Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/487,066

SOLID ELECTROLYTE, METHOD FOR PRODUCING SOLID ELECTROLYTE, AND BATTERY

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Oct 14, 2023
Priority
May 10, 2021 — JP 2021-080074 +1 more
Examiner
BROWN, MADISON ELIZABETH
Art Unit
1713
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Panasonic Holdings Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 0% of cases
0%
Career Allowance Rate
0 granted / 0 resolved
-65.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
8
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
61.7%
+21.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.5%
-31.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 0 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 1-4 and 15 in the reply filed on 7/9/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shi et al. (CN 110970667 A). It is noted that the disclosures of Shi et al. are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action. Regarding claims 1 and 15: Shi et al discloses anhydrous yttrium chloride and anhydrous lithium bromide, or anhydrous yttrium chloride, anhydrous lithium bromide and anhydrous lithium bromide, are mixed according to the chemical formula Li3YClxBr6-x, wherein 3≤x<6, i.e. M is Y and X is Cl and Br. The resulting mixture is ball-milled in a ball mill jar, i.e. pulverized, and forms a pre-crystallized composite material (0041). Shi et al. also discloses the pre-crystallized composite material can be calcined in a nitrogen or argon atmosphere at a temperature of 300–600°C for 3–5 hours to obtain a composite halide solid electrolyte (0044), i.e. heat treatment. Further, Shi et al. also discloses a negative electrode sheet, positive electrode sheet, and the solid electrolyte were assembled into a CR2032 battery (0077). Given the processes and materials disclosed by Shi et al. as set forth above are the same as the process of the present specification, the products obtained therefrom would necessarily possess a coefficient of variation of a content of the M is less than or equal to 10 and a coefficient of variation of a content of the X is less than or equal to 15. Regarding claim 2: Given the processes and materials disclosed by Shi et al. as set forth above are the same as the process of the present specification and the materials as presently claimed, the products obtained therefrom would necessarily possess an average value of a content of O atoms relative to a total of all atoms other than Li atoms is less than or equal to 2.5 atom%. Alternatively, given that no oxide is present in the starting materials, the solid electrolyte product would necessarily possess an average value of a content of O atoms relative to a total of all atoms other than Li atoms is less than or equal to 2.5 atom%. Regarding claim 3: Given the processes and materials disclosed by Shi et al. as set forth above are the same as the process of the present specification and the materials as presently claimed, a content of atoms of the M determined by an electron probe micro analyzer would necessarily satisfy AM - 3σM ≤ content of M atoms ≤ AM + 3σM. Regarding claim 4: Given the processes and materials disclosed by Shi et al. as set forth above are the same as the process of the present specification and the materials as presently claimed, a content of atoms of the X determined by an electron probe micro analyzer would necessarily satisfy AX - 3σX ≤ content of X atoms ≤ AX + 3σX. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON E. BROWN whose telephone number is (571)775-5984. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm. 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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 5712721123. 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. /MADISON ELIZABETH BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1787 /CALLIE E SHOSHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 31, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
Grant Probability
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 0 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month