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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group A (perfluoralkyl halide according to Formula I) (Claims 1-5 and 8-15) in the reply filed on 12/15/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there must be a patenable difference between the species as claimed. This is not found persuasive because Formula I as shown in Claim 3 and Formula II as shown in Claim 6 are structurally and chemically distinct from each other. They can be used to derive two different perfluoralkyl halide that requires different search strategies and/or classification to find.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4/18/23, 6/3/24, and 12/12/25 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 4/18/23. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-5 and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2021213743 A1 (hereinafter “WO’743”) in view of US 2021/0057723 A1 (hereinafter “US’723”).
As to Claim 1:
WO’743 discloses:
an electrolyte composition for an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium-ion battery employing a liquid electrolyte (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 7–9). Lithium is an alkali metal, satisfying the claimed metal selection (p. 9, lines 6–7);
the electrolyte composition comprises a first solvent, namely a solvent mixture including fluorinated ether compounds and non-fluorinated ether compounds forming a liquid electrolyte (p. 9, lines 21–30);
a salt of the alkali metal, specifically a lithium salt (LiFSI), present in the electrolyte and dissolved in the solvent system (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 30–31), thereby teaching a metal salt soluble in the first solvent;
the electrolyte composition may comprise an additive, such as a film-forming additive included in the liquid electrolyte (p. 9, lines 23–31); and
the molar concentration of the lithium salt in the liquid electrolyte is from 1 M to 3 M, which encompasses the claimed concentration range of between 2 M and 3 M (p. 9, lines 6–8).
However, WO’743 does not disclose that the additive is a perfluorinated organic compound comprising at least one halogen atom selected from chlorine, bromine, or iodine, as required by Claim 1. The additives disclosed in WO’743 are described as film-forming additives and ionic liquids, but are not described as perfluorinated organic compounds containing Cl, Br, or I.
US’723 discloses the use of perfluorinated organic compounds containing halogen atoms as components added to or mixed into electrolyte compositions. In particular, US’723 teaches iodo-fluorocarbon compounds such as C₄F₉I and C₆F₁₃I, which are perfluorinated organic compounds comprising iodine, a halogen expressly recited in Claim 1 ([0010]; [0012]).
US’723 further teaches that such halogenated perfluorinated compounds may be dissolved in or mixed with an electrolyte for use in battery systems ([0013]–[0016]), thereby teaching the missing additive limitation of Claim 1.
WO’743 and US’723 are analogous art because both references are directed to electrolyte compositions for rechargeable battery systems, and both address the formulation of liquid electrolytes containing salts, solvents, and additives to improve battery performance and stability. A person of ordinary skill in the art of battery electrolyte design would reasonably look to US’723 for teachings regarding alternative electrolyte additives suitable for incorporation into the electrolyte system of WO’743.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by incorporating the perfluorinated halogen-containing organic additives taught by US’723, such as iodo-fluorocarbons, into the electrolyte of the anode-free lithium battery disclosed in WO’743. Doing so would result in an electrolyte composition comprising a solvent, a lithium salt at a concentration between 2 M and 3 M, and a perfluorinated organic additive containing a halogen selected from chlorine, bromine, or iodine, as recited in Claim 1.
As to Claim 2:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium-ion battery employing a liquid electrolyte (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 7–9). WO’743 further discloses that the metal of the battery system is lithium, which is an alkali metal, and that the electrolyte contains a lithium salt, such as LiFSI, dissolved in the electrolyte solvent system (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 30–31). WO’743 therefore teaches an electrolyte composition in which the metal is lithium, the salt is a lithium salt, and the battery cell is a lithium-metal battery cell, as recited in Claim 2.
As to Claim 3:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free lithium battery comprising a first solvent, a lithium salt dissolved in the solvent, and optional additives included in the liquid electrolyte (p. 9, lines 21–31; p. 16, lines 30–31). WO’743 thus teaches the use of additives in the electrolyte composition of an anode-free metal battery cell.
However, WO’743 does not disclose that the additive is a perfluoroalkyl halide having the structure defined by Formula 1, nor does WO’743 disclose that the additive comprises halogen atoms selected from chlorine, bromine, or iodine, as required by Claim 3.
US’723 discloses perfluoroalkyl halide compounds, including iodo-fluorocarbons such as C₄F₉I and C₆F₁₃I, which fall within the scope of the claimed Formula 1, where X and/or Y are halogen atoms and the carbon backbone is fully fluorinated ([0010]; [0012]). US’723 further teaches that such perfluoroalkyl halides may be dissolved in or mixed with an electrolyte and used as electrolyte additives in metal battery systems ([0013]–[0016]).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by incorporating the perfluoroalkyl halide additives taught by US’723, thereby arriving at an electrolyte composition comprising a perfluoroalkyl halide additive according to Formula 1 as recited in Claim 3.
As to Claim 4:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery, comprising a liquid electrolyte that includes a solvent system, a lithium salt dissolved therein, and one or more additives included in the electrolyte formulation (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 9, lines 21–31; p. 16, lines 7–9). WO’743 therefore teaches an electrolyte composition comprising an additive suitable for use in an anode-free metal battery cell.
However, WO’743 does not disclose that the additive is a perfluoroalkyl iodide, nor does WO’743 disclose that both halogen substituents (X and Y) are iodine, as required by Claim 4.
US’723 discloses perfluoroalkyl iodide compounds, specifically iodo-fluorocarbons such as C₄F₉I and C₆F₁₃I, which are perfluoroalkyl compounds in which the halogen substituent is iodine ([0010]; [0012]). US’723 further teaches that these perfluoroalkyl iodides may be dissolved in or mixed with an electrolyte and used as additives in electrolyte compositions for metal battery systems ([0013]–[0016]). These teachings correspond directly to the limitation of Claim 4 requiring that the additive be a perfluoroalkyl iodide.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by selecting a perfluoroalkyl iodide additive, as taught by US’723.
As to Claim 5:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free lithium battery comprising a solvent system, a lithium salt dissolved therein, and optional additives included in the electrolyte formulation (p. 9, lines 21–31).
However, WO’743 does not disclose additives selected from the group consisting of 1-iodoperfluorobutane, 1,4-diiodoperfluorobutane, 1-iodoperfluorohexane, 1,6-diiodoperfluorohexane, and 1,8-diiodoperfluorooctane, as required by Claim 5.
US’723 discloses perfluoroalkyl iodide compounds as electrolyte additives, including C₄F₉I (iodoperfluorobutane) and C₆F₁₃I (iodoperfluorohexane) ([0010]–[0012]). US’723 further teaches that perfluorinated halogenated compounds of varying chain lengths may be selected based on desired electrolyte properties such as stability, solubility, and performance, indicating that chain length and degree of halogenation are adjustable parameters for tuning additive behavior in the electrolyte ([0015]–[0016]).
In view of this teaching, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that modifying the perfluoroalkyl iodide structure by adjusting carbon chain length and halogen substitution, including introducing a second iodine atom, represents a predictable variation for optimizing physical properties such as boiling point, solubility, and interfacial behavior in the electrolyte. Such structural modifications fall within routine experimentation when selecting fluorinated electrolyte additives.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by incorporating specific perfluoroalkyl iodide additives, such as iodoperfluorobutane or iodoperfluorohexane as taught by US’723, and to select closely related mono- and diiodo perfluoroalkyl species, including those recited in Claim 5, as predictable variants based on routine optimization of known additive parameters.
As to Claim 8:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery, comprising a solvent system, a lithium salt dissolved therein, and one or more additives included in the electrolyte formulation (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 9, lines 21–31). WO’743 further teaches that additives may be incorporated into the electrolyte in effective amounts sufficient to provide desired electrolyte properties, such as interfacial stabilization and performance enhancement (p. 9, lines 23–31).
However, WO’743 does not expressly disclose that the additive is present in an amount between 0.01 and 20 percent by weight, based on the total weight of the electrolyte, as specifically recited in Claim 8.
US’723 discloses that halogenated perfluorinated organic additives may be added to electrolyte compositions in weight percentage ranges suitable for achieving desired electrolyte and battery performance, including ranges that overlap with and encompass 0.01 to 20 wt% of the electrolyte composition ([0013]–[0016]). US’723 thus teaches the missing quantitative limitation regarding the additive concentration by weight.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by selecting an additive concentration within the 0.01 to 20 wt% range taught by US’723.
As to Claim 9:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free lithium battery comprising a first solvent, where the solvent system includes ether-based solvents and fluorinated ether compounds forming a liquid electrolyte suitable for dissolving a lithium salt (p. 9, lines 21–30; p. 16, lines 21–30). Ethers are expressly recited in Claim 9 as one of the solvent classes.
As to Claim 10:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery, comprising a liquid electrolyte including a solvent system, a lithium salt dissolved therein, and optional additives (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 9, lines 21–31; p. 16, lines 7–9). WO’743 further discloses that the electrolyte composition may include ionic liquid components, particularly in combination with lithium salts such as LiFSI, thereby teaching the use of fluorinated sulfonylimide-based ionic species within the electrolyte formulation (p. 9, lines 23–31; p. 16, lines 30–31).
However, WO’743 does not expressly disclose that the first solvent itself is an ionic liquid, nor does WO’743 expressly identify the specific ionic liquid cation classes recited in Claim 10 (pyrrolidinium, piperidinium, imidazolium, or cyclic saturated ammonium), or the ionic liquid anions FSI or TFSI, as components of the primary solvent.
US’723 discloses electrolyte compositions employing ionic liquid-type solvents, including systems comprising nitrogen-containing organic cations and fluorinated sulfonylimide anions, such as TFSI, which are recognized for high electrochemical stability and compatibility with lithium salts ([0009]; [0013]–[0016]). US’723 teaches that such ionic liquid systems may function as the principal electrolyte medium rather than merely as minor additives, particularly in demanding battery environments.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that, in high-voltage or anode-free battery systems, where electrolyte stability is critical, it is a common and predictable optimization to employ a known stable additive class (ionic liquids) as the primary solvent to suppress electrolyte decomposition, improve interfacial stability, and enhance cycling performance. Thus, using an ionic liquid solvent comprising a nitrogen-containing cation and an FSI or TFSI anion, as taught by US’723, in place of or in addition to conventional organic solvents in the electrolyte of WO’743 represents a routine design choice.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by selecting an ionic liquid as the first solvent, comprising a nitrogen-containing organic cation and a fluorinated sulfonylimide anion (FSI or TFSI), as taught by US’723.
As to Claim 11:
WO’743 discloses an electrolyte composition for an anode-free lithium battery comprising a solvent system that includes fluorinated ether compounds and non-fluorinated ether compounds forming a liquid electrolyte suitable for dissolving a lithium salt (p. 9, lines 21–30; p. 16, lines 21–30). These fluorinated ether compounds function as co-solvents within the electrolyte system.
However, WO’743 does not expressly disclose that the electrolyte composition further comprises a second solvent that is specifically a hydrofluoroether or a partially fluorinated alkyl ether, as recited in Claim 11.
US’723 discloses that electrolyte compositions may include fluorinated organic solvents, including partially fluorinated alkyl ethers, used alone or in combination with other solvents to tailor electrolyte properties ([0013]–[0016]). US’723 further teaches that such fluorinated ether solvents may be added as secondary solvents to improve compatibility with electrolyte additives and metal battery chemistries.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the electrolyte composition of WO’743 by further comprising a second solvent selected from hydrofluoroethers or partially fluorinated alkyl ethers, as taught by US’723.
As to Claim 12:
WO’743 discloses an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery, comprising a cathode, a current collector, and a liquid electrolyte composition (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 7–9). WO’743 further discloses that the electrolyte employed in the anode-free battery cell comprises a solvent system, a lithium salt dissolved in the solvent, and optional additives suitable for stabilizing the electrolyte and battery performance (p. 9, lines 21–31; p. 16, lines 30–31). Lithium is an alkali metal, thereby satisfying the claimed requirement that the metal is an alkali metal. Accordingly, WO’743 teaches an anode-free metal battery cell comprising the electrolyte composition of claim 1.
However, WO’743 does not expressly disclose that the anode-free metal battery cell may alternatively employ metals other than lithium, such as alkaline earth metals or Group IIIa metals, as broadly recited in Claim 12.
US’723 discloses electrolyte compositions and additives that are suitable for use in metal battery systems generally, without limitation to lithium-only batteries, and teaches applicability to a range of metal-based electrochemical cells where electrolyte formulation and additive selection are relevant ([0002]–[0004]). These teachings indicate that the disclosed electrolyte compositions and additives are not limited to lithium systems and may be employed in batteries using other metals, including alkaline earth or Group IIIa metals.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to apply the electrolyte composition of WO’743, which is expressly disclosed for anode-free lithium battery cells, to other anode-free metal battery cells using alkali metals, alkaline earth metals, or Group IIIa metals, as suggested by the broadly applicable electrolyte teachings of US’723.
As to Claim 13:
WO’743 discloses an anode-free lithium-metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery employing a liquid electrolyte composition comprising a solvent system, a lithium salt, and optional additives (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 7–9). The lithium battery disclosed in WO’743 is therefore a lithium-metal battery cell.
As to Claim 14:
WO’743 discloses an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery, employing a liquid electrolyte composition comprising a solvent system, a lithium salt dissolved therein, and optional additives (p. 9, lines 6–8; p. 16, lines 7–9). WO’743 further discloses that the anode-less lithium battery is a rechargeable battery system, as evidenced by repeated descriptions of cycling behavior, charge–discharge operation, and performance evaluation of the battery over multiple cycles (p. 16, lines 7–9; p. 17, lines 1–10). A rechargeable battery is a secondary battery cell.
As to Claim 15:
WO’743 discloses an anode-free metal battery cell, specifically an anode-less lithium battery, in which no active anode material is present prior to cycling, and lithium is plated and stripped during battery operation (p. 16, lines 7–9). In such an anode-less configuration, the anode side necessarily comprises a current collector without active anode material, i.e., a bare current collector, on which lithium metal is deposited during charging.
However, WO’743 does not explicitly state that the anode comprises a “bare current collector” using that exact terminology.
US’723 discloses metal battery systems and electrolyte compositions intended for use in configurations where metal is plated onto a substrate during battery operation, implying the use of a current collector surface without pre-existing active anode material ([0003]; [0013]–[0016]). These teachings confirm that anode-free or anode-less battery systems employ bare current collectors as the anode substrate prior to metal deposition.
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to configure the anode-free metal battery cell of WO’743 such that the anode comprises a bare current collector, as confirmed by the metal-plating battery teachings of US’723.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2019/0372466 A1 discloses fluorinated electrolyte additives including iodine-containing fluorocarbons.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY K VO whose telephone number is (571)272-3242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 am to 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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/JIMMY VO/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/JIMMY VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723