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 Species I, embodiment in Fig. 2, in the reply filed on 05/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 16-19 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/15/2026.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claim 6, the examiner is interpreting the Formula (2B) in view of P8/L19-22. This part of the specification states first solid electrolyte material may additionally include anions other than F. The claim language of independent claim 1 uses the word “includes” which is open-ended, indicating that additional components may be present. The claim language of claim 6 includes an ellipsis following the Formula (2B) which the examiner is interpreting as further evidence of this interpretation.
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.
Claims 1, 5-12, 14, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2019146236-A1 (M) in view of US-20220246983-A1 (S).
Regarding claim 1, M teaches a positive electrode material- comprising: a positive electrode active material [0010]; a first solid electrolyte material coating at least partially a surface of the positive electrode active material [0010]; and a second electrolyte material [0010], wherein the positive electrode active material includes an oxide consisting of Li, Ni, Mn, and O ([0166] “NCM”). M teaches the first solid electrolyte comprises LiaMebYCX6 where Me is selected from a group consisting of metallic elements and metalloid elements other than Li and Y, and X is halogen (this is taught because the first solid electrolyte is previously described as a halide) [0030-34]. This means that X may be F.
S teaches a solid electrolyte of the formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
90
404
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wherein: A is one element selected from the group consisting of Li, K and Na. E is at least one tetravalent element selected from the group consisting of Zr, Hf, Ti and Sn. G is at least one element selected from the group consisting of B, Si, Mg, Ca, Sr, Cs, Ba, Y, Al, Sc, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Cu, Au, Pb, Bi, In, Sn, Sb, Nb, Ta and W. D is at least one element selected from the group consisting of O, Se and Te. X is at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br and 1. a is −2b in a case where G is a hexavalent element, a is −b in a case where G is a pentavalent element, a is zero in a case where G is a tetravalent element or G is not contained, a is b in a case where G is a trivalent element, a is 2b in a case where G is a divalent element and a is 3b in a case where G is a monovalent element. b is 0 to 0.5. a is −0.3 to 0.3. c is 0.01 to 3. d is 0.1 to 6.1.) [0019-20].
S teaches A is preferably Li [0058]. Of particular interest, S teaches that E may be Ti and G may be Al [0060-61]. S teaches when X is F, high ionic conductivity and excellent oxidation resistance is obtained which is preferable [0074]. S teaches the benefit of tetravalent elements for E is that they enable Li ions to move between atoms in the compound [0094].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to use a tetravalent atom such as Ti as the Me in the formula of M because S teaches a benefit to doing so and M lists Ti as a valid option. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use F as the halogen X of M because S teaches a benefit to F as a halogen in a halide electrolyte is high oxidative resistance.
This teaches the requirements of claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, the first electrolyte of M with the elected materials suggested by S consists of Li, Ti, Y, and F. Y is an option for M1 of the instant claim 1, so this teaches the requirements of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, M teaches when the first electrolyte material coating the positive electrode active material is a halide solid electrolyte containing at least one element selected from the group consisting of metallic elements other than Li and metalloid elements, the output characteristics of the battery can be improved [0023], [0030]. M teaches the halide electrolyte material with oxidation resistance may be used and is desirable [0092-93].
M does not teach the first solid electrolyte material includes Li, Ti, M1, and F, and the M1 is at least one selected from the group consisting of Ca, Mg, Al, Y, and Zr.
S teaches a solid electrolyte of the formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
90
404
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wherein: A is one element selected from the group consisting of Li, K and Na. E is at least one tetravalent element selected from the group consisting of Zr, Hf, Ti and Sn. G is at least one element selected from the group consisting of B, Si, Mg, Ca, Sr, Cs, Ba, Y, Al, Sc, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Cu, Au, Pb, Bi, In, Sn, Sb, Nb, Ta and W. D is at least one element selected from the group consisting of O, Se and Te. X is at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br and 1. a is −2b in a case where G is a hexavalent element, a is −b in a case where G is a pentavalent element, a is zero in a case where G is a tetravalent element or G is not contained, a is b in a case where G is a trivalent element, a is 2b in a case where G is a divalent element and a is 3b in a case where G is a monovalent element. b is 0 to 0.5. a is −0.3 to 0.3. e is 0.01 to 3. d is 0.1 to 6.1.) [0019-20].
S teaches A is preferably Li [0058]. Of particular interest, S teaches that E may be Ti and G may be Al [0060-61]. S teaches when X is F, high ionic conductivity and excellent oxidation resistance is obtained which is preferable [0074].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to use the electrolyte of S as the first electrolyte of M because the electrolyte of S is a halide electrolyte which has a high ionic conductivity and oxidation resistance. S calls for a halide electrolyte with oxidation resistance as the first electrolyte and M teaches an electrolyte which is a halide electrolyte with oxidation resistance, so the substitution of the electrolyte of S for the first electrolyte of M would have been obvious because there was teaching and motivation taught by M for an electrolyte with the properties of S.
S teaches the subscripts of a is equal to b in the case where a trivalent element (Al) is use for G, making 2<a<2.5, the subscript of E being from 0 to 1, 0<b<0.5, 0.01<e<3, 0.1<d<6. The upper limits of b and d overlap with the claimed ranges of the instant claim 5, with those upper limits resulting in a formula Li2.5Ti0.5Al-0.5OeF6. Overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious, so claim 6 is unpatentable over the modification of M with the electrolyte of S.
Regarding claim 7, the modification explained above comprises Al as the M1.
Regarding claim 8, M teaches a second electrolyte including Li, Y, and at least one of Cl, Br, and I [0076]. This meets the requirements for the second electrolyte of claim 8 of the instant.
Regarding claim 9, M teaches Li2YX6- as a second electrolyte, where X is selected from a group consisting of Cl, Br, and I [0085]. This equation meets the requirements of the equation of claim 9 of the instant, because O may have a subscript of 0.
Regarding claim 10, the electrolyte of M comprises Y [0085].
Regarding claim 11, the subscript of Li is 2, the subscript of Y is 1, the subscript of O is 0, and the subscript of X is 6 [0085], these fall in the claimed ranges of instant claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, M teaches a sulfide as the second electrolyte [0086].
Regarding claim 14, M teaches the first solid electrolyte material coats the positive electrode active material (see Fig. 1), meaning it must be between the positive electrode active material and the second electrolyte material.
Regarding claim 15, M teaches a positive electrode (201); a negative electrode (203); and an electrolyte layer (202) positioned between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 20, M teaches a halide solid electrolyte [0151].
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2019146236-A1 (M), US-20220246983-A1 (S) and in further view of US-20190386335-A1 (K).
Regarding claim 2, M teaches a NCM positive electrode active material [0166].
M does not teach a positive electrode active material with the formula LiNiXMn2-xO4, where 0<x<2.
K teaches LiNi0.5Mn-1.5-O4 as a spinel lithium manganese positive electrode active material [0069]. K teaches spinel lithium manganese oxides have advantage of excellent thermodynamic stability [0070].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to utilize the spinel lithium manganese positive active material of K as the positive active material of M because doing so would provide the benefit of excellent thermodynamic stability. It would have been obvious to do because of the clear benefit taught by K and because doing so would amount to no more than the substitution of one positive active material for another with known benefits.
This teaches the limitations of claim 2 of the instant.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, the composition K teaches meets the narrowed requirements of claims 3 and 4.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2019146236-A1 (M), US-20220246983-A1 (S), and in further view of US-20210242493-A1 (Shin).
Regarding claim 13, M teaches the sulfide may be a phosphorous sulfide [0087].
M does not teach a phosphorus sulfide with the formula Li6PS5Cl.
Shin teaches a method of making an argyrodite-type solid electrolyte without conventional milling methods [0006-0009]. Shin teaches the resulting solid electrolyte has a formula of Li6PS5Cl [0031]. Shin teaches the method enables mass production [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to use the solid electrolyte of Shin was the solid electrolyte of M because M teaches the electrolyte may be a phosphorous sulfide electrolyte and Shin teaches the argyrodite electrolyte produced by its method is capable of being mass produced. One of ordinary skill in the art would have seen the benefit of this as a way of reducing costs compared to what was known in the art [0005] and known to pursue this as a way of gaining similar cost savings. This election of phosphorous sulfide renders claim 13 unpatentable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUISE JAMES IANNUCCI whose telephone number is (571)272-6917. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M..
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/LOUISE JAMES IANNUCCI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights