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 .
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.
Claim 10 is 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.
Claim 10 states that the second crystal phase belongs to C2/m or P21/c. However, Claim 8 (from which Claim 10 depends) states that the solid electrolyte material includes a first crystal phase belonging to P21/c and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase. Therefore, Claim 10 is rendered particularly indefinite insofar as it is unclear how the second crystal phase could belong to P21/c when the first crystal phase is already required to belong P21/c (per Claim 8) and the second crystal phase is already required to be different from the first crystal phase (per Claim 8). Proper clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-7, 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugimoto et al. (WO 2019/146296, using the equivalent US 2020/0350621 for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 1, Sugimoto teaches a solid electrolyte material (“solid electrolyte material”) (Abstract). In an embodiment, Sugimoto teaches that the solid electrolyte material is represented by the composition formula LiαMβXγ, wherein α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, wherein “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and wherein “M” is a metal element (e.g. Al) from Group 13 of the periodic table (i.e. boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium) ([0017]-[0022], [0028], [0030]).
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach the instantly claimed compositional formula (1) (with the provision that 0 < a < 1, excluding a = 0.5, is satisfied, and the provision that “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I).
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 2, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 3, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 2, as previously described.
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 4, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 3, as previously described.
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 5, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 6, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 5, as previously described.
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 7, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Furthermore, and as previously described (See Claim 1), “X” may specifically include I because Sugimoto teaches that “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I.
Regarding Claim 12, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 1, Sugimoto teaches a battery (1000) (“battery”) comprising a positive electrode (101) (“positive electrode”), a negative electrode (103) (“negative electrode”), and an electrolyte layer (102) (“electrolyte layer”) disposed between said positive and negative electrodes ([0104]-[0106]). Sugimoto teaches that the positive electrode includes the solid electrolyte material therein, and also that the electrolyte layer may include the solid electrolyte material therein, and also that the negative electrode may include the solid electrolyte material therein (Abstract, [0110], [0114], [0143]).
Regarding Claim 13, Sugimoto teaches a battery (1000) (“battery”) comprising a positive electrode (101) (“positive electrode”), a negative electrode (103) (“negative electrode”), and an electrolyte layer (102) (“electrolyte layer”) disposed between said positive and negative electrodes ([0104]-[0106]). Sugimoto teaches that the positive electrode includes a solid electrolyte material therein, and also that the electrolyte layer may include the solid electrolyte material (“a compound”) therein with the provision that the electrolyte layer is formed only of the solid electrolyte material (wherein the electrolyte layer is considered to necessarily contain “20 mol% or more” of the solid electrolyte material given that the electrolyte layer is formed only of the solid electrolyte material (Abstract, [0110], [0114], [0138]). In an embodiment, Sugimoto teaches that the solid electrolyte material is represented by the composition formula LiαMβXγ, wherein α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, wherein “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and wherein “M” is a metal element (e.g. Al) from Group 13 of the periodic table (i.e. boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium) ([0017]-[0022], [0028], [0030]).
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach the instantly claimed compositional formula (2) (with the provision that 0 < b < 1 is satisfied).
However, the composition formula (i.e. LiαMβXγ) disclosed by Sugimoto is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (2) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Sugimoto (i.e. (A) α, β, and γ are each independently a value greater than 0, (B) “X” may specifically be I because “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I, and (C) “M” may specifically be Al because “M” may be specifically be a metal element from Group 13 of the periodic table, wherein Group 13 includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, and nihonium). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 14, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 13, as previously described.
As previously described (See Claim 13), the electrolyte layer is formed only of the solid electrolyte material (i.e. the electrolyte layer is considered to necessarily contain “50 mol% or more” of the solid electrolyte material given that the electrolyte layer is formed only of the solid electrolyte material).
Regarding Claim 15, Sugimoto teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 13, as previously described.
As previously described (See Claim 13), the electrolyte layer is formed only of the solid electrolyte material (“the electrolyte layer consists of the compound”).
Claims 1-7, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joshi et al. (US 4,307,163).
Regarding Claim 1, Joshi teaches a solid-state electrolyte (Abstract). In an embodiment, Joshi teaches that the solid-state electrolyte comprises a solid electrolyte material “A” and a solid electrolyte material “B” (“solid electrolyte material”), wherein the solid electrolyte material “B” is represented by the general formula LixM’’yXz, wherein “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, wherein “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), wherein “M’’” is an element (e.g. Al) from Group IIIA of the periodic table (i.e. boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium), and wherein “X” is halide atom that is advantageously “I” (col. 1 lines 24-61).
Joshi does not explicitly teach the instantly claimed compositional formula (1) (with the provision that 0 < a < 1, excluding a = 0.5, is satisfied, and the provision that “X” is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I).
However, the general formula (i.e. LixM’’yXz) disclosed by Joshi is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Joshi (i.e. (A) “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, (B) “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, (C) wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), (D) “M’’” may specifically be Al because “M’’” may be an element from Group IIIA of the periodic table which includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium, and (E) “X” may specifically be “I” because “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I”). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 2, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Joshi does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the general formula (i.e. LixM’’yXz) disclosed by Joshi (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Joshi (i.e. (A) “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, (B) “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, (C) wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), (D) “M’’” may specifically be Al because “M’’” may be an element from Group IIIA of the periodic table which includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium, and (E) “X” may specifically be “I” because “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I”). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 3, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 2, as previously described.
Joshi does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the general formula (i.e. LixM’’yXz) disclosed by Joshi (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Joshi (i.e. (A) “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, (B) “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, (C) wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), (D) “M’’” may specifically be Al because “M’’” may be an element from Group IIIA of the periodic table which includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium, and (E) “X” may specifically be “I” because “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I”). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 4, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 3, as previously described.
Joshi does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the general formula (i.e. LixM’’yXz) disclosed by Joshi (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Joshi (i.e. (A) “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, (B) “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, (C) wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), (D) “M’’” may specifically be Al because “M’’” may be an element from Group IIIA of the periodic table which includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium, and (E) “X” may specifically be “I” because “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I”). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 5, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Joshi does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the general formula (i.e. LixM’’yXz) disclosed by Joshi (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Joshi (i.e. (A) “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, (B) “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, (C) wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), (D) “M’’” may specifically be Al because “M’’” may be an element from Group IIIA of the periodic table which includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium, and (E) “X” may specifically be “I” because “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I”). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 6, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 5, as previously described.
Joshi does not explicitly teach that the instantly claimed inequality is satisfied.
However, the general formula (i.e. LixM’’yXz) disclosed by Joshi (See Claim 1) is considered to result in a formula overlapping the instantly claimed composition formula (1) when considering the aforementioned compositional/subscript limitations set forth by Joshi (i.e. (A) “x” = 0 or a number up to 1, (B) “y” = a number from 0.1 to 1, (C) wherein “z” = x + y(valence of M’’), (D) “M’’” may specifically be Al because “M’’” may be an element from Group IIIA of the periodic table which includes boron, aluminum, gallium, indium, thallium, nihonium, and (E) “X” may specifically be “I” because “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I”). It is noted that in the case where the claimed range(s) “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art,” a prima facie case of obviousness exists (See MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Regarding Claim 7, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Furthermore, and as previously described (See Claim 1), “X” may specifically include I because Joshi teaches that “X” is a halide atom that is advantageously “I.”
Regarding Claim 12, Joshi teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Joshi does not explicitly teach a battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and an electrolyte layer between the positive and negative electrodes, wherein at least one of said electrodes or electrolyte layer includes the solid electrolyte material “B” therein.
However, Joshi teaches that the solid-state electrolyte itself (wherein the solid electrolyte material “B” is comprised in the solid-state electrolyte) is intended for use as the electrolyte in a solid-state battery having a lithium-metal anode because its level of ionic conductivity makes it useful for powering micro-electronic items (col. 1 lines 5-20). Indeed, Joshi teaches embodiments wherein the solid-state electrolyte is used as an electrolyte layer positioned between positive and negative electrodes (See Examples I-III, col. 2 line 40 to col. 3 line 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would construct a solid-state battery (“battery”) comprising at least a positive electrode (“positive electrode”), a negative electrode (“negative electrode”), and an electrolyte layer (“electrolyte layer”) disposed between said electrodes, wherein the electrolyte layer is formed of the solid-state electrolyte (which comprises the solid electrolyte material “B” therein), as taught by Joshi, given not only because the Joshi teaches that the solid-state electrolyte itself is intended for use as the electrolyte in a solid-state battery, but also because such a battery would be specifically useful for powering micro-electronic items given the level of ionic conductivity exhibited by the solid-state electrolyte.
Claims 8, 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugimoto et al. (WO 2019/146296, using the equivalent US 2020/0350621 for citation purposes), and further in view of Asano et al. (WO 2018/025582, using the equivalent US 2022/0109185 for citation purposes) and Ogihara (US 2019/0123346).
Regarding Claim 8, Sugimoto teaches a solid electrolyte material (“solid electrolyte material”) (Abstract). In an embodiment, Sugimoto teaches that the solid electrolyte material is represented by LiaMebYcX6, wherein a + mb + 3c = 6, wherein c > 0, wherein Al is disclosed as an explicit example of Me, wherein m is a valence of Me, and wherein “X” is at least one of Cl, Br, and I) (“solid electrolyte material comprising Li, Al, and X’, wherein X’ is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I”) ([0022], [0034]-[0036]). Sugimoto teaches that the solid electrolyte material includes a crystal phase, wherein the crystal phase is determined by selecting the reaction method and the reaction conditions of the raw material powders utilized in forming the solid electrolyte material.
Sugimoto does not explicitly teach that the solid electrolyte material includes a first and second crystal phase, wherein the second crystal phase is different from the first crystal phase.
However, Asano teaches a solid electrolyte material for use in a solid-state secondary battery (Abstract, [0024]). Asano teaches that the solid electrolyte material includes a first crystal phase and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase, wherein the second crystal phase is disposed between two of said first crystal phases ([0026], [0047]-[0048]). Asano teaches that the by including such first and second crystal phases therein, the lithium ion conductivity characteristics of the solid electrolyte material are enhanced ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would form the solid electrolyte material of Sugimoto such that it includes a first crystal phase and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase, wherein the second crystal phase is disposed between two of said first crystal phases, as taught by Asano, given that the inclusion of such first and second crystal phases would help enhance the lithium ion conductivity characteristics of the solid electrolyte material.
Sugimoto, as modified by Asano, does not explicitly teach that the first crystal phase is P21/c.
However, Ogihara teaches an electrolyte for conducting alkali metal ions (Abstract, [0047]). Ogihara teaches that the electrolyte comprises a layered structure therein which preferably exhibits a monoclinic crystal structure belonging to the P21/c space group in order to increase structural stability ([0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the first crystal phase of Sugimoto, as modified by Asano, exhibits a monoclinic crystal structure belonging to the P21/c space group, as taught by Ogihara, given that such a monoclinic crystal structure would increase structural stability of the solid electrolyte material.
Regarding Claim 10, Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, does not explicitly teach that the second crystal phase belongs to C2/m.
However, Asano further teaches that the solid electrolyte material may exhibit, at least in part, a crystal phase belonging to the C2/m space group ([0027]). Asano teaches that the C2/m space group promotes the formation of lithium ion diffusion paths, thereby improving lithium ion conductivity ([0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the second crystal phase of Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, belongs to the C2/m space group, as taught by Asano, given that such a crystal structure would help promote the formation of lithium ion diffusion paths to thereby help improve lithium ion conductivity.
Regarding Claim 11, Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
As previously described, (See Claim 8), “X” may include “I” given that “X” is at least one of Cl, Br, and I.
Claims 8, 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joshi et al. (US 4,307,163), and further in view of Asano et al. (WO 2018/025582, using the equivalent US 2022/0109185 for citation purposes) and Ogihara (US 2019/0123346).
Regarding Claim 8, Joshi teaches a solid-state electrolyte (Abstract). In an embodiment, Joshi teaches that the solid-state electrolyte includes LiAlI4 therein (“solid electrolyte material comprising Li, Al, and X’, wherein X’ is at least one selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and I”) (See Example 3, col. 3 lines 5-14).
Joshi does not explicitly teach that the solid-state electrolyte material includes a first and second crystal phase, wherein the second crystal phase is different from the first crystal phase.
However, Asano teaches a solid electrolyte material for use in a solid-state secondary battery (Abstract, [0024]). Asano teaches that the solid electrolyte material includes a first crystal phase and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase, wherein the second crystal phase is disposed between two of said first crystal phases ([0026], [0047]-[0048]). Asano teaches that the by including such first and second crystal phases therein, the lithium ion conductivity characteristics of the solid electrolyte material are enhanced ([0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would form the solid-state electrolyte material of Joshi such that it includes a first crystal phase and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase, wherein the second crystal phase is disposed between two of said first crystal phases, as taught by Asano, given that the inclusion of such first and second crystal phases would help enhance the lithium ion conductivity characteristics of the solid-state electrolyte material.
Joshi, as modified by Asano, does not explicitly teach that the first crystal phase is P21/c.
However, Ogihara teaches an electrolyte for conducting alkali metal ions (Abstract, [0047]). Ogihara teaches that the electrolyte comprises a layered structure therein which preferably exhibits a monoclinic crystal structure belonging to the P21/c space group in order to increase structural stability ([0040]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the first crystal phase of Joshi, as modified by Asano, exhibits a monoclinic crystal structure belonging to the P21/c space group, as taught by Ogihara, given that such a monoclinic crystal structure would increase structural stability of the solid-state electrolyte material.
Regarding Claim 10, Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, does not explicitly teach that the second crystal phase belongs to C2/m.
However, Asano further teaches that the solid electrolyte material may exhibit, at least in part, a crystal phase belonging to the C2/m space group ([0027]). Asano teaches that the C2/m space group promotes the formation of lithium ion diffusion paths, thereby improving lithium ion conductivity ([0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the second crystal phase of Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, belongs to the C2/m space group, as taught by Asano, given that such a crystal structure would help promote the formation of lithium ion diffusion paths to thereby help improve lithium ion conductivity.
Regarding Claim 11, Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
As previously described, (See Claim 8), the solid-state electrolyte material includes LiAlI4 therein.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugimoto et al. (WO 2019/146296, using the equivalent US 2020/0350621 for citation purposes), and further in view of Asano et al. (WO 2018/025582, using the equivalent US 2022/0109185 for citation purposes) and Ogihara (US 2019/0123346) and Asano et al. (WO 2019/135342, using the equivalent US 2020/0328458 and the term “Asano2” for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 9, Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, does not explicitly teach that the second crystal phase belongs to Fm-3m.
However, Asano2 teaches a solid electrolyte material for use in a solid-state secondary battery (Abstract, [0017]). Asano2 teaches that the solid electrolyte material includes a first crystal phase and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase ([0045]-[0046]). Asano2 teaches that the second crystal phase is structured such that it belongs to the Fm-3m space group ([0050]). Asano2 teaches that the solid electrolyte exhibits a higher lithium ion conductivity due to the presence of said different crystal phases ([0048]-[0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the second crystal phase of Sugimoto, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, belongs to the Fm-3m space group, as taught by Asano2, given that such a crystal structure would help provide for higher lithium ion conductivity characteristics.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joshi et al. (US 4,307,163), and further in view of Asano et al. (WO 2018/025582, using the equivalent US 2022/0109185 for citation purposes) and Ogihara (US 2019/0123346) and Asano et al. (WO 2019/135342, using the equivalent US 2020/0328458 and the term “Asano2” for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 9, Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, does not explicitly teach that the second crystal phase belongs to Fm-3m.
However, Asano2 teaches a solid electrolyte material for use in a solid-state secondary battery (Abstract, [0017]). Asano2 teaches that the solid electrolyte material includes a first crystal phase and a second crystal phase different from the first crystal phase ([0045]-[0046]). Asano2 teaches that the second crystal phase is structured such that it belongs to the Fm-3m space group ([0050]). Asano2 teaches that the solid electrolyte exhibits a higher lithium ion conductivity due to the presence of said different crystal phases ([0048]-[0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would ensure that the second crystal phase of Joshi, as modified by Asano and Ogihara, belongs to the Fm-3m space group, as taught by Asano2, given that such a crystal structure would help provide for higher lithium ion conductivity characteristics.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7595. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-3PM 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 5712707871. 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.
/MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728