Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/331,665

ELECTROLYTE, SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING SUCH ELECTROLYTE, AND PREPARATION METHOD OF SUCH SECONDARY BATTERY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 08, 2023
Examiner
AMPONSAH, OSEI K
Art Unit
1752
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
CONTEMPORARY AMPEREX TECHNOLOGY CO., LIMITED
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
488 granted / 680 resolved
+6.8% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+34.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
68 currently pending
Career history
748
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
66.1%
+26.1% vs TC avg
§102
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§112
9.1%
-30.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 680 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12-04-2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment Upon consideration, the previous rejection of record was withdrawn in light of new amendments.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, see pages 6-9 of Remarks, filed 12-04-2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 9, 12, 14-15, and 20-21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2011/0200864 and US 2020/0243911. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12-24-2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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) 9, 12, 14, 15, and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2019/0006635 hereinafter Kim in view of JP 2016-186915 A hereinafter Yoshida, U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2011/0200864 hereinafter Dai and U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2020/0243911 hereinafter Kuwajima. Regarding Claims 9, 12, 21, 22 and 23, Kim teaches a method for preparing a lithium secondary battery, the method comprising: forming a first electrolyte solution that comprises a lithium (electrolyte) salt [LiPF6] and organic solvent (paragraphs 124-125); forming a second electrolyte solution that comprises a lithium (electrolyte) salt [LiPF6] and organic solvent (paragraph 126); and injecting the first electrolyte solution into the battery, then after formation, injecting the second electrolyte solution into the battery (paragraph 126). Kim does not specifically disclose that the first electrolyte solution comprises an additive (i.e., MSO3F [wherein M is Na, K, Rb, or Cs]), and the amount of the additive in the electrolyte. However, Yoshida teaches a method for preparing a secondary battery (see Examples 1-4), the method comprising forming an electrolyte solution that includes a non-aqueous solvent, an electrolyte salt, and an additive (NaFSO3) (see compound represented by general formula 1). Yoshida further teaches that the additive (NaFSO3) is included in an amount of 0.1 to 5 wt% based on the total amount of the electrolyte solution. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use such additive (NaFSO3) in the first electrolyte solution before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Yoshida discloses that such amount of NaFSO3 can improve the battery characteristics. The combination does not specify that the additive is MFSO3, wherein M is Rb (i.e., RbFSO3). However, Dai teaches an electrolyte for a secondary battery and a method for preparing the electrolyte, wherein the electrolyte comprises an additive such as RbFSO3 or NaFSO3 (paragraph 36). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use RbFSO3 as the additive in the electrolyte solution before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Dai discloses that such additive can improve the ionic conductivity of the electrolyte (paragraph 36). The use of a known technique (i.e., using RbFSO3 as the additive in the electrolyte solution) to improve similar methods (or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S._,_, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 - 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.). The combination of Kim and Yoshida teaches that the electrolyte solution comprises an electrolyte salt such as LiPF6 or LiFSI at a concentration of 0.3 to 3 mol/L (see electrolyte (lithium) salts in Yoshida) but does not specifically disclose that the electrolyte salt is LiTFSI. However, Kuwajima teaches an electrolyte solution for a secondary battery and a method for preparing the electrolyte solution, wherein the electrolyte solution comprises lithium fluorosulfate and LiN(CF3SO2)2 [LiTFSI] as the imide salt (paragraph 209). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include LiTFSI as the imide salt in the electrolyte solution before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Kuwajima discloses that such configuration can achieve an effect of improving properties such as output characteristics, high-rate charge and discharge characteristics, high-temperature storage characteristics, and cycle characteristics (paragraph 212). Regarding Claim 14, the combination teaches that the first lithium (electrolyte) salt and the second lithium (electrolyte) salt each independently comprise LiPF6 (paragraphs 124 and 126 of Kim). Regarding Claim 15, the combination teaches that the second electrolyte solution comprises a phosphoric or sulfonic ester (paragraphs 44, 69 of Kim). Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 08, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 14, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 02, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 04, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586819
Non-Aqueous Electrolyte and Lithium Secondary Battery Including the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580223
STABILIZED SOLID GARNET ELECTROLYTE AND METHODS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573615
All-Solid-State Battery and Method of Manufacturing the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573717
MICROPOROUS MEMBRANES, SEPARATORS, LITHIUM BATTERIES, AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567648
EXPLOSIVE ENVIRONMENT NEUTRALIZATION IN CHEMICAL ENERGY STORAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 680 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month