DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of species A (exemplified by claims 1, 2, 4-7, and 15-21) and species C (exemplified by claims 8, 9, and 11-14) in the reply filed on 4/29/26 is acknowledged.
3. Claims 3 and 10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/29/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 9, 11-13, and 15-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allie et al. (US2017/0179472).
Regarding claim 1, Allie discloses an oxide solid electrolyte represented by General Formula (I) (low melting point electrolyte [0050]-[0051]), Aa Bb Oc Xd (I) in General Formula (I), A represents at least one selected from the group consisting of Li (lithium tetraborate, [0051]), X represents at least one selected from the group consisting of S (silicon doped [0051]), a represents the number of moles of each element represented by A and satisfies 1.75 < a < 2.45 (lithium tetraborate is Li2 B4 O7 [0051]), b satisfies 3.75 < b <4.25 (lithium tetraborate is Li2 B4 O7 [0051]), c satisfies 6.50 < c < 10.00 (lithium tetraborate is Li2 B4 O7 [0051]), and d represents a total number of moles of elements represented by X and satisfies 0.1 to about 20 atomic percent ([0050]) which overlaps the claim range of 0 < d < 0.50, thus reading on the limitation.
Allie is explicitly silent to the claim range however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 2, Allie discloses the low melting point electrolytes may have low ionic conductivities, their low melting temperatures make them suitable for effectively bonding with and forming low ionic impedance interfaces with lithium active battery materials and with other, faster lithium ion conductive materials([0056]). Allie discloses the low melting temperature electrolyte serves as a glue which, when melted, flows between powder particles and establishes good contacts ([0056]) but does not explicitly disclose the oxide solid electrolyte satisfies the following requirements 1-1 and 1-2, the requirement 1-1: in a reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the oxide solid electrolyte obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, a first peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 1.43 ± 0.2 Å and a second peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 2.40 ± 0.2 Å are present, and G(r) of the peak top of the first peak and G(r) of the peak top of the second peak indicate more than 1.0, and the requirement 1-2: in the reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the oxide solid electrolyte obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, an absolute value of G(r) is less than 1.0 in a range where r is more than 5 Å and 10 Å or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the oxide solid electrolyte of Allie with the oxide solid electrolyte satisfies the following requirements 1-1 and 1-2, the requirement 1-1: in a reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the oxide solid electrolyte obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, a first peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 1.43 ± 0.2 Å and a second peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 2.40 ± 0.2 Å are present, and G(r) of the peak top of the first peak and G(r) of the peak top of the second peak indicate more than 1.0, and the requirement 1-2: in the reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the oxide solid electrolyte obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, an absolute value of G(r) is less than 1.0 in a range where r is more than 5 Å and 10 Å or less in order to balance effectively bonding with and forming low ionic impedance interfaces with lithium active battery materials and flow between powder particles and good contacts, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 4, Allie discloses low melting point materials may be heated to a molten or near molten state and interfaced with lithium active materials without the inter-atomic migration problems typically associated with high temperature sintering([0056]). Allie discloses such electrolytes are thus included in the electrode to serve as a binding agent or sintering aid for the active material and other components of the electrode([0056]) but does not explicitly disclose a proportion of a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where a solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 120° C. is 70% or less with respect to a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where the solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 20° C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the oxide solid electrolyte of Allie with a proportion of a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where a solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 120° C. is 70% or less with respect to a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where the solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 20° C in order to balance interatomic migration problems and serving as a binding agent for the active material and other components of the electrode, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 5, Allie discloses amorphous or glass-ceramic lithium ion conductive inorganic electrolytes comprising doped metal oxides containing boron and/or carbon ([0051]) but does not explicitly disclose a coefficient of determination is 0.9400 or more, where the coefficient of determination is obtained by carrying out a linear regression analysis according to a least squares method in a wave number range of 600 to 850 cm-1 in a Raman spectrum.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the oxide solid electrolyte of Allie with a coefficient of determination is 0.9400 or more, where the coefficient of determination is obtained by carrying out a linear regression analysis according to a least squares method in a wave number range of 600 to 850 cm-1 in a Raman spectrum since the low melting point electrolytes are amorphous or glass-ceramic lithium ion conductive inorganic electrolytes.
Regarding claim 6, Allie discloses the low melting temperature electrolyte serves as a glue which, when melted, flows between powder particles and establishes good contacts ([0056]) but does not explicitly disclose a bulk elastic modulus measured by an ultrasonic attenuation method is 45 GPa or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the oxide solid electrolyte of Allie with a bulk elastic modulus measured by an ultrasonic attenuation method is 45 GPa or less in order to balance melt flow and good contacts, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 8, Allie discloses a binder represented by General Formula (I) (low melting point electrolyte which acts as a binder, abstract, [0050]-[0051], [0056]), Aa Bb Oc Xd (I) in General Formula (I), A represents at least one selected from the group consisting of Li (lithium tetraborate, [0051]), X represents at least one selected from the group consisting of S (silicon doped [0051]), a represents the number of moles of each element represented by A and satisfies 1.75 < a < 2.45 (lithium tetraborate is Li2 B4 O7 [0051]), b satisfies 3.75 < b <4.25 (lithium tetraborate is Li2 B4 O7 [0051]), c satisfies 6.50 < c < 10.00 (lithium tetraborate is Li2 B4 O7 [0051]), and d represents a total number of moles of elements represented by X and satisfies 0.1 to about 20 atomic percent ([0050]) which overlaps the claim range of 0 < d < 0.50, thus reading on the limitation.
Allie is explicitly silent to the claim range however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 9, Allie discloses the low melting point electrolytes may have low ionic conductivities, their low melting temperatures make them suitable for effectively bonding with and forming low ionic impedance interfaces with lithium active battery materials and with other, faster lithium ion conductive materials([0056]). Allie discloses the low melting temperature electrolyte serves as a glue which, when melted, flows between powder particles and establishes good contacts ([0056]) but does not explicitly disclose the binder satisfies the following requirements 1-1 and 1-2, the requirement 1-1: in a reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the binder obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, a first peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 1.43 ± 0.2 Å and a second peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 2.40 ± 0.2 Å are present, and G(r) of the peak top of the first peak and G(r) of the peak top of the second peak indicate more than 1.0, and the requirement 1-2: in the reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the binder obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, an absolute value of G(r) is less than 1.0 in a range where r is more than 5 Å and 10 Å or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the binder of Allie with the binder satisfies the following requirements 1-1 and 1-2, the requirement 1-1: in a reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the binder obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, a first peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 1.43 ± 0.2 Å and a second peak of which a peak top is located in a range where r is 2.40 ± 0.2 Å are present, and G(r) of the peak top of the first peak and G(r) of the peak top of the second peak indicate more than 1.0, and the requirement 1-2: in the reduced two-body distribution function G(r) of the binder obtained from an X-ray total scattering measurement, an absolute value of G(r) is less than 1.0 in a range where r is more than 5 Å and 10 Å or less in order to balance effectively bonding with and forming low ionic impedance interfaces with lithium active battery materials and flow between powder particles and good contacts, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 11, Allie discloses low melting point materials may be heated to a molten or near molten state and interfaced with lithium active materials without the inter-atomic migration problems typically associated with high temperature sintering([0056]). Allie discloses such electrolytes are thus included in the electrode to serve as a binding agent or sintering aid for the active material and other components of the electrode([0056]) but does not explicitly disclose a proportion of a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where a solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 120° C. is 70% or less with respect to a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where the solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 20° C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the binder of Allie with a proportion of a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where a solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 120° C. is 70% or less with respect to a full width at half maximum of a peak in which a chemical shift appears in a range of -100 to +100 ppm in a spectrum obtained in a case where the solid 7Li-NMR measurement is carried out at 20° C in order to balance interatomic migration problems and serving as a binding agent for the active material and other components of the electrode, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 12, Allie discloses amorphous or glass-ceramic lithium ion conductive inorganic electrolytes comprising doped metal oxides containing boron and/or carbon ([0051]) but does not explicitly disclose a coefficient of determination is 0.9400 or more, where the coefficient of determination is obtained by carrying out a linear regression analysis according to a least squares method in a wave number range of 600 to 850 cm-1 in a Raman spectrum.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the binder of Allie with a coefficient of determination is 0.9400 or more, where the coefficient of determination is obtained by carrying out a linear regression analysis according to a least squares method in a wave number range of 600 to 850 cm-1 in a Raman spectrum since the low melting point electrolytes are amorphous or glass-ceramic lithium ion conductive inorganic electrolytes.
Regarding claim 13, Allie discloses the low melting temperature electrolyte serves as a glue which, when melted, flows between powder particles and establishes good contacts ([0056]) but does not explicitly disclose a bulk elastic modulus measured by an ultrasonic attenuation method is 45 GPa or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the binder of Allie with a bulk elastic modulus measured by an ultrasonic attenuation method is 45 GPa or less in order to balance melt flow and good contacts, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 15, Allie discloses a solid electrolyte layer that is located between a positive electrode and a negative electrode and contains the oxide solid electrolyte according to claim 1(separator with low melting temperature electrolyte, [0075]-[0077], [0087]).
Regarding claim 16, Allie discloses an active material that is an active material for an all-solid state secondary battery([0049], [0087]), wherein at least a part of a surface of the active material is coated with a coating layer containing the oxide solid electrolyte according to claim 1([0073]).
Regarding claim 17, Allie discloses an electrode for an all-solid state secondary battery([0073], [0087]), comprising: an active material layer containing an active material and the oxide solid electrolyte according to claim 1([0049], [0062], [0073]-[0074]); and a collector([0062], [0074]).
Regarding claim 18, Allie discloses an electrode for an all-solid state secondary battery([0073], [0087]), comprising: an active material layer containing the active material for an all-solid state secondary battery according to claim 16([0049]); and a collector([0062], [0074]).
Regarding claim 19, Allie discloses an all-solid state secondary battery ([0087]) comprising: a positive electrode([0087]), a negative electrode([0087]-[0088]); and a solid electrolyte layer that is located between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (separator, [0087], [0075]-[0077]), wherein at least one of the positive electrode([0073]), or the solid electrolyte layer contains the oxide solid electrolyte according to claim 1([0075]-[0077]).
Regarding claim 20, Allie discloses an all-solid state secondary battery ([0087]) comprising: a positive electrode([0087]), a negative electrode([0087]-[0088]); and a solid electrolyte layer(separator, [0087], [0075]-[0077]), wherein the solid electrolyte layer is located between the positive electrode and the negative electrode and contains the oxide solid electrolyte according to claim 1([0087], [0075]-[0077]).
Regarding claim 21, Allie discloses at least one of the positive electrode or the negative electrode is an electrode for an all-solid state secondary battery ([0087]) comprising: an active material layer containing an active material and the oxide solid electrolyte according to claim 1([0073]); and a collector([0074]).
8. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allie et al. (US2017/0179472) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Koep (US 2016/0118693).
Regarding claim 7, Allie does not explicitly disclose the X includes at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br, I, Se, Te, and H and at least one selected from the group consisting of C, P, S, and N.
Koep teaches an intercalated lithium battery that has been fabricated in open air with a thin dense layer of amorphous solid-state lithium borate electrolyte deposited directly onto a negative electrode via flame spray pyrolysis (abstract). Koep teaches the lithium borate electrolyte is doped with at least one of phosphorous, sulfur or selenium(claim 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the oxide solid electrolyte of Allie with the X includes at least one selected from the group consisting of Se, and at least one selected from the group consisting of P and S as taught by Koep as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
9. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allie et al. (US2017/0179472) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Koep (US 2016/0118693).
Regarding claim 14, Allie does not explicitly disclose the X includes at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br, I, Se, Te, and H and at least one selected from the group consisting of C, P, S, and N.
Koep teaches an intercalated lithium battery that has been fabricated in open air with a thin dense layer of amorphous solid-state lithium borate electrolyte deposited directly onto a negative electrode via flame spray pyrolysis (abstract). Koep teaches the lithium borate electrolyte is doped with at least one of phosphorous, sulfur or selenium(claim 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the binder of Allie with the X includes at least one selected from the group consisting of Se, and at least one selected from the group consisting of P and S as taught by Koep as obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA HOM LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-0489. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:30 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.
/VICTORIA H LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights