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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 1/23/2024 and 4/16/2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 1. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 14, 17-20, and 29 are 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.
The term “about” in claims 1-5, 7, 9, 14, 17-20, and 29 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how close the voltage needs to be to the recited number in order to meet the limitations of the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 11 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claims recite both a pristine (unused) cell, and a non-pristine (used) cell. Every battery cell will fall into one of those two categories; therefore, the claim does not further limit the subject matter.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7, 10-12, 14, 17-22, 25-27 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhou et al. (Thermal Stability of High Power 26650-Type Cylindrical Na-Ion Batteries).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhou teaches a process for providing a sodium-ion cell which is in a state of charge from about 20% or less and which is capable of safe storage and/or transportation and/or maintenance ([Page 1] “As a new electrochemical power system, safety ( especially thermal safety) of Na-ion batteries (NIBs) is the key towards large-scale industrialization and market application”), comprising the steps:
a) providing a sodium-ion cell comprising a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode material, a positive electrode current collector, a negative electrode comprising a negative electrode material, a negative electrode current collector and an electrolyte ([Page 2 Col 1] “the batteries divided into three parts: cathode+ electrolyte, anode+ electrolyte and separator+ electrolyte are monitored by the DSC device.”),
wherein the positive and negative electrode current collectors comprise aluminum ([Page 4 Col 1] “Because of the adoption of aluminum foil collector, NIBs can be overdischarged without obvious temperature change”);
b) subjecting the sodium-ion cell provided in step a) to one or more discharge operations to a minimum cell operating voltage (cell Vmin) of less than −0.1V, at a discharge rate of C/<10 (See Fig. 2(d), [Page 4 Col 1-2] “Because of the adoption of aluminum foil collector, NIBs can be overdischarged without obvious temperature change, and the capacity can be recovered after continuous overdischarge” and [Page 1] “The high power NIBs can achieve fast charge and discharge at 5-10 C rate” see also Fig 2(d) for discharge rate); and
c) maintaining the sodium-ion cell at a voltage of 1V or less (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute).
Regarding Claim 2, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step b) comprises discharging the sodium-ion cell provided in step a) to a cell Vmin of from less than −0.1V to about −5.0V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute, which is between the -0.1V and -5V range).
Regarding Claim 3, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step b) comprises discharging the sodium-ion cell provided in step a) to a cell Vmin of from less than −0.1V to about −2.5V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute, which is between the -0.1V and -2.5V range).
Regarding Claim 4, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step b) comprises discharging the sodium-ion cell provided in step a) to a cell Vmin of from less than −0.1V to about −1.7V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute).
Regarding Claim 5, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step a) comprises a sodium-ion cell that has been assigned a maximum operating voltage (cell Vmax) from about 1V to about 5.0V (see Fig. 2(a) where the max voltage is about 5V).
Regarding Claim 6, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step a) comprises a sodium-ion cell that is capable of being charged to the conventional and/or expected charge capacity of the cell (see Fig. 2(a) where the max voltage is about 5V).
Regarding Claim 7, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 6.
Zhou further teaches in which the sodium-ion cell is capable of being charged to from ≥80% to 100% of a cell Vmax from about 1V to about 5.0V (see Fig. 2(a) where the max voltage is about 5V).
Regarding Claim 10, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step a) comprises a sodium-ion cell that has been subject to one or more charge and discharge operations (see Fig. 2(d) where the voltage of the cell goes up and down before being subject to overdischarge. See also the other tests in Figs. 2(a) and 2(c) which charge and discharge the battery).
Regarding Claim 11, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 10.
Zhou further teaches in which step a) comprises a pristine or a non-pristine cell (see Fig. 2(d) where the voltage of the cell goes up and down before being subject to overdischarge. See also the other tests in Figs. 2(a) and 2(c) which charge and discharge the battery).
wherein a pristine cell is a cell that has been subject to a conditioning process but not been subsequently used with an application device, and
wherein a non-pristine cell is a cell that has been subject to a conditioning process and then subsequently used with an application device.
Regarding Claim 12, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which the discharging at step b) is at a discharge rate of from C/<10 to C/≥0.1 ([Page 1] “The high power NIBs can achieve fast charge and discharge at 5-10 C rate” see also Fig 2(d) for discharge rate).
Regarding Claim 14, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches in which step c) comprises maintaining the sodium-ion cell at a voltage of from about −1.7 V to about 1V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute and then increased).
Regarding Claim 17, Zhou teaches a process for providing a sodium-ion battery which is in a state of charge from about 20% or less and which is capable of safe storage and/or transportation and/or maintenance ([Page 1] “As a new electrochemical power system, safety ( especially thermal safety) of Na-ion batteries (NIBs) is the key towards large-scale industrialization and market application”), comprising the steps:
a) providing a sodium-ion battery comprising one or more sodium-ion cells according to step a) of claim 1 (as taught by Zhou above);
b) subjecting the sodium-ion battery provided in step a) to one or more discharge operations to a minimum battery operating voltage (battery Vmin) of less than −0.1V, at a discharge rate of C/<10 (See Fig. 2(d), [Page 4 Col 1-2] “Because of the adoption of aluminum foil collector, NIBs can be overdischarged without obvious temperature change, and the capacity can be recovered after continuous overdischarge” and [Page 1] “The high power NIBs can achieve fast charge and discharge at 5-10 C rate” see also Fig 2(d) for discharge rate); and
c) maintaining the sodium-ion battery at a voltage of 1V or less (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute).
Regarding Claim 18, Zhou further teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou further teaches in which step b) comprises discharging the sodium-ion battery to a battery Vmin of from less than −0.1V to about −5.0V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute, which is between the -0.1V and -5V range).
Regarding Claim 19, Zhou further teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou further teaches in which step b) comprises discharging the sodium-ion battery to a battery Vmin of from less than −0.1V to about −2.5V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute, which is between the -0.1V and -2.5V range).
Regarding Claim 20, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou further teaches in which step b) comprises discharging the sodium-ion battery to a battery Vmin of from less than −0.1V to about −1.7V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute).
Regarding Claim 21, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou further teaches in which step a) comprises a sodium-ion battery that is capable of being charged to the conventional and/or expected charge capacity of the battery (see Fig. 2(a) where the max voltage is about 5V).
Regarding Claim 22, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 21.
Zhou further teaches in which the sodium-ion battery is capable of being charged to from ≥80% to 100% of a battery Vmax (see Fig. 2(a) where the max voltage is about 5V).
Regarding Claim 25, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
in which all of the one or more sodium-ion cells provided in step a) have been subject to one or more charge and discharge operations (see Fig. 2(d) where the voltage of the cell goes up and down before being subject to overdischarge. See also the other tests in Figs. 2(a) and 2(c) which charge and discharge the battery).
Regarding Claim 26, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 25.
Zhou further teaches in which step a) comprises a pristine or a non-pristine battery (see Fig. 2(d) where the voltage of the cell goes up and down before being subject to overdischarge. See also the other tests in Figs. 2(a) and 2(c) which charge and discharge the battery).
wherein a battery is pristine when all of the sodium-ion cells that form the battery have been subject to a conditioning process but none of such cells have been subsequently used with an application device, and
wherein a battery is non-pristine when all of the sodium-ion cells that form the battery have been subject to a conditioning process, and one or more of such cells have subsequently been used with an application device.
Regarding Claim 27, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou further teaches in which the discharging at step b) is at a discharge rate of from C/<10 to C/≥0.1 ([Page 1] “The high power NIBs can achieve fast charge and discharge at 5-10 C rate” see also Fig 2(d) for discharge rate).
Regarding Claim 29, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
in which step c) comprises maintaining the sodium-ion battery at a voltage of from about −1.7V to about 1V (see Fig.2(d) where voltage is maintained at -2V for about 1 minute and then increased).
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(s) 8-9, 15, 23-24 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (Thermal Stability of High Power 26650-Type Cylindrical Na-Ion Batteries).
Regarding Claim 8, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou does not explicitly teach in which step a) comprises a sodium-ion cell that is not capable of being charged to the conventional and/or expected charge capacity of the cell, however Zhou teaches that a sodium-cell can be reduced to below 80% of its original capacity after repeated charge/discharge cycles ([Page 1] “The high power NIBs can achieve fast charge and discharge at 5-10 C rate and maintain 80% capacity after 4729 cycles at 2C/2C rate”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a sodium-ion cell that has been previously charged and discharged, and therefore is not capable of being charged to the expected charge capacity.
Regarding Claim 9, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 8.
Zhou further teaches in which the sodium-ion cell is not capable of being charged to from ≥80% to 100% of a cell Vmax from about 1V to about 5.0V (see Page 1 quoted above).
Regarding Claim 15, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 1.
Zhou does not explicitly teach in which step c) comprises the use of a removable shorting device, however Zhou teaches the use of a removable shorting device to test the battery for a short circuit test (Fig. 2(a) and [Page 3 Col 2] “Firstly, the fully charged battery shows no fire and no smoke after a direct external short-circuit”); and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a similar device to overdischarge the battery.
Regarding Claim 23, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou does not explicitly teach in which step a) comprises a sodium-ion battery that is not capable of being charged to the conventional and/or expected charge capacity of the battery, however Zhou teaches that a sodium-cell can be reduced to below 80% of its original capacity after repeated charge/discharge cycles ([Page 1] “The high power NIBs can achieve fast charge and discharge at 5-10 C rate and maintain 80% capacity after 4729 cycles at 2C/2C rate”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a sodium-ion cell that has been previously charged and discharged, and therefore is not capable of being charged to the expected charge capacity.
Regarding Claim 24, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 23.
Zhou further teaches in which the sodium-ion battery is not capable of being charged to from ≥80% to 100% of a battery Vmax (see Page 1 quoted above).
Regarding Claim 30, Zhou teaches the process according to claim 17.
Zhou does not explicitly teach in which step c) comprises the use of a removable shorting device, however Zhou teaches the use of a removable shorting device to test the battery for a short circuit test (Fig. 2(a) and [Page 3 Col 2] “Firstly, the fully charged battery shows no fire and no smoke after a direct external short-circuit”); and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a similar device to overdischarge the battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIMAN BICKIYA whose telephone number is (571)270-0555. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 6 PM 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/A.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights