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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato, et. al. (US 20210202985 A1), in view of Kong, et. al. (US2021020929A1) and Wu, et. al., Advances and prospects of PVDF based polymer electrolytes, 64 Journal of Energy Chemistry, 62-84.
Regarding Claim 1, Sato teaches an all solid battery (all solid battery 100) comprising: a multilayer structure (multilayer chip 6) in which each of a plurality of solid electrolyte layers (green sheet 51; these are also referred to as a “solid electrolyte green sheet” in paragraph [0050]) and each of a plurality of internal electrodes including an electrode active material are alternately stacked (“[0030] FIG. 3A to FIG. 3C illustrate schematic cross sectional view of the solid electrolyte layer 30 and the first internal electrode layer 11 adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer 30 , and the second internal electrode layer 21 adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer 30” ; see also Fig. 2-3C); a first cover layer provided on a first end of the multilayer structure in a stacking direction (“[0051] Cover sheets having an average thickness of 30 μm in which solid electrolyte green sheets were stacked were adhered to an upper face and a lower face of the multilayer structure of the stacked green sheets after the printing.”); and a second cover layer provided on a second end of the multilayer structure in the stacking direction (see above), wherein the first cover layer and the second cover layer include a solid electrolyte (see above). Sato at [0050 - 51], Fig. 2. Further, Sato teaches “and wherein the second cover layer directly contacts another one of the plurality of internal electrodes located closest to the second cover layer [See Fig. 2].”
PNG
media_image1.png
344
382
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2 of Sato.
Kong teaches an all solid state battery, which comprises a separator 26 which “[0043] separator 26 may be formed by a solid-state electrolyte. For example, the separator 26 may be defined by a plurality of solid-state electrolyte particles 30,” wherein “[0049] Such a separator 26 may have an interparticle porosity 80 between the first solid-state electrolyte particles 30 that is greater than or equal to about 1 vol. % to less than or equal to about 70 vol. %, optionally greater than or equal to 5 vol. % to less than or equal to about 40 vol. %, optionally greater than or equal to about 5 vol. % to less than or equal to about 30 vol. %, and in certain aspects, optionally greater than or equal to about 5 vol. % to less than or equal to about 20 vol. %.The first plurality of solid state electrolyte particles 30 may comprise one or more of oxide-based particles, sulfide-based particles, halide-based particles, borate-based particles, nitride-based particles, hydride-based particles, and fluoride-based particles.” Kong at [0043 – 49]. Kong teaches these particles 30 may be “optionally intermingled with one or more polymeric binders (not shown) and/or one or more reinforcing additives or fillers (also, not shown) that improve the structural integrity of the separator 26 . . . [t]he one or more reinforcing additives or fillers may be selected from the group consisting of: silica-based glass fibers, alumina fibers, boron nitride fibers, thermoplastic polymer fibers, and combinations thereof.” Id. at [0053]. This reads upon “filler materials dispersed in the solid electrolyte.”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the solid electrolyte layers 30 of Sato to comprise the reinforcing alumina fibers of Kong, because Kong teaches a benefit to improving the structural integrity of the separator.
However, modified Sato is silent as to “wherein one of the plurality of solid electrolyte layers not including the filler materials is arranged between the first cover layer and one of the plurality of internal electrodes located closest to the first cover layer.”
Wu teaches a variety of electrolytes, including liquid electrolytes, solid inorganic electrolytes, and polymer electrolytes composed of, for example, inorganic filler including inert Al2O3 and active fast ionic conductors such as LATP and LLZZTO, i.e. conductive ceramics. p. 62-64, 68.
PNG
media_image2.png
361
707
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Wu.
Wu teaches that there are tradeoffs between different electrolyte designs, namely indicating polymer electrolytes present a “middle ground” between stability, conductivity, and wettability. Id. at Fig. 1. By contrast, solid inorganic electrolytes produce higher ionic conductivity, stability, and mechanical strength, but substantially reduced wettability. Id. This strongly implies mechanical strength, electrochemical and thermal stability of an overall electrode stack would be improved if, for example, a solid electrolyte comprising inorganic electrolyte constituted an end unit. Id. Wu teaches that some electrolyte designs present composite systems, especially utilizing inorganic filler as part of a polymer electrolyte; this indicates the design of the fillers of modified Sato are best described as a composite ceramic electrolyte. Id. at p.68.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to further modify the battery of modified Sato, such that one of the plurality of solid electrolyte layers not including the filler materials (i.e., a solid inorganic electrolyte without the inert filler alumina of modified Sato) is arranged between the first cover layer and one of the plurality of internal electrodes located closest to the first cover layer, because Wu teaches a benefit to mechanical strength and stability.
Claim 1 is obvious over Sato, in view of Kong and Wu.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Sato.
Modified Sato teaches solid electrolyte layers 30 forming a first and second cover layer, having inorganic filler materials in the form of alumina or silica.
PNG
media_image3.png
321
408
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 7 of Wu.
Wu teaches that, when utilizing the inorganic filler doping method, the silica based material forms a branching structure with the electrolyte material, with silica domains spatially dispersed throughout the branched structure. This indicates that, within the material of modified Sato, in the first cover layer and the second cover layer, the solid electrolyte forms a bone structure which is spatially continuously formed, and wherein the filler materials are spatially dispersed in the solid electrolyte.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Sato.
Kong teaches the filler materials are alumina or silica. Kong at [0054]. This meets the terms of Claim 3 directly.
Claim 3 is obvious over Sato, in view of Kong and Wu.
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Sato.
Sato teaches “[0016] A main component of the solid electrolyte layer 30 is phosphoric acid salt-based solid electrolyte having a NASICON structure,” that this is an “[0039] Powder of oxide-based solid electrolyte for the solid electrolyte layer 30, and is produced with one or more “glass components,” as it is sintered; this solid electrolyte having a NASICON type crystal structure strongly implies a glass-state, given that it is sintered alongside materials which form a glass at temperatures which would form a glass material comprising the NASICON oxide-based solid electrolyte. This reads upon “the solid electrolyte is a glass material which is an oxide-based solid electrolyte having a NASICON type crystal structure.”
Claim 4 is obvious over Sato, in view of Kong and Wu.
Regarding Claim 6, Sato teaches a manufacturing method of an all solid battery (all solid battery 100) comprising: forming a multilayer structure (multilayer chip 60) by stacking a plurality of stack units (“[0028] The first internal electrode layer 11 is stacked on the first electric collector layer 12 . The solid electrolyte layer 30 is stacked on the first internal electrode layer 11”), each having a structure in which an internal electrode pattern including an electrode active material powder is formed on a solid electrolyte green sheet (green sheet 51; these are also referred to as a “solid electrolyte green sheet” in paragraph [0050]) and each of a plurality of internal electrodes including an electrode active material are alternately stacked (“[0030] FIG. 3A to FIG. 3C illustrate schematic cross sectional view of the solid electrolyte layer 30 and the first internal electrode layer 11 adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer 30 , and the second internal electrode layer 21 adjacent to the solid electrolyte layer 30” ; see also Fig. 2-3C) including solid electrolyte powder (“[0039] (Making process of ceramic material powder) Powder of oxide-based solid electrolyte for the solid electrolyte layer 30 is made”); stacking a cover sheet on an upper face and a lower face in a stacking direction of the multilayer structure (“[0045] (Stacking process) Paste 52 for internal electrode is printed on one face of a green sheet 51 as illustrated in FIG. 6. Paste 53 for electric collector is printed on the paste 52 for electrode layer. And, another paste 52 for internal electrode is printed on the paste 53 for electric collector. A reverse pattern 54 is printed on a part of the green sheet 51 where neither the paste 52 for electrode layer nor the paste 53 for electric collector is printed. A material of the reverse pattern 54 may be the same as that of the green sheet 51 . The green sheets 51 after printing are stacked so that each of the green sheets 51 is alternately shifted to each other. Thus, a multilayer structure is obtained”). Sato at [0045]. Sato teaches firing the multilayer structure, including the cover sheet. Id. at [0006].
Sato is silent as to a filler material.
Kong teaches an all solid state battery, which comprises a separator 26 which “[0043] separator 26 may be formed by a solid-state electrolyte. For example, the separator 26 may be defined by a plurality of solid-state electrolyte particles 30,” wherein “[0049] Such a separator 26 may have an interparticle porosity 80 between the first solid-state electrolyte particles 30 that is greater than or equal to about 1 vol. % to less than or equal to about 70 vol. %, optionally greater than or equal to 5 vol. % to less than or equal to about 40 vol. %, optionally greater than or equal to about 5 vol. % to less than or equal to about 30 vol. %, and in certain aspects, optionally greater than or equal to about 5 vol. % to less than or equal to about 20 vol. %.The first plurality of solid state electrolyte particles 30 may comprise one or more of oxide-based particles, sulfide-based particles, halide-based particles, borate-based particles, nitride-based particles, hydride-based particles, and fluoride-based particles.” Kong at [0043 - 0049]. Kong teaches these particles 30 may be “optionally intermingled with one or more polymeric binders (not shown) and/or one or more reinforcing additives or fillers (also, not shown) that improve the structural integrity of the separator 26 . . . [t]he one or more reinforcing additives or fillers may be selected from the group consisting of: silica-based glass fibers, alumina fibers, boron nitride fibers, thermoplastic polymer fibers, and combinations thereof.” Id. at [0053]. This reads upon “the cover sheet including a solid electrolyte and a filler material which is less likely causes necking than the solid electrolyte; and firing the multilayer structure and the cover sheet,” because while Kong does not directly refer to “necking,” identical materials necessarily disclose identical properties; because the alumina of Kong, as applied to Sato, is identical to the alumina-based filler as disclosed within the application’s examples, it necessarily must present the same reduction in necking. MPEP 2112.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the solid electrolyte layers 30 of Sato to comprise the reinforcing alumina fibers of Kong, such that the cover sheet including a solid electrolyte and a filler material which is less likely causes necking than the solid electrolyte; and firing the multilayer structure and the cover sheet, because Kong teaches a benefit to improving the structural integrity of the separator, and because Kong inherently discloses a reduction in the likelihood of necking.
However, modified Sato is silent as to “the solid electrolyte green sheet does not include the filler material.”
Wu teaches a variety of electrolytes, including liquid electrolytes, solid inorganic electrolytes, and polymer electrolytes composed of, for example, inorganic filler including inert Al2O3 and active fast ionic conductors such as LATP and LLZZTO, i.e. conductive ceramics. p. 62-64, 68.
PNG
media_image2.png
361
707
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Wu.
Wu teaches that there are tradeoffs between different electrolyte designs, namely indicating polymer electrolytes present a “middle ground” between stability, conductivity, and wettability. Id. at Fig. 1. By contrast, solid inorganic electrolytes produce higher ionic conductivity, stability, and mechanical strength, but substantially reduced wettability. Id. This strongly implies mechanical strength, electrochemical and thermal stability of an overall electrode stack would be improved if, for example, a solid electrolyte comprising inorganic electrolyte constituted an end unit. Id. Wu teaches that some electrolyte designs present composite systems, especially utilizing inorganic filler as part of a polymer electrolyte; this indicates the design of the fillers of modified Sato are best described as a composite ceramic electrolyte. Id. at p.68.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to further modify the battery of modified Sato, such that wherein the solid electrolyte green sheet does not include the filler material, because Wu teaches a benefit and/or tradeoff to mechanical strength and stability in exchange for slight reduction in wettability compared to a filler based composite electrolyte.
Claim 6 is obvious over Sato, in view of Kong and Wu.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato, in view of Kong, and Wu, and further in view of Kim, et. al. (US 20210167418 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is obvious over modified Sato.
Modified Sato teachers a first cover layer and the all-solid battery of claim 1, but is silent as to a substrate and the all-solid battery mounted on the substrate.
Kim teaches “[0006] In the case of an all-solid battery using an oxide-based material as a solid electrolyte, reflow soldering may be mounted on a substrate, and thus, there is a high degree of freedom in circuit design in a substrate as in passive components.” Kim at [0006].
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to further modify the battery of modified Sato, such that it comprises a circuit substrate comprising: a substrate; and the all solid battery of claim 1 mounted on the substrate, wherein a first cover layer of the all solid battery faces the substrate, because Kim teaches a benefit to utilizing the battery within an electric circuit, and specifically a high degree of freedom to select the desired circuit design.
Claim 5 is obvious over Sato, in view of Kong and Wu, further in view of Kim.
5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNA RAJAN HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-9997. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:30 PM M-F.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/K.R.H./Examiner , Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights