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 .
Claims 1-13 are pending and considered in the present Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xing (US 2018/0277830) in view of Mun et al. (US 2013/0071745) and Iwasaki et al. (US 2015/0372344), hereinafter Xing, Mun, and Iwaskai.
Claims 1-7 and 12-13, Xing suggests a battery (see e.g., abstract, [0058]) comprising a positive electrode ([0114]) comprising a positive electrode material comprising a positive electrode active material (e.g., cathode active material), a first solid electrolyte, and a second solid electrolyte (e.g., one or more coating materials comprising one or more of a metal oxide, metal sulfide, metal fluoride, ion conducting electrolyte, and solid electrolyte, and mixtures thereof, see e.g., [0096-0097]). Xing suggests the first solid electrolyte contains Li, M, and X (e.g., lithium metal fluoride), M is at least one selected from the group consisting of metalloid elements and metal elements other than Li (e.g., Al, see e.g., [0106]), X is at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br, and I (e.g., lithium metal fluoride, MzAlFy, which M being an alkali metal z is between about 0.5 to 10 and y between about 1.75 to 6.5, e.g., LiAlFx , where x is between 1.75 to about 6.5, [0106]); the second solid electrolyte has a different composition than the first solid electrolyte and contains Li and S (e.g., Li2S, [0100]);
Xing does not suggest the first solid electrolyte containing the Li, M and X elements (e.g., lithium metal fluoride, LiAlFx) includes Zr. However, Xing utilizes the solid electrolytes to enhance the protection, stability, and conductivity of the electrode materials (anode/cathode), thereby enhancing electrochemical performance or strengthening long-term cycle life and storage life, see e.g., [0096]. Mun suggests composite metal halides (e.g., AaMeXb, where A is Li (a between 1-3), Me is one or more of Al, Fe, Ti, Zr, etc., and X is a halogen (e.g., F, b is between 4-6), see e.g., [0028-0029]) coated on an active material core and serves as a protective layer of the active material core that can suppress side reactions between the active material core and electrolyte, prevents transition metals erupting from the core, and provides conductivity (in view of the presence of lithium), see e.g., [0026]; additionally, the composite metal halide includes a stronger metal-halogen bond compared to typical metal oxides, thus can form a stable coating layer under high temperature and high voltages conditions, see e.g., [0027]. It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art the first solid electrolyte includes Li, Al, Zr and F with the expectation of forming a stable coating layer, that offers conductivity and protection to the cathode active material.
Xing does not suggest a ratio of a volume of the first solid electrolyte to a total volume of the first solid electrolyte and the second solid electrolyte is greater than or equal to 3% and less than or equal to 60% (or 3.3%to 50%, 6.7%-50%, or 33-50%, or 3.3%-8.0%); however, a ratio of a volume of the first solid electrolyte to a total volume of the first solid electrolyte and the second solid electrolyte is a matter of routine optimization/experimentation based on the properties (e.g., protection, stability, conductivity, see e.g., [0096] of Xing) the solid electrolyte offers the active material. Iwasaki suggests coating an active material core particle with a first solid electrolyte and a second solid electrolyte. The solid electrolytes on the active material, and specifically the amount of first solid electrolyte (e.g., oxide based solid electrolyte) and the second solid electrolyte (e.g., sulfide based solid electrolyte), is controlled in view of the properties (conductivity) the solid electrolytes offer the active material (see e.g., [0016, 0049, 0052, 0055], where the solid electrolytes and amounts thereof reducing resistance (which is understood at least in part due to the conductivity property the solid electrolytes offer). The amount of each solid electrolyte is described based on coating coverage, where the first solid electrolyte coats the particle in part or completely, while the second solid electrolyte coats the particle in part or completely, see e.g., [0054, 0070]. Full coating coverage of each solid electrolyte suggests a ratio of the first solid electrolyte to a total amount of the solid electrolyte is about 50%, while partial coverage of the first electrolyte and full coverage of the second solid electrolyte suggests a ratio of less than about 50%, and full coverage of the first electrolyte and partial coverage of the second solid electrolyte suggests a ratio of more than about 50%. It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to adjust a ratio of the first solid electrolyte with respect to a total of the first and second solid electrolyte with the expectation of control/optimize the conductivity, stability, and protection properties the solid electrolytes offer to the active material through routine experimentation. One of ordinary skill in the art would arrive at the claimed ratio in optimizing and/or determining another workable product, with respect to the protection, stability and conductivity of the cathode. The claimed ratio is further obvious over the prior art because there is no evidence to suggest the claimed ratio is critical. MPEP 2144.05, II.
Regarding Claim 8, Xing was modified with Mun to the suggest the first solid electrolyte contains Li, Zr, M, and X. As detailed under the rejection of claim 1, Mun suggests AaMeXb (e.g., Li2Zr0.5Ti0.5F6, Li3Al0.5Fe0.5F6), where A is Li (a between 1-3), Me is one or more of Al, Fe, Ti, Zr, etc. (e.g., Zr, and Ti), and X is a halogen (e.g., F, b is between 4-6), see e.g., [0028-0029]). Thus, Mun suggests Formula 1, e.g., Li2Zr0.5M0.5X6, where α, β, γ, and δ are each greater than 0. Such a formula would be obvious with the expectation of forming a protective layer around the active material core, thereby suppressing side reactions, as suggested by Mun (see rejection of claim 1 for more details).
Regarding Claim 9-11, Xing suggests one or more solid electrolytes as functional coatings on the positive electrode active material. The solid electrolyte functional coating may be an oxide solid electrolyte having lithium ion conductivity (e.g., garnet ion conductor, lithium super ionic conductor, see e.g., [0096, 0105-0108]), or can contain lithium niobate (e.g., LiyNbOz, where y is 1 to 5, and z is 3 to 5, see e.g., [0105-106]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hashimoto (US 2024/0047656).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA KOROVINA whose telephone number is (571)272-9835. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7am - 6 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 5712721481. 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.
/ANNA KOROVINA/Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights