DETAILED ACTION
Claims1, 2, 4-6 and 9 are pending as amended on 10 September 2026, claims 3, 7 and 8 are withdrawn from consideration.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims and the remarks/arguments have been entered and fully considered.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
Applicant’s amendment overcomes the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 1, 2 and 4-6 over US2022/0416296A1 (Nakama). The rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are moot as they do not apply to the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 2, 4-6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakama in view of US 2015/0372344A1(Iwasaki), which is listed in Applicant’s information disclosure statement.
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Nakama teaches an electrode material includes a positive electrode active material and a first solid electrolyte material coating at least partially the surface of the positive electrode active material, and a second electrolyte material adhered to the positive electrode material coated with the first solid electrolyte material ([0091] and Fig. 2), wherein the first solid electrolyte material includes a fluoride solid electrolyte and the second electrolyte material include a sulfide solid electrolyte ([0024] and [0063]).
Nakama teaches that the second material may include an electrolyte solution containing a solvent ([0181]-[0182]), thus the solid content of 100% or less, which encompasses the claimed solid concentration.
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would have found it obvious to include solid at the instantly claimed range since it has been held that in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside range disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 f. 2d 257,191 USPQ 90(CCPA 1976). See MPEP 2144.05.I.
Generally, differences in ranges will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such ranges is critical. See MPEP 2144.05, In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); In re Aller, 220 F2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) and In re Hoeschele, 406 F2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969).
Nakama does not teach the claimed solvent.
Iwasaki teaches wet mixing a sulfide-based solid electrolyte in a dispersion medium such as n-heptane and/or butyl butyrate promote the sulfide solid electrolyte to adhere to a composite active material particle with a desired uniform and stable coverage of the sulfide-based solid electrolyte ([0059]-[0060]).
At the time the invention was made it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to include heptane and/or butyl butyrate of Iwasaki in the electrolyte solution of the second material , i.e., the sulfide solid electrolyte of Nakama. The rationale to do so would have been the motivation provided by the teachings of Iwasaki that to do so would predictably provide uniform and stable adherence of the sulfide solid electrolyte to the composite particle ([0059]-[0061]).
Regarding claim 2, 4 and 5, Nakama exemplifies that the first solid electrolyte material as Li3Ti0.4Al0.6F6 (Table 1, Example 8), which meets the claimed formula (I) when M is Al and Ti.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIQUN LI whose telephone number is (571)270-7736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am -4:00 pm.
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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-2721302. 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.
/AIQUN LI/Ph.D., Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights