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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2 August 2023 and 15 July 2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 8 August 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2022-126114 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-4, in the reply filed on 22 April 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Invention . This is not found persuasive because the restriction between a product and process of making is based on a one-way test for distinctness, and it is possible to make the solid-state battery of Invention I by a materially different process. See MPEP 806.05(f).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugimoto et al. (US 20210143474, hereinafter, Sugimoto).
Regarding claim 1, Sugimoto teaches a solid-state secondary battery comprising a positive electrode current collector, a positive electrode, a first electrolyte layer, a second electrolyte layer, a negative electrode, and negative current collector (Abstract). The first layer contains Li, M1 selected as Zr, and X1 selected as Cl, also written stoichiometrically as Li2ZrCl6 (¶ 33-34), and the second layer contains a complex hydride solid electrolyte (¶ 2, 69, 76), and LiBH4 is known in the solid-state battery art. Sugimoto does not expressly teach the claimed oxidation resistance or reduction resistance of the first and second solid electrolyte. However, Sugimoto teaches the chloride Li2ZrCl6 as the first solid electrolyte and the hydride LiBH4 as the second solid electrolyte, which is substantially identical to that which applicant claims and discloses as having said oxidation and reduction resistance. As such, one would expect the first and second solid electrolytes of Sugimoto to possess the claimed oxidation and reduction resistance as a material and its properties are inseparable, absent an objective showing. See MPEP 2112.01.
Referring to the above recited layer structure of Sugimoto, the first electrolyte is adjacent to the positive electrode, the second electrolyte is adjacent to the negative electrode, the first electrolyte layer separates the positive electrode and the second electrolyte layer, and the second electrolyte layer separates the first electrolyte layer and the negative electrode, resulting in a higher content of first solid electrolyte material around the positive electrode and a higher content of second solid electrolyte material around the negative electrode.
Regarding claim 2, the second electrolyte may include Li2S-P2S5-LiCl (¶ 36), the first electrolyte layer may include material from the second electrolyte layer (¶ 29), and both the first and second electrolyte layers may be of a multi-layer structure formed of a plurality of layers with different respective compositions (¶ 27-29). In the case that both the first and second electrolyte layers are formed of two layers, with each extra layer being formed at the interface between the electrolyte layers, and with each layer being composed of additional Li2S-P2S5-LiCl, an intermediary region with a third layer comprising the Li2S-P2S5-LiCl can be formed. Sugimoto does not expressly teach the claimed greater ion conductivity of the third solid electrolyte material. However, Sugimoto teaches Li2S-P2S5-LiCl, which is substantially identical to that which applicant claims and discloses as having said greater ion conductivity. As such, one would expect the Li2S-P2S5-LiCl of Sugimoto to possess the claimed greater ion conductivity as a material and its properties are inseparable, absent an objective showing. See MPEP 2112.01.
Regarding claim 3, both the first and second electrolyte layers may include material from the second electrolyte layer (¶ 29), and the second electrolyte layer may include complex hydrides such as LiBH4-LiNH2 (¶ 27). Sugimoto does not expressly teach the claimed lower melting point of the fourth solid electrolyte. However, Sugimoto teaches LiBH4-LiNH2, which is substantially identical to that which applicant claims and discloses as having said lower melting point. As such, one would expect the LiBH4-LiNH2 of Sugimoto to possess the claimed lower melting point as a material and its properties are inseparable, absent an objective showing. See MPEP 2112.01.
Regarding claim 4, Sugimoto teaches the solid-state battery of claim 1, wherein the first electrolyte layer comprises the first solid electrolyte material, and is in contact with the positive electrode and covers the positive electrode (¶ 25), thus the surface of the positive electrode active material is covered by substantially only the first solid electrolyte, and meets the claimed limitation of at least 50% by mass of the first solid electrolyte.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al. (US 20210104773, hereinafter, Ozawa) in view of Atsushi et al. (Mechanochemically Prepared Li2S-P2S5-LiBH4 Solid Electrolytes with an Argyrodite Structure, ACS Omega, 2018, 3, 5453-5458, hereinafter, Atsushi).
Regarding claim 1, Ozawa teaches a solid-state secondary battery comprising a laminated structure including a negative electrode current collector, a negative electrode active material layer, solid electrolyte layers, a positive electrode active material layer, and a positive electrode current collector (¶ 114). Ozawa also teaches the inclusion of sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte in all solid electrolyte layers (¶ 26), and that examples include Li2S-P2S5. Applicant discloses in paragraph 53 the use of Li2S-P2S5-LiBH4 as both the first and second solid electrolyte in an embodiment of their invention. Applicant also discloses in paragraph 63 that the resulting solid-state battery made with the sulfide-based electrolyte resulted in superior oxidation resistance and reduction resistance. While Ozawa does not teach LiBH4, Atsushi teaches the use of Li2S-P2S5-LiBH4 as a solid electrolyte for a battery (Atsushi Abstract). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the LiBH4 and Li2S-P2S5 to make Li2S-P2S5-LiBH4 because doing so would increase the lithium-ion conductivity (Atsushi Introduction). Thus, the battery with sulfide-based electrolyte of Li2S-P2S5-LiBH4 meets the claimed limitations of oxidation and reduction resistances, and content ratios at regions near the positive and negative electrode layers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL FANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8815. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Humera Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-0604. 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.
/M.F./ Examiner, Art Unit 1784
/HUMERA N. SHEIKH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1784
Prosecution Insights