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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-12 and 18-20, drawn to a solid electrolyte film, and Species I, Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11, 12, and 18-20, drawn to a sulfide-based solid electrolyte in the reply filed on 28 July, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 3, 10, and 13-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 28 July, 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 24 January, 2024, 14 May, 2024, 25 August, 2025, 04 September 2025, and 19 May 2026 fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because they do not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Claim Interpretation
In claim 1, the packing density is understood by the examiner to be the ratio of the total volume of the solid electrolyte film less the volume of the pores to the total volume of the solid electrolyte film, as defined in the detailed description. The packing density approaches 1 as the volume of the pores decreases to 0.
packing density
=
total volume of film
-
pore volume
total volume of film
Additionally, the solid electrolyte film of claim 1 is understood by the examiner to be a planar or sheet type solid electrolyte layer comprising a solid electrolyte material and a binder.
In claim 7, the bonding of adjacent particles is interpreted as at least inert adhesion between two particles, not necessarily a covalent bond.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-12, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Ku et al. (US 2021/0242490 A1, provided in an IDS filed 24 January, 2024).
Regarding Claim 1, Ku teaches a solid electrolyte film, comprising:
a solid electrolyte (second solid electrolyte, [0011]); and
a binder (the second solid electrolyte layer 32 further includes a binder, [0155]),
wherein the solid electrolyte includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a sulfide-based solid electrolyte and a halide-based solid electrolyte (a typical sulfide-based solid electrolyte may be further included in the solid electrolyte layer, [0147]), and
wherein the solid electrolyte film has a packing density of 0.81 to 0.99 (packing density of the second solid electrolyte layer may be about 80% or more of the true density, [0107]).
The definition of packing density of Ku leads the ratio of packing density to true density to be equivalent to the packing density of the present application. As described in [0109] and [0108] respectively,
ρ
packing
=
m
a
s
s
S
A
r
e
a
*
t
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s
=
m
a
s
s
v
o
l
u
m
e
and
ρ
true
=
t
r
u
e
m
a
s
s
t
r
u
e
v
o
l
u
m
e
=
m
a
s
s
t
o
t
a
l
v
o
l
u
m
e
-
v
o
l
u
m
e
o
f
p
o
r
e
s
.
Thus,
ρ
packing
ρ
true
=
m
a
s
s
v
o
l
u
m
e
m
a
s
s
v
o
l
u
m
e
-
v
o
l
u
m
e
o
f
p
o
r
e
s
=
v
o
l
u
m
e
-
v
o
l
u
m
e
o
f
p
o
r
e
s
v
o
l
u
m
e
,
which is equivalent to the definition of packing density given in the present application.
Regarding Claim 2, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the sulfide-based solid electrolyte is represented by Formula 1:
<Formula 1>
L
a
1
M
b
1
P
c
1
S
d
1
A
e
1
wherein, in Formula 1, L is an element selected from Li, Na, and K; M is an element selected from B, Zn Sn, Si, Cu, Ga, Sb, Al, and Ge; A is an element selected from I, Br, Cl, and F; each of a1, b1, c1, d1, and e1 represents a compositional ratio of each element; and a ratio of a1:b1:c1:d1:e1 is (1-12):(0-1):1:(2-12):(0-5).
Ku teaches in paragraphs [0076]-[0084] that the second solid electrolyte layer includes a compound having an argyrodite crystal structure represented by the formula
Li
a
M
x
P
S
b
Cl
d
wherein M is Na, K, Fe, Mg, Ca, Ag, Cu, Zr, Zn, or a combination thereof; and 0≤x≤0.07, 5≤a≤6, 4≤b≤6, c>0, d>0, and 0<(c+d)≤2, 5≤(a+x)≤6. For example, the second solid electrolyte may be
Li
5
P
S
5
Cl
, which anticipates the sulfide-based solid electrolyte represented by Formula 1.
Regarding Claim 4, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the solid electrolyte is included in an amount of 95 to 99.5 weight % based on a total weight of the solid electrolyte film (Example 1 of Preparation of all-Solid Secondary Battery teaches the preparation of the solid electrolyte layer in paragraph [0205], which includes the solid electrolyte powder Li5.75PS4.75Cl1.25 in an amount of 98.5 weight % to the total weight of the solid electrolyte film; the solid electrolyte powder is mixed with an acrylic resin binder and stirred into solvent to prepare a slurry, which is thoroughly dried to obtain the second solid electrolyte layer in the form of a sheet).
Regarding Claim 5, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the binder comprises styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (paragraph [0155] teaches that the binder included in the solid electrolyte layer may be a styrene-butadiene rubber).
Regarding Claim 6, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the binder is included in an amount of 0.5 to 5 weight % based on a total weight of the solid electrolyte film (paragraph [0205] or example 1 of preparing all-solid secondary battery teaches that the binder is included in an amount of 1.5 weight % based on the total weight of the solid electrolyte film).
Regarding Claim 7, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the solid electrolyte has a form of a plurality of particles (the last sentence of paragraph [0187] teaches plural solid electrolyte particles in the solid electrolyte layer).
It is deemed that the two adjacent particles being directly bonded or bonded through the binder is an inherent characteristic and/or property of the specifically disclosed solid electrolyte. In this respect, MPEP 2112 sets forth the following:
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
When the PTO shows a sound basis for believing that the products of the applicant and the prior art are the same, the applicant has the burden of showing that they are not. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
“Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In this case, the prior art teaches that the solid electrolyte and the binder are mixed in solvent to form a slurry, which is then thoroughly dried (Example 1, paragraph [0205]) and later pressed at a temperature to form the battery ([0207]). Thus, the resulting structure necessarily has at least two adjacent particles directly bonded or bonded through the binder.
Additionally, the summary of the present disclosure (page 5, lines 17-22) describes the same preparation process for the solid electrolyte. The preparation process of the solid electrolyte layer is the same for both the given prior art and the instant applicant, producing the same basic structure having adjacent solid electrolyte particles either directly bonded or bonded through the binder.
Regarding Claim 8, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte according to claim 1, wherein an ionic conductivity of the solid electrolyte film is 0.1 to 10 mS/cm (paragraphs [0065]-[0066] teach that the solid electrolyte layer has ion conductivity at about 1 mS/cm or more).
Regarding Claim 9, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the solid electrolyte film comprises the sulfide-based solid electrolyte including LiPSCl (paragraphs [0076]-[0084], see Formula 2).
Regarding Claim 11, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the solid electrolyte has a form of a plurality of particles (the last sentence of paragraph [0187] teaches plural solid electrolyte particles in the solid electrolyte layer) with a particle diameter (D50) ranging from 10 nm to 10 µm (paragraphs [0194]-[0195] describe the preparation of the sulfide-based solid electrolyte powder Li5.75PS4.75Cl1.25 powder and teach a resulting D50 of 3 µm).
Regarding Claim 12, Ku teaches the solid electrolyte film according to claim 1, wherein the solid electrolyte film has a thickness ranging from 50 to 150 µm (paragraph [0094] clearly states the thickness of the solid electrolyte layer ranging from 50 µm to 150 µm).
Regarding Claim 18, Ku teaches an all-solid-state battery, comprising:
a positive electrode (cathode layer 10, figures 11-13, paragraph [0121]);
a negative electrode (anode layer 20, figures 11-13, paragraph [0121]); and
the solid electrolyte film of claim 1 between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (solid electrolyte layer 30 disposed between the anode layer 20 and the cathode layer 10; the solid electrolyte layer 30 contains the second electrolyte layer 32 according to an embodiment).
Regarding Claim 19, Ku teaches a device comprising the all-solid-state battery of claim 18 (paragraph [0192] describes the all-solid secondary battery according to an embodiment being installed on an electric vehicle, the device).
Regarding Claim 20, Ku teaches the device according to claim 19, wherein the device is an electric vehicle (EV) (paragraph [0192] clearly describes the device as an electric vehicle).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Isojima et al. (US 2022/0181680 A1, provided in an IDS received 24 January, 2024) teaches the sulfide-based solid electrolyte material in [0072] and teaches a rationale for using SEBS as a binder in paragraphs [0045]-[0055].
Fujiki et al. (US 2019/0190064 A1) teaches the rationale for having a packing density of 0.81 to 0.99 in paragraphs [0086]-[0087] for a solid electrolyte comprising LiPSCl. Paragraph [0110] teaches SBR as a binder, and paragraph [0010] teaches a solid electrolyte layer with thickness of 50 to 100 microns.
Fujiki et al. (US 2018/0351159 A1, provided in an IDS filed 05/14/2024) appears to be relevant to the subject matter of the immediate application, teaching an all-solid-state battery comprising the LiPSCl solid electrolyte material and specifically teaching relative density of 80% or greater.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW N KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-9169. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/ANDREW KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
