2)m(R3)n(R4)4-l-m-n (1)
wherein R1 represents an alkenyl group having 2 to 20 carbon atoms, R2 represents a substituted or unsubstituted arylethynyl group having 8 to 20 carbon atoms, R3 represents an alkyl group having 1 to 20 carbon atoms, R4 represents an alkynyl group having 2 to 20 carbon atoms, “l” and “m” each independently represent an integer of 1 to 3, “n” represents an integer of 0 to 2, and “l”, “m”, and “n” represent integers satisfying 2≤l+m+n≤4 (formula (1)
PNG
media_image1.png
222
308
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; [0010], [0013], for example is R1 of the instant claimed invention can be R4-R6; R2 of the instant claimed invention is the alkynyl and R3 as an aryl group; R3 and R4 of the instant claimed invention can be R1 and R2). NOTE: this is a 103-type rejection because of picking and choosing specific compounds. It would have been obvious to pick the specific compounds within Asano as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I).
As to claim 9, Asano discloses wherein, in the silane compound represented by the general formula (1), the substituted arylethynyl group represented by R2 in the general formula (1) is an arylethynyl group having 8 to 20 carbon atoms in which a part or all of hydrogen atoms in an aryl group are substituted with a hydrocarbon group having 1 to 6 carbon atoms, an alkoxy group having 1 to 6 carbon atoms, or a halogen atom (formula 1, [0010], [0013], [0023], and discussed throughout; it is also seen in No.15 and No.16 that F can be added to the aryl group in the original non translated portion).
As to claim 10, Asano discloses wherein, in the silane compound represented by the general formula (1), “l” and “m” in the general formula (1) each independently represent an integer of 1 to 3, “n” represents an integer of 0 to 1, and “l”, “m”, and “n” represent integers satisfying l+m+n=4 (formula 1, [0010], [0013], [0023] and discussed throughout).
As to claim 11, Asano discloses wherein, a content of the silane compound in the non-aqueous electrolyte liquid is 0.1 mass % to 5.0 mass % ([0018]-[0023] and discussed throughout).
As to claims 12-15, Asano discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery ([0047]-[0048], discussed throughout), comprising:
a positive electrode ([0047]-[0048] and discussed throughout);
a negative electrode ([0047]-[0048] and discussed throughout); and
a non-aqueous electrolyte liquid ([0035], [0001] and discussed throughout),
wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte liquid is the non-aqueous electrolyte liquid ([0035]-[0040], [0001] and discussed throughout).
Claims 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asano as applied to claims 12-15 above, and further in view of Hirose (US 2019/0097223).
As to claims 16-19, Asano is silent to wherein, the negative electrode contains negative electrode active material particles, the negative electrode active material particles contain Li2SiO3 and contain silicon oxide particles coated with a carbon layer, and the Li2SiO3 contains a crystalline portion.
Hirose discloses a negative electrode contains negative electrode active material particles, the negative electrode active material particles contain Li2SiO3 and contain silicon oxide particles ([0025]-[0026] and discussed throughout) coated with a carbon layer ([0097], and discussed throughout), and the Li2SiO3 contains a crystalline portion ([0025]-[0026] and discussed throughout). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the negative electrode active material from Hirose within Asano because the negative electrode for nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery containing the mixed negative electrode active material, and a lithium ion secondary battery, which are capable of increasing battery capacity and improving cycle characteristics and initial charge/discharge characteristics when used as the negative electrode active material of a lithium ion secondary battery ([0023]) and as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I).
As to claims 20-23, modified Asano discloses wherein, before the negative electrode active material particles are charged and discharged, the negative electrode active material particles have a peak derived from a Si (111) crystal plane obtained by X-ray diffraction using Cu-Kα ray, a crystallite size corresponding to the crystal plane is 5.0 nm or less, and a ratio A/B of an intensity A of the peak derived from the Si (111) crystal plane relative to an intensity B of a peak derived from a Li2SiO3 (111) crystal plane satisfies the following formula (2),
0.4≤A/B≤1.0.(2)
PNG
media_image2.png
298
784
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(annotated figure 4 shows the ratio at about 0.47; also see MPEP 2112 as the prior art discloses the same elements with the same structures and thus would have the same results; [0031] shows 7.5 nm or less for the size; Hirose and discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F.
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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights