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 with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-19 in the reply filed on 15 Jun, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would not be a serious search and/or examination burden if the restriction were not required. This is not found persuasive because the battery of Invention I could be produced by applying an electrolyte precursor to a substrate that does not comprise a release film, whereas the method of Invention II requires that the substrate have a release film. As such, the two inventions are materially different, requiring different search strategies, and prior art that might be applicable to one invention may not be applicable to the other. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al. (CN 103840198A, as read via machine translation) in view of Dong et al. (Dong, D., & Bedrov, D. (2018). The Journal of Physical Chemistry B, 122(43), 9994-10004)) and Cui et al. (EP 3258532A1).
As to claim 1, Xue et al. discloses a battery that cycles lithium ions (see e.g. button cell, Xue et al.: [0037]), the battery comprising:
a negative electrode (see e.g. lithium sheet negative electrode, Xue et al.: [0037]);
a positive electrode spaced apart from the negative electrode and comprising a high-voltage electroactive material formulated to undergo lithium intercalation and deintercalation (see e.g. lithium iron phosphate positive electrode, Xue et al.: [0037]); and
a gel polymer electrolyte that is configured to conduct lithium ions (see e.g. gel-type ionic liquid polymer electrolyte, Xue et al.: [0037]).
Xue et al. does not explicitly state that the gel polymer electrolyte is disposed between and configured to provide a medium for the conduction of lithium ions between the negative electrode and the positive electrode. However, one of ordinary skill in the battery arts prior to the filing date of the claimed invention would have understood that Xue et al.’s electrolyte would necessarily need to be disposed between the negative and positive electrodes and be configured to provide a medium for the conduction of lithium ions between the negative electrode and the positive electrode, because Xue et al.’s battery would be unable to function as a battery without an electrolyte providing ionic conduction between the electrodes. It would therefore have been obvious to said artisan to place the gel polymer electrolyte between the positive electrode and the negative electrode such that it acts as a conduction medium for lithium ions.
Further regarding claim 1, Xue et al.’s gel polymer electrolyte comprises:
an aliphatic polymer comprising poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO, see e.g. Xue et al.: [0012]),
a lithium salt comprising lithium sulfonylimide, lithium borate, or a combination thereof (see e.g. lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI), and lithium bis(oxalateborate) (LiBOB), which read on lithium sulfonylimide and lithium borate, respectively),
and an ionic liquid (see e.g. ionic liquids given in Xue et al.: [0013]).
Xue et al. does not disclose an aliphatic polyester comprising a substituted or unsubstituted poly(ethylene carbonate) (PEC), or an ionic liquid comprising substantially equimolar amounts of a cation and an anion, the cation comprising a complex of lithium (Li+) and an ethylene glycol dimethyl ether, an imidazole ion, or a combination thereof, and the anion comprising a sulfinate ion, a borate ion, or a combination thereof.
Dong et al., working in the field of ionic liquids for battery electrolytes, teaches the use of an ionic liquid comprising substantially equimolar amounts of a cation and an anion, the cation comprising a complex of lithium (Li+) and an ethylene glycol dimethyl ether, an imidazole ion, or a combination thereof (see e.g. equimolar system of [Li(G4)]-[TFSI], which comprises the cation [Li(G4))], which comprises a complex of Li+ and an ethylene glycol dimethyl ether, Dong et al.: pg. 9995, col. 2, para 1 and Fig. 1. See also para [0011] of the instant specification), and the anion comprising a sulfinate ion, a borate ion, or a combination thereof (see e.g. equimolar system of [Li(G4)]-[TFSI], which comprises the anion TFSI, which comprises a sulfinate ion, Dong et al.: pg. 9995, col. 2, para 1 and Fig. 1. See also para [0011] of the Instant Specification).
Dong et al. further teaches that this [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid has been investigated for use as an electrolyte in a gel composite for a Li-ion battery, and that this ionic liquid shows encouraging potential as a solid electrolyte (see e.g. Dong et al.: pg. 9994, col. 1, para 1).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the ionic liquid in Xue et al.’s battery with the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid taught by Dong et al., which comprises substantially equimolar amounts of a cation and an anion, the cation comprising a complex of lithium (Li+) and an ethylene glycol dimethyl ether, an imidazole ion, or a combination thereof, and the anion comprising a sulfinate ion, a borate ion, or a combination thereof. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such a substitution because Dong et al. teaches that [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] shows encouraging potential for use as in a gel composite electrolyte in a Li-ion battery.
Further regarding claim 1, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. as applied above teaches a battery comprising a polymer comprising PEO (see e.g. Xue et al.: [0012]), but does not teach an aliphatic polyester comprising a substituted or unsubstituted PEC.
Cui et al., also working in the field of gel polymer electrolytes, teaches an all-solid polymer electrolyte for a Li-ion battery in which the polymer comprises a carbonic ester polymer as shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
99
392
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Illustration 1: Reproduction of general formula 1 of Cui et al., para [0014].
where a is in the range 1-10,000, b is in the range 1-10,000, and R1 and R2 are substituents given in paras [0014]-[0015] of Cui et al.. This polymer reads on the claimed substituted or unsubstituted PEC (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0014], and compare with para [0048] of the Instant Specification).
Cui et al. teaches that PEO/lithium salt electrolytes are only suitable for high-temperature or micro-current applications, and can be difficult for practical applications at ambient temperatures (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0009]). Additionally, Cui et al. teaches that the PEC polymer shown above yields a polymeric matrix having a relatively high ionic conductivity at room temperature and is a cheap, low-cost material that is easy to prepare (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0046]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the PEO polymer of Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. with the aliphatic polyester comprising a substituted or unsubstituted PEC taught by Cui et al.. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such a substitution because Cui et al. teaches that this PEC polymer yields a polymeric matrix having a relatively high ionic conductivity at room temperature and is a cheap, low-cost material that is easy to prepare.
As to claim 2, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the substituted or unsubstituted PEC comprises a PEC homopolymer consisting of repeating substituted or unsubstituted ethylene carbonate monomer units, a PEC-based copolymer primarily comprising repeating substituted or unsubstituted ethylene carbonate monomer units, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0014] and Illustration 1 above, the PEC polymer taught by Cui et al. is a copolymer comprising repeating -R1-O-(C=O)-O- and -R2-O-(C=O)-O- monomers that read on substituted or unsubstituted ethylene carbonate monomer units. Additionally, R1 and R2 may comprise identical substituents as per [0015] and [0020], in which case the polymer of Cui et al. reads on a homopolymer comprising repeating -R2-O-(C=O)-O- monomers).
As to claim 3, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic polyester further comprises an aliphatic polycarbonate comprising a primary repeating monomer unit having the formula −O−(C=O)−O−R1−, where R1 is a substituted or unsubstituted bivalent hydrocarbon group, an aliphatic polylactone comprising a primary repeating monomer unit having the formula −O−(C=O)−R2−, where R2 is a substituted or unsubstituted bivalent hydrocarbon group, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0019]-[0020] and Illustration 1 above, which teaches an aliphatic polycarbonate comprising the monomer −O−(C=O)−O−R1− where R1 may include the substituent -CHm1Xn1-CHm2Xn2-, where m1, n1, m2, and n2 all range from 0 to 2, provided m1 and n1 are not both 0 and m2 and n2 are not both 0. When m1=2, n1=0, m2=2, and n2=0, the substituent is simply -CH2-CH2-. This reads on the instantly-claimed substituted or unsubstituted bivalent hydrocarbon group. See also para [0050] of the Instant Specification, which recites -CH2-CH2- as an example of a bivalent hydrocarbon group).
As to claim 4, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic polyester further comprises a substituted or unsubstituted poly(propylene carbonate) (PPC), poly(trimethylene carbonate) (PTMC), polycaprolactone (PCL), poly(propiolactone) (PPL), or a combination thereof (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0014]-[0015] and Illustration 1 above, which teaches an aliphatic polycarbonate comprising the monomer −O−(C=O)−O−R2− where R2 may include the substituent -CHm1Xn1-CHm2Xn2-CHm3Xn3, where m1, n1, m2, n2, m3, and n3 all range from 0 to 2, provided m1 and n1 are not both 0 and m2 and n2 are not both 0 and m3 and n3 are both not zero. When m1=2, n1=0, m2=2, n2=0, m3=2, and n3=0 the substituent is simply -CH2-CH2-CH2-. The monomer of Cui et al.’s polymer is therefore -O-(C=O)-O-CH2-CH2-CH2-, which reads on a substituted or unsubstituted poly(trimethylene carbonate) group).
As to claim 5, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic polyester constitutes, by weight, greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 30% of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Xue et al.: [0018], the mass ratio of the polymer to the other components of the gel polymer electrolyte (ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive) is 1:(0.5-10). This means that the polymer is present at a minimum mass ratio of 1:10 and a maximum mass ratio of 1:0.5, which corresponds to mass percentages of 9% and 66%, respectively. Xue et al. therefore discloses a range which overlaps and thereby renders obvious the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 30%).
As to claim 6, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the lithium salt comprises lithium bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (LiTFSI), lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI), lithium bis(oxalato)borate (LiBOB), lithium difluoro(oxalato)borate (LiDFOB), or a combination thereof (see e.g. lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI) and lithium bis(oxalato)borate (LiBOB), Xue et al.: [0016]).
As to claim 7, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the lithium salt constitutes, by weight, greater than or equal to about 40% and less than or equal to about 90% of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Xue et al.:[0017]-[0018], Xue et al.’s gel polymer electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive in a mass ratio of (1-6):2:(0.06-6):(0.03-2). Also, Xue et al. teaches a mass ratio of the polymer to the above collection of ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive that is 1:(0.5-10).
For simplicity, if the polymer:(ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) ratio is 1:10, then the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) is 10/(1+10) = 90.9% of the mass of the gel electrolyte.
If the ionic liquid:organic solvent:lithium salt:film-forming additive ratio is set to 1:2:6:0.03, then the lithium salt is 6/(1+2+6+0.03) = 66.6% of the mass of the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) component.
Therefore, the salt is 66.6% of 90.9% of the total mass of the gel electrolyte, or 60.4%, which lies within the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 40% and less than or equal to about 90% of the gel polymer electrolyte).
As to claim 8, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the cation of the ionic liquid comprises a complex of lithium (Li+) and triglyme, a complex of lithium (Li+) and tetraglyme, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Dong et al.: Abstract and Fig. 1, the [Li(G4)] cation of the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid comprises a complex of Li+ and G4, which is a tetraglyme), and
wherein the anion of the ionic liquid comprises bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (FSI), bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (TFSI), bis(oxalato)borate (BOB), difluorooxalatoborate (DFOB), or a combination thereof (see e.g. Dong et al.: Abstract and Fig. 1, the anion of the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid is TFSI).
As to claim 9, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the ionic liquid constitutes, by weight, greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 50% of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Xue et al.:[0017]-[0018], Xue et al.’s gel polymer electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive in a mass ratio of (1-6):2:(0.06-6):(0.03-2). Also, Xue et al. teaches a mass ratio of the polymer to the above collection of ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive that is 1:(0.5-10).
For simplicity, if the polymer:(ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) ratio is 1:10, then the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) is 10/(1+10) = 90.9% of the mass of the gel electrolyte.
If the ionic liquid:organic solvent:lithium salt:film-forming additive ratio is set to 1:2:6:0.03, then the ionic liquid is 1/(1+2+6+0.03) = 11.1% of the mass of the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) component.
Therefore, the ionic liquid is 11.1% of 90.9% of the total mass of the gel electrolyte, or 10.1%, which lies within the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 50% of the gel polymer electrolyte).
As to claim 10, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, wherein the lithium salt comprises lithium bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (LiTFSI) (see e.g. lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI), Xue et al.: [0016]),
the cation of the ionic liquid comprises a complex of lithium (Li+) and tetraglyme (see e.g. Dong et al.: Abstract and Fig. 1, the [Li(G4)] cation of the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid comprises a complex of Li+ and G4, which is a tetraglyme), and the anion of the ionic liquid comprises bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (TFSI) (see e.g. Dong et al.: Abstract and Fig. 1, the anion of the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid is TFSI).
Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. as applied above teaches an ionic liquid wherein the cation of the ionic liquid comprises a tetraglyme rather than a triglyme. However, Dong et al. also teaches that both tetraglymes and triglymes are expected to yield good solvate ionic liquids (see e.g. Dong et al.: pg. 9994, col. 1, para 1 to col. 2, para. 1).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. as applied above by substituting a triglyme for the tetraglyme in the ionic liquid. Said artisan would have found such a substitution to be obvious because Dong et al. teaches that triglymes and tetraglymes are both expected to yield good solvate ionic liquids, and the use of a triglyme instead of a tetraglyme would fail to yield any new benefits that would not have been reasonably expected by one of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 11, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, including a gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. gel-type ionic liquid polymer electrolyte, Xue et al.: [0037]). Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. are silent as to the oxidation potential of this battery, and do not explicitly teach that the gel polymer electrolyte has an oxidation potential of greater than or equal to about 5.5 Volts vs. Li/Li+.
However, as described in MPEP 2112 III, a rejection under 35 USC §103 (and/or 35 USC §102) can be made when the prior art product seems to be identical except that the prior art is silent as to an inherent characteristic. In this case, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teach a gel polymer electrolyte that meets all of the compositional limitations of the claimed gel polymer electrolyte, as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, including a polymer, ionic liquid, and a lithium salt that all read on the materials of the instantly-claimed gel polymer electrolyte. Additionally, the gel polymer electrolyte of Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. appears to be configured to achieve the same, or substantially the same, function of serving as an electrolyte layer for a lithium-ion battery.
One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have reasonably expected that the gel polymer electrolyte of , Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. would have an oxidation potential of greater than or equal to about 5.5 Volts vs. Li/Li+, or alternatively would be close enough to the range to render it obvious, as similar structure/materials are present and similar functional results are achieved.
As to claim 12, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1. Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. are silent as to the ionic conductivity of the gel polymer electrolyte of this battery, and do not explicitly teach that the gel polymer electrolyte has an ionic conductivity of greater than or equal to about 8.5 mS/cm at 60 degrees Celsius (°C).
However, as described in MPEP 2112 III, a rejection under 35 USC §103 (and/or 35 USC §102) can be made when the prior art product seems to be identical except that the prior art is silent as to an inherent characteristic. In this case, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teach a gel polymer electrolyte that meets all of the compositional limitations of the claimed gel polymer electrolyte, as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, including a polymer, ionic liquid, and a lithium salt that all read on the materials of the instantly-claimed gel polymer electrolyte. Additionally, the gel polymer electrolyte of Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. appears to be configured to achieve the same, or substantially the same, function of serving as an ion-conducting electrolyte layer for a lithium-ion battery.
One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have reasonably expected that the gel polymer electrolyte of Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. would have an ionic conductivity of greater than or equal to about 8.5 mS/cm at 60°C, or alternatively would be close enough to the range to render it obvious, as similar structure/materials are present and similar functional results are achieved.
As to claim 14, Xue et al. discloses A battery that cycles lithium ions (see e.g. button cell, Xue et al.: [0037]), the battery comprising:
a negative electrode comprising, by weight, greater than or equal to about 97% lithium (see e.g. lithium sheet negative electrode, Xue et al.: [0037], which reads on a negative electrode that comprises greater than or equal to 97% lithium as Xue et al. does not disclose any additives added to the lithium);
a positive electrode spaced apart from the negative electrode and comprising a high-voltage electroactive material formulated to undergo lithium intercalation and deintercalation (see e.g. lithium iron phosphate positive electrode, Xue et al.: [0037]);
and a gel polymer electrolyte that is configured to conduct lithium ions (see e.g. gel-type ionic liquid polymer electrolyte, Xue et al.: [0037]).
Xue et al. does not explicitly state that the gel polymer electrolyte is disposed between and configured to provide a medium for the conduction of lithium ions between the negative electrode and the positive electrode. However, one of ordinary skill in the battery arts prior to the filing date of the claimed invention would have understood that Xue et al.’s electrolyte would necessarily need to be disposed between the negative and positive electrodes and be configured to provide a medium for the conduction of lithium ions between the negative electrode and the positive electrode, because Xue et al.’s battery would be unable to function as a battery without an electrolyte providing ionic conduction between the electrodes. It would therefore have been obvious to said artisan to place the gel polymer electrolyte between the positive electrode and the negative electrode such that it acts as a conduction medium for lithium ions.
Further regarding claim 14, Xue et al.’s gel polymer electrolyte comprises: an aliphatic polymer comprising poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO, see e.g. Xue et al.: [0012]),
a lithium salt comprising lithium sulfonylimide, lithium borate, or a combination thereof (see e.g. lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI), and lithium bis(oxalateborate) (LiBOB), which read on lithium sulfonylimide and lithium borate, respectively), and
an ionic liquid (see e.g. ionic liquids given in Xue et al.: [0013]).
Xue et al. does not disclose an aliphatic polyester comprising a substituted or unsubstituted poly(ethylene carbonate) (PEC), or an ionic liquid comprising substantially equimolar amounts of a cation and an anion, the cation comprising a complex of lithium (Li+) and triglyme, and the anion comprising bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (TFSI).
Dong et al., working in the field of ionic liquids for battery electrolytes, teaches the use of an ionic liquid comprising substantially equimolar amounts of a cation and an anion, the cation comprising a complex of lithium (Li+) and an ethylene glycol dimethyl ether, an imidazole ion, or a combination thereof (see e.g. equimolar system of [Li(G4)]-[TFSI], which comprises the cation [Li(G4))], which comprises a complex of Li+ and an ethylene glycol dimethyl ether, Dong et al.: pg. 9995, col. 2, para 1 and Fig. 1. See also para [0011] of the instant specification), and the anion comprising a sulfinate ion, a borate ion, or a combination thereof (see e.g. equimolar system of [Li(G4)]-[TFSI], which comprises the anion TFSI, which comprises a sulfinate ion, Dong et al.: pg. 9995, col. 2, para 1 and Fig. 1. See also para [0011] of the Instant Specification).
Dong et al. further teaches that this [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid has been investigated for use as an electrolyte in a gel composite for a Li-ion battery, and that this ionic liquid shows encouraging potential as a solid electrolyte (see e.g. Dong et al.: pg. 9994, col. 1, para 1). Further, Dong et al. also teaches that both tetraglymes and triglymes are expected to yield good solvate ionic liquids (see e.g. Dong et al.: pg. 9994, col. 1, para 1 to col. 2, para. 1).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the ionic liquid in Xue et al.’s battery with an ionic liquid comprising substantially equimolar amounts of a cation and an anion, the cation comprising a complex of lithium (Li+) and triglyme, and the anion comprising bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (TFSI) as taught by Dong et al., Said artisan would have been motivated to make such a substitution because Dong et al. teaches that [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] shows encouraging potential for use as in a gel composite electrolyte in a Li-ion battery, and that both tetraglymes and triglymes are expected to yield good solvate ionic liquids.
Further regarding claim 14, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches a battery wherein the lithium salt constitutes, by weight, greater than or equal to about 40% and less than or equal to about 90% of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Xue et al.:[0017]-[0018], Xue et al.’s gel polymer electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive in a mass ratio of (1-6):2:(0.06-6):(0.03-2). Also, Xue et al. teaches a mass ratio of the polymer to the above collection of ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive that is 1:(0.5-10).
For simplicity, if the polymer:(ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) ratio is 1:10, then the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) is 10/(1+10) = 90.9% of the mass of the gel electrolyte.
If the ionic liquid:organic solvent:lithium salt:film-forming additive ratio is set to 1:2:6:0.03, then the lithium salt is 6/(1+2+6+0.03) = 66.6% of the mass of the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) component.
Therefore, the salt is 66.6% of 90.9% of the total mass of the gel electrolyte, or 60.4%, which lies within the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 40% and less than or equal to about 90% of the gel polymer electrolyte).
As to claim 15, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 14, wherein the substituted or unsubstituted PEC comprises a PEC homopolymer consisting of repeating substituted or unsubstituted ethylene carbonate monomer units, a PEC-based copolymer primarily comprising repeating substituted or unsubstituted ethylene carbonate monomer units, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0014] and Illustration 1 above, the PEC polymer taught by Cui et al. is a copolymer comprising repeating -R1-O-(C=O)-O- and -R2-O-(C=O)-O- monomers that read on substituted or unsubstituted ethylene carbonate monomer units. Additionally, R1 and R2 may comprise identical substituents as per [0015] and [0020], in which case the polymer of Cui et al. reads on a homopolymer comprising repeating -R2-O-(C=O)-O- monomers).
As to claim 16, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 14, wherein the aliphatic polyester further comprises an aliphatic polycarbonate comprising a primary repeating monomer unit having the formula −O−(C=O)−O−R1−, where R1 is a substituted or unsubstituted bivalent hydrocarbon group, an aliphatic polylactone comprising a primary repeating monomer unit having the formula −O−(C=O)−R2−, where R2 is a substituted or unsubstituted bivalent hydrocarbon group, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Cui et al.: [0019]-[0020] and Illustration 1 above, which teaches an aliphatic polycarbonate comprising the monomer −O−(C=O)−O−R1− where R1 may include the substituent -CHm1Xn1-CHm2Xn2-, where m1, n1, m2, and n2 all range from 0 to 2, provided m1 and n1 are not both 0 and m2 and n2 are not both 0. When m1=2, n1=0, m2=2, and n2=0, the substituent is simply -CH2-CH2-. This reads on the instantly-claimed substituted or unsubstituted bivalent hydrocarbon group. See also para [0050] of the Instant Specification, which recites -CH2-CH2- as an example of a bivalent hydrocarbon group).
As to claim 17, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 14, wherein the aliphatic polyester constitutes, by weight, greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 30% of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Xue et al.: [0018], the mass ratio of the polymer to the other components of the gel polymer electrolyte (ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive) is 1:(0.5-10). This means that the polymer is present at a minimum mass ratio of 1:10 and a maximum mass ratio of 1:0.5, which corresponds to mass percentages of 9% and 66%, respectively. Xue et al. therefore discloses a range which overlaps and thereby renders obvious the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 30%).
As to claim 18, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 14, wherein the cation of the ionic liquid comprises a complex of lithium (Li+) and triglyme, a complex of lithium (Li+) and tetraglyme, or a combination thereof (see e.g. Dong et al.: Abstract and Fig. 1, the [Li(G4)] cation of the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid comprises a complex of Li+ and G4, which is a tetraglyme), and
wherein the anion of the ionic liquid comprises bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (FSI), bis(trifluoromethane)sulfonylimide (TFSI), bis(oxalato)borate (BOB), difluorooxalatoborate (DFOB), or a combination thereof (see e.g. Dong et al.: Abstract and Fig. 1, the anion of the [Li(G4)]-[TFSI] ionic liquid is TFSI).
As to claim 19, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 14, wherein the ionic liquid constitutes, by weight, greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 50% of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Xue et al.:[0017]-[0018], Xue et al.’s gel polymer electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive in a mass ratio of (1-6):2:(0.06-6):(0.03-2). Also, Xue et al. teaches a mass ratio of the polymer to the above collection of ionic liquid, organic solvent, lithium salt and film-forming additive that is 1:(0.5-10).
For simplicity, if the polymer:(ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) ratio is 1:10, then the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) is 10/(1+10) = 90.9% of the mass of the gel electrolyte.
If the ionic liquid:organic solvent:lithium salt:film-forming additive ratio is set to 1:2:6:0.03, then the ionic liquid is 1/(1+2+6+0.03) = 11.1% of the mass of the (ionic liquid + organic solvent + lithium salt + film-forming additive) component.
Therefore, the ionic liquid is 11.1% of 90.9% of the total mass of the gel electrolyte, or 10.1%, which lies within the claimed range of greater than or equal to about 5% and less than or equal to about 50% of the gel polymer electrolyte).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al. (CN 103840198A, as read via machine translation) in view of Dong et al. (Dong, D., & Bedrov, D. (2018). The Journal of Physical Chemistry B, 122(43), 9994-10004)) and Cui et al. (EP 3258532A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kwon et al. (KR 20140082043A, as read via machine translation).
As to claim 13, Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. teaches the battery of claim 1, including a gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. gel-type ionic liquid polymer electrolyte, Xue et al.: [0037]), but does not teach that the gel polymer electrolyte further comprises a support comprising a microporous nonwoven material impregnated with and encapsulated in the gel polymer electrolyte.
Kwon et al., also working in the field of gel polymer electrolytes, teaches a gel polymer electrolyte that further comprises a support comprising a microporous nonwoven material (see e.g. porous nonwoven fabric substrate, Kwon et al., [0023]) impregnated with and encapsulated in the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Kwon et al., [0016], the porous support is impregnated with a gel polymer electrolyte). Kwon et al. further teaches that by providing a microporous nonwoven material support for the gel electrolyte, the thickness of the gel polymer electrolyte can be reduced to about 50 mm or less, and that the support improves the strength and flexibility of the gel polymer electrolyte (see e.g. Kwon et al.: [0039]).
It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Xue et al. in view of Dong et al. and Cui et al. by providing the gel polymer electrolyte with a support comprising a microporous nonwoven material impregnated with and encapsulated in the gel polymer electrolyte in the manner taught by Kwon et al.. Said artisan would have been motivated to make such a modification to the battery in order to improve the strength and flexibility of the gel polymer electrolyte and to allow the size of the gel polymer electrolyte to be reduced to about 50 mm or less, as taught by Kwon et al..
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liao et al. (CN 102244292A, as read via machine translation) teaches a similar gel polymer electrolyte system comprising an ionic liquid and a lithium salt.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT HILTON whose telephone number is (571)272-4068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Tong Guo can be reached at (571)-272-3066. 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.
/A.M.H./
Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/CHRISTIAN ROLDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
07/03/2026
Prosecution Insights