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 .
Response to Amendment
Upon consideration, the previous rejection of record was withdrawn in light of new amendments. However new rejection is applied to the amended claims. All changes made in the rejection are necessitated by the amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 11, 15, 18-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 11, 15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mengyun Nie et al. “Lithium Ion Battery Graphite Solid Electrolyte Interphase Revealed by Microscopy and Spectroscopy, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, Volume 117, Issue 3, 2013” hereinafter Nie [cited in IDS filed 03-26-2024] in view of JP 2022089412 A [English equivalent US 2022/0181694] hereinafter Nagaya, U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2019/0140321 hereinafter Ahn and U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2007/0117012 hereinafter Xiao and U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2009/0311611 hereinafter Wu.
Regarding Claim 1, Nie teaches a method for preparing a solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) component additive comprising: reacting a tetrahydrofuran (THF) solution of lithium naphthalenide with ethylene carbonate at a 1:1 mole ratio in an inert atmosphere; and drying the mixture in vacuum to obtain the solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) component additive (see page 1259).
Nie does not specifically disclose that the solvent is a mixed solvent that comprises ethylene carbonate, methyl ethyl carbonate, and dimethyl carbonate as claimed.
However, Nagaya teaches an electrolyte solution comprising a liquid composition, wherein the liquid composition includes lithium naphthalenide (paragraphs 46-47) in a mixed solvent including ethylene carbonate, ethyl methyl carbonate, and dimethyl carbonate (paragraph 59). Nagaya further teaches that the content of the electrolyte solution in the composition is 30% by volume or more and 50% by volume or less (paragraph 57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form such electrolyte composition including the mixed solvent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Nagaya discloses that such configuration can improve charge/discharge cycle characteristics of the battery (paragraphs 62-64).
The combination does not specifically disclose the method further comprises dissolving the SEI additive in the non-aqueous solvent of the electrolyte, wherein the SEI additive is added in an amount of 0.1 to 0.3 wt % based on the total weight of the electrolyte.
However, Ahn teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte for a lithium secondary battery and a method for forming the electrolyte, the method comprising: mixing the SEI additive in the electrolyte solution at an amount of 0.1 to 5 wt % based on the total weight of the electrolyte (paragraphs 75-76). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to dissolve such amount of the SEI additive in the electrolyte solution before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Ahn discloses that such configuration can suppress a side reaction in the electrolyte to excessively occur upon charging and discharging of the battery (paragraph 76).
The combination does not specify the reaction temperature and the reaction time in reaction step as claimed, and the drying temperature for the mixture under vacuum.
However, Xiao teaches a method for a preparing an electrolyte solution, the method comprising: mixing an organic solvent with an additive; and heating the mixture at temperature of 30 to 90 oC (preferably 45 to 70 oC) for about 5 to 60 minutes (paragraph 31). Xiao further teaches heating (drying ) the mixture under vacuum condition (paragraph 31). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use such reaction and drying conditions before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Xiao discloses that such configuration can improve rate of dissolving for the additive and also help the additive dissolve quickly (paragraph 31).
The use of a known technique (i.e., dissolving 0.1 to 5 wt % of the SEI additive in the electrolyte solution, and using such reaction and drying conditions) to improve similar methods (products) in the same way is likely to be obvious (see MPEP § 2143 C).
The combination teaches the lithium salt is added at 1 to 10 parts by weight and the additive (vinylene carbonate) is added at 0.1 to 5 parts by weight (paragraph 28 of Wu).
Regarding Claims 2 and 4, the combination teaches a mixed solvent that comprises ethylene carbonate, ethyl methyl carbonate, and dimethyl carbonate as described above (see Examples 1-2 of Nagaya). A rationale to support a conclusion that a claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP §§ 2143 and 2143.02).
Regarding Claims 5 and 7-9, the combination teaches a method of preparing an organic solution of lithium naphthalenide by mixing lithium metal to an organic solution containing naphthalene in an inert atmosphere (see Examples 1-2 of Nagaya and Xiao above). A rationale to support a conclusion that a claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP §§ 2143 and 2143.02).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination teaches an electrolyte solution comprising the liquid composition and electrolyte solution as described above (see the combination described above).
Regarding Claims 15 and 18-20, the combination teaches a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode; a negative electrode; a separator disposed between the electrodes; and the electrolyte solution described above (see the combination above).
The combination further teaches a power device comprising a battery pack including the lithium-ion battery described above (see Nie and Nagaya).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSEI K AMPONSAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 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, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571)272-8760. 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.
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752