CTNF 18/486,002 CTNF 97502 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/12/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings 06-22 AIA The drawings are objected to because they are not in compliance with 37 C.F.R. 1.84 (t)(1), which requires that drawing sheets be numbered (“The sheets of drawings should be numbered in consecutive Arabic numerals, starting with 1, within the sight as defined in paragraph (g) of this section.”). The drawings sheets submitted on 10/12/2023 do not contain any numbering of the sheets . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 7 recites the language “the same composition as composition of an electrolyte”. Here, this is objected to due the omission of an article for the second “composition”. A suggested rephrasing to overcome this objection is “the same composition as a composition of an electrolyte” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 7 recites the limitation "the same composition" in line 1 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A suggested rephrasing to overcome this rejection is “a same composition”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (CN 110518277 A with EPO machine translation used for citation purposes), further in view of Di Noto (US 20140162137 A1) . Regarding Claim 1, Song is an analogous art to the claimed invention, being directed towards the field of batteries (Abstract, “The invention discloses a solid electrolyte and a preparation method thereof, and a solid battery containing a solid electrolyte”). Here, Song discloses a battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and an electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Paragraph 0017, “A solid-state battery is composed of a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and an electrolyte interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode.”). Additionally, Song discloses structure wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material (Paragraph 0017, “The positive electrode includes a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active material.”) and which comprises an oxide consisting of Li, Ni, Mn, and O (Paragraph 0018, “lithium nickel manganate LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 ”). Additionally, Song discloses structure wherein the electrolyte layer comprises Li (Paragraph 0031, “LLZTO (relative to the polymer)”), M1 and F (Paragraph 0031, “lithium bistrifluoromethanesulfonimide”), where M1 is Zr (Paragraph 0031, “LLZTO (relative to the polymer)”), where LLZTO is lithium lanthanum zirconium tantalum oxide. However, Song does not disclose an electrolyte which comprises titanium. Therefore, we look to Di Noto, which is an analogous art to the instant application, being directed towards solid state electrolyte art (Abstract, “The use of particles of at least one crystalline oxide, preferably metal oxide, having an average particle size of less than 500 nm and a fluorine content of between 0.5 and 30% by weight, preferably between 0.5 and 5%, even more preferably between 1.0 and 4%, for the preparation of solid-state electrolytes, is described.”). Here, Di Noto discloses that fluorinated titanium oxides can be used in high conduction solid electrolytes, which are also capable of reacting with ionic liquids to increase conductivity (Paragraph 0017, “for example, fluorinated titanium oxide functionalized by means of a process for replacing the proton of hydroxyl groups with lithium ions (processed called lithiation). This therefore results in a solid electrolyte, the conductivity of which is sufficiently high to be used as such (and not for the production of polymer electrolytes). The electrolyte may be optionally made to react with ionic liquids in order to increase its conductivity, thus resulting in a hybrid organic/inorganic element.”), and that said electrolyte is a solid-state electrolyte for ion batteries (Paragraph 0072, “A first subject of the present invention therefore consists in the use of particles of an oxide, preferably metal oxide, doped with fluorine and in particular particles of titanium dioxide and/or iron doped with fluorine, for the preparation of solid-state electrolytes and, in particular, solid-state electrolytes for ion batteries.”). Based on this, it would be obvious to combine the titanium oxide particles of Di Noto with the solid electrolyte of Song, thereby resulting in structure where the electrolyte layer comprises Ti, thereby reading upon and making obvious the instant claim. Regarding Claim 2, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Song discloses structure where the electrolyte layer comprises Al, through comprising an auxiliary agent (Paragraph 0013, “Further, an auxiliary agent is further included.”) which is methoxypolyethylene glycol aluminate (Paragraph 0013, “methoxypolyethylene glycol aluminate”). Regarding Claim 3, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Song discloses structure where the oxide is lithium nickel manganese oxide (Paragraph 0018, “lithium nickel manganate LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 ”). Regarding Claim 4, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Song discloses structure wherein the oxide has a composition represented by LiNi x Mn 2-x O 4 , where x satisfies 0<x<2 (Paragraph 0018, “lithium nickel manganate LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 ”). Regarding Claim 5, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Song discloses structure where the oxide has composition represented by LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 (Paragraph 0018, “lithium nickel manganate LiNi 0.5 Mn 1.5 O 4 ”). Regarding Claim 6, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Song discloses structure which comprises a positive electrode electrolyte, here a positive electrode interface layer (Paragraph 0037, “Preparation of the positive electrode interface layer:”), which comprises Li (Paragraph 0037, “LLZTO (relative to the polymer)”), M2 and F (Paragraph 0037, “lithium bistrifluoromethanesulfonimide”), where M2 is Zr (Paragraph 0037, “LLZTO (relative to the polymer)”), where LLZTO is lithium lanthanum zirconium tantalum oxide. Additionally, as discussed above, Di Noto makes obvious structure where the sold electrolyte comprises titanium oxide, thereby comprising Ti. Here, where the positive electrode electrolyte is an electrolyte with the same chemical components as the other electrolytes of Song (Paragraphs 0031-0033), it would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the same combination, thereby resulting in structure where the positive electrode electrolyte comprises Ti. Regarding Claim 7, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 6. Additionally, Song discloses structure where the positive electrode electrolyte, which is their positive electrode interface layer, has a same composition as a composition of an electrolyte included in the electrode layer, that being the negative electrode interface layer, comprising the same LLZTO, lithium bistrifluoromethanesulfonimide, and polyethylene oxide and polyethylene oxide-polypropylene-polyethylene triblock polymer (Paragraphs 0032-0033). Here, these similar components represent a same composition shared between the positive electrode electrolyte and an electrolyte of an electrolyte included in the electrolyte layer. Regarding Claim 8, modified Song makes obvious the invention of Claim 1. Additionally, Song discloses structure where the electrolyte layer comprises a first electrolyte layer and a second electrolyte layer, here the intermediate layer and the negative electrode interface layer (Paragraph 0039, “Compounding of a multilayer structure: The positive electrode interface layer, the intermediate layer, and the negative electrode interface layer obtained above are assembled in sequence to form a composite solid electrolyte containing a multilayer structure and a gradient design.”). Here, the negative electrode interface layer is positioned between the intermediate layer and the negative electrode . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (CN 110518277 A with EPO machine translation used for citation purposes) and Di Noto (US 20140162137 A1) , as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Kodama (US 20170104245 A1) . Regarding Claim 9, modified Song makes obvious makes obvious the invention of claim 8. Additionally, Song discloses structure where the first electrolyte layer, the intermediate layer, comprises Additionally, Song discloses structure wherein the electrolyte layer comprises Li (Paragraph 0031, “LLZTO (relative to the polymer)”), M1 and F (Paragraph 0031, “lithium bistrifluoromethanesulfonimide”), where M1 is Zr (Paragraph 0031, “LLZTO (relative to the polymer)”), where LLZTO is lithium lanthanum zirconium tantalum oxide. Additionally, as discussed above, Di Noto makes obvious structure where the sold electrolyte comprises titanium oxide, thereby comprising Ti. Here, where the positive electrode electrolyte is an electrolyte with the same chemical components as the other electrolytes of Song (Paragraphs 0031-0033), it would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the same combination, thereby resulting in structure where the positive electrode electrolyte comprises Ti. Additionally, in regards to the limitation which requires that the second electrolyte layer, the negative electrode interface layer comprises a sulfide solid electrolyte, Song fails to disclose said structure. Therefore we look to Kodama, which is an analogous art to the instant invention, being directed towards the art of an all solid state battery comprising a sulfide solid electrolyte (Abstract, “The main object of the present invention is to provide an all solid state battery with capability of inhibiting heat generation of an anode layer. The present invention solves the problem by providing an all solid state battery comprising a cathode layer, an anode layer, and a solid electrolyte layer formed between the cathode layer and the anode layer, wherein at least one of the anode layer and the solid electrolyte layer contains a sulfide solid electrolyte material”). Here, Kodama discloses that sulfide solid electrolytes have an advantage in being excellent in lithium ion conductivity (Paragraph 0003, “Moreover, an all solid state battery utilizing a sulfide solid electrolyte material has an advantage of being excellent in Li ion conductivity.”), as well as that the inclusion of resin-coated oxides in their solid electrolyte can inhibit heat generation in an anode layer (Paragraph 0022, “As the result, the inventors of the present application found out the way to inhibit heat generation of the anode layer and achieved the present invention.”). Here, where the second electrolyte layer is positioned adjacent to the anode, it would therefore be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art to make use of the sulfide solid electrolyte and resin coated oxides of Kodama in the second electrolyte layer of Song, thereby reading upon and making obvious the limitation of the instant claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN W ESTES whose telephone number is (571)272-4820. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 5:30. 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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 5712721453. 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. /J.W.E./ Examiner, Art Unit 1725 /BASIA A RIDLEY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 2 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 3 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 4 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 5 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 6 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 7 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 8 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 9 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 10 Art Unit: 1725 Application/Control Number: 18/486,002 Page 11 Art Unit: 1725
Prosecution Insights