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 .
Status of Claims
2. Claims 1-15 are pending in the current application.
Examiner Note
3. It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant's specification are to the published
application US 20230327210 A1, unless stated otherwise.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informality: “the electrolytic solution” which constitutes inconsistent claim language relative to the phrase “the battery electrolytic solution” recited in claim 1. In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “the battery electrolytic solution.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (WO 2007091817 A1, hereinafter Kim), and further in view of Saito et al. (US 20110045357 A1, hereinafter Saito).
9. Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a nonaqueous liquid electrolyte (battery electrolytic solution) [page 9 lines 6-7], wherein the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte comprises: an alkali metal ion containing substance, inter alia LiClO4, etc. (electrolyte salt) [page 9 lines 9-10 and page 10 lines 7-9], a non-aqueous solvent (non-aqueous organic solvent) [page 9 line 9], and an anion receptor (a first organic solvent and/or a second organic solvent) [page 9 lines 8-9] wherein the anion receptor is represented by Formula 1, see below for disclosed “Kim, Formula 1” [page 5 line 9 to page 6 line 1] and a total content in mass of the anion receptor in the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte ranges from 0.5-86.5 parts by weight of the anion receptor [page 12, lines 11-12]. It is noted that the italicized text in parentheses indicates the element of the claimed invention to which the preceding prior art element corresponds.
PNG
media_image1.png
462
632
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim, Formula 1
10. The aforecited disclosure of Kim reasonably encompasses the following organic solvents suitable for use as the at least one organic solvent of the electrolytic solution:
R1-S(=0)x-N(-R3)-R2, claimed formula (I); and
R1-S(=0)x-N(-R3)-S(=0)y-R4, claimed formula (II), wherein:
R1 and R4 are separately selected from one of fluoroalkyl, fluoroalkoxy, fluoroalkenyl, fluoroalkenyloxy, fluoroaryl, and fluoroaryloxy, R2 and R3 are separately selected from one of alkyl, alkoxy, alkenyl, alkenyloxy, aryl, and aryloxy, x is 1 or 2, and y is 1 or 2.
11. Wherein, Kim discloses that the anion receptors in the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte enhance ionic conductivity and cation transference number of electrolytes, thereby increasing electrochemical stability of alkali metal batteries using the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte [page 4 line 21 – page 5 line 2], as well as, to enhance lithium cycling performance and efficiency of liquid electrolytes [page 37 lines 10 – 18], which is similar to the reasoning of the addition of the claimed first organic solvent and/or the claimed second organic solvent in the claimed invention, see Applicant’s Specification [0036].
12. Kim does not explicitly teach use of both specific solvents of claimed formula (I) and formula (II) in combination with one another.
13. Saito is directed to a composition of an electrolyte solution [0040-0041]. Saito teaches use of alkanamine derivatives represented by formulas (1), (2), and (3) (claimed formula (1) ) and/or claimed Formula (2)) [0041, 0056, see below for disclosed “Saito, Formula (1), Formula (2), and Formula (3)”] specifically in combination with one another ([0054]) to prevent a decomposition reaction of the electrolyte solution thereby resulting in excellent cycle characteristics and high-temperature preservability as recognized by Saito (Saito, [0052]), which is similar to that of Kim. It is noted that the italicized text in parentheses indicates the element of the claimed invention to which the preceding prior art element corresponds.
PNG
media_image2.png
231
465
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
106
466
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
106
466
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Saito, Formula (1), Formula (2), and Formula (3)
14. Kim and Saito each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – composition of a battery electrolytic solution. Given that Kim reasonably teaches use of more than one anion receptor represented by Formula 1, in the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte – and in view of (A) MPEP 2144.06(I) which indicates that it is prima facie obvious to combine two functionally equivalent components taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose in order to form a (third) composition to be used for the very same purpose, and (B) the aforecited teachings of Saito – it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte of Kim with teachings of Saito by having utilized the alkanamine derivatives of formula (1) and/or formula (2) and/or formula (3) in combination with one another.
15. The nonaqueous liquid electrolyte of Kim, as modified above, would have included solvent of formula (1) and/or solvent of formula (2) and/or solvent of formula (3) as the anion receptor, the total amount in mass of said solvents ranging from 0.5-86.5 parts by weight. The aforesaid range encompasses the lower bound of, and is within the upper bound of the claimed range of 10-90%, thereby rendering the claimed range prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
16. Regarding claim 3, the grounds of rejection of claim 1 above are incorporated herein and read on the range defined by claim 3. The aforesaid range encompasses the lower bound and upper bound of the claimed range, 20% to 50%, thereby rendering the range prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
17. Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 above reads on the battery electrolytic solution defined by claim 4.
18. Additionally, Kim further teaches the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte further comprises a nonaqueous solvent, inter alia ethylene carbonate, etc. (a co-solvent) [page 10 lines 1-6, see MPEP 2132.02 (II)].
19. Regarding claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 above reads on the battery electrolytic solution defined by claim 6.
20. Additionally, Saito further teaches the electrolyte solution comprising a solvent, inter alia vinylene carbonate, etc. (an additive) [0042-0046, see MPEP 2132.02 (II)].
21. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte of Kim as modified by teachings of Saito and as set forth above to additionally include the solvent of Saito in order to enhance the chemical stability of the electrolyte solution as recognized by Saito [Saito, 0044-0046].
22. Regarding claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 above reads on the battery electrolytic solution defined by claim 7.
23. Additionally, Kim further teaches an alkali metal ion containing substance (electrolyte salt) comprises LiClO4, etc. (a lithium salt) [page 10 lines 7-9, see MPEP 2132.02 (II)].
24. Regarding claim 8, the grounds of rejection of claim 7 above read on the composition of the claimed electrolyte salt.
25. Regarding claim 9, Kim/Saito teaches the battery electrolytic solution of claim 1 as set forth above.
26. Additionally, Kim further teaches alkali metal ion containing substance is preferably 3-60 parts by weight [page 12 lines 11-13], wherein Kim Example 1 uses NaOH in a concentration of 4M [page 17 line 12]. The aforesaid concentration is within the lower bound and upper bound of the claimed range, 0.1 mol/L to 8.0 mol/L, thereby rendering the range prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
27. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as modified by Saito as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kubo et al. (US 20200136186 A1, hereinafter Kubo).
28. Regarding claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 above reads on the battery electrolytic solution defined by claim 2.
29. Kim as modified by Saito above remains silent regarding a number of carbon atoms in each of a fluoroalkyl, fluoroalkoxy, alkyl, and alkoxy ranges from 1 to 20; a number of carbon atoms in each of a fluoroalkenyl, fluoroalkenyloxy, alkenyl, and alkenyloxy ranges from 2 to 10; and a number of carbon atoms in each of a fluoroaryl, fluoroaryloxy, aryl, and aryloxy ranges from 6 to 20.
30. Kubo is directed to a composition of an electrolyte solution for a non-aqueous electrolyte battery [abstract, 0047]. Kubo teaches a number of carbon atoms in each of a fluoroalkyl, fluoroalkoxy, alkyl, and alkoxy ranges from 1-10; and a number of carbon atoms in each of a fluoroalkenyl, fluoroalkenyloxy, alkenyl, and alkenyloxy ranges from 2 to 10; and a number of carbon atoms in each of a fluoroaryl, fluoroaryloxy, aryl, and aryloxy ranges from 6-10 [0063-0064].
31. Kim, Saito, and Kubo each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – composition of a battery electrolytic solution. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte of Kim as modified by teachings of Saito and set forth above to additionally include teachings of Kubo so that the number of carbon atoms in each of the fluoroalkyl, fluoroalkoxy, alkyl, and alkoxy ranges from 1-10; and the number of carbon atoms in each of the fluoroalkenyl, fluoroalkenyloxy, alkenyl, and alkenyloxy ranges from 2 to 10; and the number of carbon atoms in each of the fluoroaryl, fluoroaryloxy, aryl, and aryloxy ranges from 6-10. Doing so would improve the degree of ion dissociation and improve mobility, thereby increasing the degree of ionic conductance as recognized by Kubo [Kubo, 0064]. The aforesaid ranges in ¶30 overlap with the claimed ranges, thereby rendering all ranges prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
32. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as modified by Saito as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Sakuma et al. (US 20140234696 A1, hereinafter Sakuma).
33. Regarding claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 above reads on the battery electrolytic solution defined by claim 5.
34. Kim as modified by Saito remains silent regarding wherein in a battery electrolytic solution, a ratio of a mass of a co-solvent to a total mass of the first organic solvent and/or a second organic solvent ranges from 1:80 to 8:1.
35. Sakuma is directed to a composition of an electrolytic solution for a non-aqueous secondary battery [abstract, 0014]. Regarding an amount of the claimed co-solvents, Sakuma teaches in Examples 1-1 to 1-21 and 2-1 to 2-21 that vinylene carbonate (VC) or 4-fluoro-1,3-dioxolane-2-one (FEC) (co-solvent) was added so that the content in the non-aqueous solvent became 1 mass %” [0202]. Regarding an amount of the claimed first and/or second organic solvent(s), Sakuma teaches one or both contents of a disulfonyl compound and a disulfinyl compound in the electrolytic solution (battery electrolytic solution) are from 0.0005 mass % to 8 mass % both inclusive [0247, claim 6, Formula (1) and Formula (2), see below for attached Sakuma Formula (1) and Formula (2)], wherein, use of one or both of the disulfonyl compound and the disulfinyl compound in the electrolytic solution enhances cycling characteristic, thereby promoting chemical stability of the electrolytic solution as recognized by Sakuma [0083], which is similar to that of Kim (as described above in ¶9-11), as well as Saito (as described above in ¶13-14).
PNG
media_image4.png
451
414
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Sakuma, Formula (1) and Formula (2)
36. Given that Sakuma reasonably teaches use of VC, which functions as a co-solvent, in the electrolytic solution, in a content of 1 mass %, as well as, use of more than one compound represented by Formula (1) and Formula (2), which function(s) as a first organic solvent and/or a second organic solvent, in the electrolytic solution, in a content of 0.0005 mass % to 8 mass %, the electrolytic solution of Sakuma would have exhibited a ratio of a mass of a co-solvent to a total mass of a first organic solvent and/or a second organic solvent ranging from 1:8 to 1:1.0005.
37. Kim, Saito, and Sakuma each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – composition of a battery electrolytic solution. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the nonaqueous liquid electrolyte of Kim as modified by teachings of Saito and set forth above to additionally include teachings of Sakuma such that the ratio of the mass of a co-solvent to the total mass of a first organic solvent and/or a second organic solvent ranges from 1:8 to 1:1.0005. Doing so would increase the capacity retention ratio of a battery as recognized by Sakuma [Sakuma, 0211]. The aforesaid range encompasses the lower bound and upper bound of the claimed range, 1:80 to 8:1, thereby rendering the range prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
38. Claims 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 20230163417 A1, hereinafter Li) and further in view of Kim and Saito as applied to claim 1 above.
39. Regarding claim 10, Li teaches a secondary battery [element 30, 0029, 0045] comprising a positive electrode plate (positive electrode) [element 10, 0029], a negative electrode plate (negative electrode) [element 20, 0029], a separator [element 30, 0029], and an electrolyte (battery electrolytic solution) [element 40, 0029] between the positive electrode and the negative electrode [FIG. 1].
40. Li remains silent regarding the electrolyte further comprising a non-aqueous organic solvent, and the non-aqueous organic solvent comprises a first organic solvent shown in a general structural formula (I) and/or a second organic solvent shown in a general structural formula (II):
R1-S(=O)x-N(-R3)-R2 formula (I); and
R1-S(=O)x-N(-R3)-S(=O)y-R4 formula (II), wherein:
R1 and R4 are separately selected from one of fluoroalkyl, fluoroalkoxy, fluoroalkenyl, fluoroalkenyloxy, fluoroaryl, and fluoroaryloxy; R2 and R3 are separately selected from one of alkyl, alkoxy, alkenyl, alkenyloxy, aryl, and aryloxy; x is 1 or 2; and y is 1 or 2; and
a total content in mass of the first organic solvent and/or the second organic solvent in the battery electrolytic solution ranges from 10% to 90%.
41. Kim is directed to a composition of a nonaqueous liquid electrolyte [page 9 lines 8-10]. The disclosure and teachings of Kim set forth above in the copending grounds of rejection (see ¶9-12 and ¶14-15); in particular, regarding the anion receptor, are incorporated herein by reference. Kim does not explicitly teach both specific solvents of claimed formula (I) and formula (II) in combination with one another.
42. Saito is directed to a composition of an electrolyte solution [0040-0041]. The disclosure and teachings of Saito set forth above in the copending grounds of rejection (see ¶13-14); in particular, regarding use of alkanamine derivatives represented by formulas (1), (2), and (3) specifically in combination with one another, are incorporated herein by reference.
43. Li, Kim, and Saito each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – composition of a battery electrolytic solution. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrolyte of Li to additionally include the non-aqueous organic solvent of the aforesaid teachings of Kim and Saito, which regards the composition of the non-aqueous organic solvent (see ¶9-15). Doing so would enhance ionic conductivity and cation transference, thereby increasing electrochemical stability of the secondary battery as recognized by Kim [Kim, page 4 line 21 through page 5 line 2], as well as, prevent a decomposition reaction of the electrolytic solution thereby resulting in excellent cycle characteristics and high-temperature preservability as recognized by Saito [Saito, 0052, see ¶13].
44. Regarding claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 above reads on the secondary battery defined by claim 11.
45. Additionally, Kim further teaches an anode (a negative electrode) [page 13, lines 7-11] consists of lithium, lithium alloys, etc. (a lithium negative electrode) [page 13, lines 7-11, see MPEP 2132.02 (II)].
46. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the secondary battery of Li as modified by teachings of Kim and teachings of Saito to instead include the anode of Kim which comprises lithium or lithium alloys. Doing so would enhance ionic conductivity and cation transference, thereby increasing electrochemical stability of an alkali metal battery as recognized by Kim [Kim, page 4 line 21 – page 5 line 2].
47. Regarding claim 12, the grounds of rejection of claim 11 above are incorporated herein and read on the claimed lithium negative electrode.
48. Regarding claim 13, the rejection of claim 12 above reads on the secondary battery defined by claim 13.
49. Additionally, Kim further teaches the lithium alloys comprise Li-Al or Li-Si [page 13, lines 7-11].
50. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the secondary battery of Li as modified by teachings of Kim and teachings of Saito to specify that the lithium alloys of Kim comprise a lithium silicon alloy or a lithium aluminum alloy. Doing so would enhance ionic conductivity and cation transference, thereby increasing electrochemical stability of an alkali metal battery as recognized by Kim [Kim, page 4 line 21 – page 5 line 2, see MPEP 2132.02 (II)].
51. Regarding claim 14, the rejection of claim 11 above reads on the secondary battery defined by claim 14.
52. Additionally, Kim further teaches a lithium-ion battery (a lithium secondary battery) [page 37 lines 10-12].
53. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have specified the secondary battery of Li as modified by teachings of Kim and teachings of Saito be a lithium-ion battery as taught by Kim. Doing so would enhance ionic conductivity and cation transference, thereby increasing electrochemical stability of an alkali metal battery as recognized by Kim [Kim, page 4 line 21 – page 5 line 2].
54. Regarding claim 15, Li teaches a terminal [element 300, 0045], includes a housing [element 301, 0045], an electronic component [0045], and a battery [element 302, 0045] that are accommodated in the housing [0045], wherein: the battery supplies power to the electronic component, and the battery comprises a secondary battery [0023, 0045, claim 19]. Further, Li teaches the secondary battery comprising a positive electrode plate (positive electrode) [element 10, 0029], a negative electrode plate (negative electrode) [element 20, 0029], a separator [element 30, 0029], and an electrolyte (battery electrolytic solution) [element 40, 0029] between the positive electrode and the negative electrode [FIG. 1].
55. Li remains silent regarding the electrolyte further comprising a non-aqueous organic solvent as set forth above in the copending grounds of rejection of claim 10 (see ¶40).
56. Kim is directed to a composition of a nonaqueous liquid electrolyte [page 9 lines 8-10]. The disclosure and teachings of Kim set forth above in the copending grounds of rejection (see ¶9-12 and ¶14-15); in particular, regarding the anion receptor, are incorporated herein by reference. Kim does not explicitly teach both specific solvents of claimed formula (I) and formula (II) in combination with one another.
57. Saito is directed to a composition of an electrolyte solution [0040-0041]. The disclosure and teachings of Saito set forth above in the copending grounds of rejection (see ¶13-14); in particular, regarding use of alkanamine derivatives represented by formulas (1), (2), and (3) specifically in combination with one another, are incorporated herein by reference.
58. Li, Kim, and Saito each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – composition of a battery electrolytic solution. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrolyte of Li to additionally include the non-aqueous organic solvent of the aforesaid teachings of Kim and Saito, which regards the composition of the non-aqueous organic solvent (see ¶9-15). Doing so would enhance ionic conductivity and cation transference, thereby increasing electrochemical stability of the secondary battery as recognized by Kim [Kim, page 4 line 21 through page 5 line 2], as well as, prevent a decomposition reaction of the electrolytic solution thereby resulting in excellent cycle characteristics and high-temperature preservability as recognized by Saito [Saito, 0052, see ¶13].
Pertinent Prior Art
59. The following constitutes a list of prior art which are not relied upon herein, but are considered pertinent to the claimed invention and/or written description thereof. The prior art are purposely made of record hereinafter to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, and consideration thereof is respectfully suggested.
60.
I. Mimura et al., US 20190097268 A1; teaches a range of carbon atoms in various substituent groups [0082].
II. Zhou et al., CN 103515650 A; teaches Formula I [0019-0024, machine translation] which corresponds to claimed Formula II.
III. Fan et al., US 20210384554 A1; teaches Formula I [0009-0011] which corresponds to claimed Formula II.
IV. Han et al., CN 102816096 A; teaches Formula VI [Formula VI of original document; 0023-0028 of machine translation] which corresponds to claimed Formula II.
V. Yamazaki, US 20140197802 A1; teaches a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a separator, and a battery electrolytic solution between the positive electrode and negative electrode [0054-0055, 0192].
Conclusion
61. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA X. COLTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM.
62. 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.
63. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571)272-8935. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
64. 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.
/JENNA X. COLTON/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782