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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application
Claim 20 has been withdrawn in the application
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-19, drawn to a solid secondary battery, classified in H01M 4/136
II. Claim 20, drawn to a method of manufacturing a solid secondary battery, classified in H01M 10/052.
Inventions I and II are related as process of making and product made. The inventions are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the process as claimed can be used to make another and materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process (MPEP § 806.05(f)). In the instant case that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different process such as by a simultaneous milling of the M2S, the alkali salt, the inorganic electronic-conductive structure, and the fibrous carbonaceous material as opposed to a sequential milling process.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; and/or
the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Olga Katsnelson on 26 May 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-19. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 20 is withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-4 and 6-19 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 and 13-19 of copending Application No. 18/496,685, hereinafter ‘685, in view of Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099).
Regarding Claim 1, ‘685 claims A solid secondary battery comprising: a cathode layer; an anode layer; and a solid electrolyte layer between the cathode layer and the anode layer, wherein the cathode layer comprises: a cathode current collector; and a cathode active material layer on at least one side of the cathode current collector, wherein the cathode active material layer comprises a composite cathode active material, wherein the composite cathode active material comprises a composite of i) M2S, M being Li or Na, ii) an alkali metal salt, and iii) an inorganic electronically-conductive structure (claim 1). ‘685 further claims the inorganic electronically-conductive structure has an electronic conductivity of 10-3 S/cm or more (claim 1) and the composite comprises a solid solution of the M2S and the alkali metal salt (claim 2).
‘685 does not claim a two-dimensional carbonaceous structure and/or a fibrous carbonaceous material, the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more, nor the two-dimensional carbonaceous structure is graphene, graphene oxide, or a combination thereof.
Gernov teaches a solid composite cathode for a battery (electric current producing cell) that includes a fibrous carbonaceous material (carbon nanofibers) and sulfur (abstract). The carbon nanofibers have a length of about 1 to about 200 µm and a diameter of 10 to 1000 nanometers (page 12, column 8, lines 24-36). Gernov further teaches an aspect ratio of between 20 to 500 of the carbon nanofibers (page 11, column 6, lines 30-33), which allows for an effective range of the carbon nanofibers (page 13, column 10, lines 5-30) to increase the volumetric densities of electroactive sulfur-based cathodes without sacrificing the high specific capacity of the materials (page 10, column 4, lines 7-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more as taught by Gernov in the claimed invention of ‘685. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion as to increase the volumetric densities of electroactive sulfur-based cathodes without sacrificing the high specific capacity of the materials (Gernov, page 10, column 4, lines 7-10).
Regarding Claim 2, the above imported fibrous carbonaceous material (carbon nanofibers) of Gernov have a rod structure with a cross-section of the fibrous carbonaceous material, crossing a length direction thereof, having a circular shape and have a length of about 1 to about 200 µm and a diameter of 10 to 1000 nanometers (page 12, column 8, lines 24-36). This range overlaps with the claimed range of an aspect ratio of 2 or more. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 3, ‘685 claims an amount of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure in the composite is in a range of about 1 part by weight to about 30 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite (claim 3), which overlaps with the claimed range of an amount of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure in the composite in a range of about 1 part by weight to about 20 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite. ‘685 further claims a molar ratio of the M2S to the alkali metal salt is about 50:50 to about 95:5 (claim 10).
‘685 does not claim an amount of the fibrous carbonaceous material and/or the two-dimensional carbonaceous structure is in a range of about 1 part by weight to about 40 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite.
Gernov further teaches an amount of the fibrous carbonaceous material and/or the two-dimensional carbonaceous structure is in a range of 30 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite (page 17, column 18, line 65 to page 18, column 19, line 2). Since the prior art recites a value within the claimed range, the claimed range is obviated by the prior art (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the amount of the fibrous carbonaceous material as taught by Gernov in the positive electrode composite of the claimed invention of ‘685. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this amount as it allows for sufficient carbon nanofibers present to effectively provide the microporosity and electrical conductivity for efficient utilization of the cathode active material consistent with the volumetric density requirements for loading of cathode active material in the cell (page 15, column 14, lines 11-18).
Regarding Claim 4, ‘685 claims a size of the M2S is identical to or smaller than a size of the alkali metal salt, and a size of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is larger than a size of lithium sulfide and the alkali metal salt, and wherein the particle sizes of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S gradually decrease in order of: the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S (claim 8).
Regarding Claim 6, ‘685 claims the inorganic electronically-conductive structure has a one-dimensional structure form or a two-dimensional structure form (claim 4), wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure comprises a transition metal sulfide, a metal sulfide comprising at least one metal selected from among elements in Groups 3 to 5 of the Periodic Table or a combination thereof, wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure comprises titanium, vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, niobium, tantalum, molybdenum, tungsten, or a combination thereof, and wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is: at least one metal oxide selected from among VO2, ReO2, CrO2, ReO2, VO2, SnO2, TiO2, ZrO2, Al2O3, TeN, TiN, TiO, TiOx (0.75<x<1.45), TinO2n-1 (4<n<10), ReO3, CrO2, and VO2; at least one metal sulfide selected from among ZrS2, FeS, FeS2, CuS, Cu2S, CuS2, Cu9S8, Cu7S4, CoS, CoS2, Co3S4, Co9S8, NiS, NiS2, Ni9S8, Ni3S2, VS, VS2, V2S3, V2S5, VS4, NbS2, NbS3, NbS4, NbS5, Nb2S3, Nb2S5, TaS2, TaS3, TaS4, TaS5, Ta2S3, Ta2S5, Cr2S3, CrS3, MoS2, MoS3, MoS4, WS2, WS3, WS4, WS5, MnS, Mn2S3, TiS2, NiNb3S6, Cu2MoS4, and Cu4Mo6S8; or a combination thereof (claim 5).
Regarding Claim 7, ‘685 claims, in an X-ray diffraction (XRD) spectrum of the composite cathode active material, a first diffraction angle of each of a first peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5°, a second peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 32.5°±0.5°, and a third peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 58.5°±0.5° in the composite is less than a second diffraction angle of each of a fourth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5°, a fifth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 32.5°±0.5°, and a sixth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 58.5°±0.5° in an XRD spectrum of MoS2 used to prepare the composite, respectively, and an intensity of the first peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5° is less than an intensity of the fourth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5° in the XRD spectrum of the MoS2 used to prepare the composite (claim 6).
Regarding Claim 8, ‘685 claims a first lattice constant d1 derived from a first peak appearing at a diffraction angle of 2θ = 27° ± 2.0°, corresponding to the (111) crystal plane of M2S, on the XRD spectrum of the composite, is larger than a second lattice constant d2 derived from a second peak appearing at a diffraction angle of 2θ = 27° ± 2.0°, corresponding to the (111) crystal plane of M2S on the XRD spectrum of the M2S used in the preparation of the composite, and wherein a size of the first lattice constant d1 is 5.78 Å or more (claim 7).
Regarding Claim 9, as the modified invention of ‘685 teaches both the inorganic electronically-conductive structure and the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more, the composite cathode active material has a structure in which the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is supported on the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more.
Regarding Claim 10, ‘685 claims the cathode active material layer further comprises a solid electrolyte, and wherein the solid electrolyte comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte, an oxide-based solid electrolyte, a polymer solid electrolyte, or a combination thereof, wherein an amount of the solid electrolyte is about 10 parts by weight to about 60 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the cathode active material layer (claim 9).
Regarding Claim 11, ‘685 claims the alkali metal salt is a lithium salt or a sodium salt, and the alkali metal salt is a binary compound or a ternary compound, wherein the binary compound comprises: LiI, LiBr, LiCl, LiF, LiH, Li2O, Li2Se, Li2Te, Li3N, Li3P, Li3As, Li3Sb, Li3Al2, LiB3, or a combination thereof; or NaI, NaBr, NaCl, NaF, Na2O, Na2Se, Na3N, Na3P, Na3As, Na3Sb, Na3Al2, NaB3 or a combination thereof, and wherein the ternary compound comprises: Li3OCl, LiPF6, LiBF4, LiSbF6, LiAsF6, LiClO4, LiAlO2, LiAlCl4, LiNO3, Li2CO3, LiBH4, Li2SO4, Li3BO3, Li3PO4, Li4NCl, Li5NCl2, Li3BN2, or a combination thereof; or Na3OCl, NaBF4, NaPF6, NaAsF6, NaClO4, NaNO3, NaAlO2, NaAlCl4, NaNO3, Na2CO3, NaBH4, Na2SO4, Na3BO3, Na3PO4, Na4NCl, Na5NCl2, Na3BN2, or a combination thereof (claim 10).
Regarding Claim 12, ‘685 claims the anode layer comprises an anode current collector and a first anode active material layer on the anode current collector (claim 13).
Regarding Claim 13, ‘685 claims an anode active material of the first anode active material layer comprises at least one of a carbonaceous anode active material or a metal-based anode active material, wherein the carbonaceous anode active material comprises amorphous carbon, crystalline carbon, porous carbon, or a combination thereof, and the metal-based anode active material comprises gold (Au), platinum (Pt), palladium (Pd), silicon (Si), silver (Ag), aluminum (Al), bismuth (Bi), tin (Sn), zinc (Zn), or a combination thereof (claim 14).
Regarding Claim 14, ‘685 claims an anode active material of the first anode active material layer comprises a mixture of a metal-based anode active material and a carbonaceous material, a metal-based anode active material being supported on a carbonaceous material, or a combination thereof (claim 14).
Regarding Claim 15, ‘685 claims the anode layer comprises an anode current collector and a lithium host layer on a side of the anode current collector, wherein the lithium host layer comprises a lithium host structure, wherein the lithium host structure comprises at least one lithium host, the at least one lithium host comprising a carbon-based lithium host, a metal-based lithium host, a polymer-based lithium host, or a combination thereof, and wherein the solid secondary battery further comprises a first inactive member on the anode layer (claim 15).
Regarding Claim 16, ‘685 claims a second anode active material layer between the anode current collector and the first anode active material layer, wherein the second anode active material layer is a metal layer comprising lithium and/or a lithium alloy, and wherein the second anode active material layer is a plated layer, and a thickness of the first anode active material layer is greater than a thickness of the second anode active material layer (claim 16).
Regarding Claim 17, ‘685 claims the solid secondary battery further comprises an inactive elastic member on a side of the cathode layer or the anode layer, or does not comprise the inactive elastic member (claim 17).
Regarding Claim 18, ‘685 claims the electrolyte layer comprises a solid electrolyte, a gel electrolyte, or a combination thereof, wherein the solid electrolyte comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte, an oxide-based solid electrolyte, a polymer solid electrolyte, or a combination thereof, and wherein the gel electrolyte comprises a polymer gel electrolyte (claim 18).
Regarding Claim 19, ‘685 claims he anode layer comprises an anode current collector, wherein at least one of the cathode current collector or the anode current collector comprises a base film and a metal layer on at least one side of the base film, wherein the base film comprises a polymer, wherein the polymer comprises polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), polyimide (PI), or a combination thereof, and wherein the metal layer comprises indium (In), copper (Cu), magnesium (Mg), stainless steel, titanium (Ti), iron (Fe), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni), zinc (Zn), aluminum (Al), germanium (Ge), lithium (Li), or an alloy thereof (claim 19).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 5 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 4 and 11 of copending Application No. 18/496,685, hereinafter ‘685, in view of Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Chen (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0162901).
Regarding Claim 5, ‘685 claims the inorganic electronically-conductive structure has a length of about 1 µm to about 50 µm, and a thickness of about 0.01 µm to about 10 µm, and the M2S has a size of about 0.1 nm to about 10 µm (claim 4), and a particle size of the composite is 2 μm or less (claim 11), which overlaps with the claimed range of the composite has a particle size of 10 µm or less. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
‘685 does not claim the alkali metal salt has a size of about 1 nm to about 10 µm
Chen teaches a solid-state lithium conducting electrolyte and cathode active material (catholyte) (abstract). The electrode active material contains a lithium-phosphorus-sulfur-iodine (LPSI) ion conductor ([0108], the LPSI and electrode slurry are laminated together), which is made via milling lithium sulfide and an alkali metal salt (LiI) with other components ([0137]). The alkali metal salt (LiI) has a workable range of 1 nm to 100 nm ([0050] and [0122]). This overlaps with the claimed range of about 1 nm to about 10 µm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the workable range of the alkali metal salt as taught by Chen in the cathode active material of the claimed invention of ‘685. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this range of sizes as it would allow for the combination of the alkali salt with the lithium sulfide and other components with a reasonable expectation of success.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: ref. #4 and ref #5 in Claim 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-19 are 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-8 recite the limitation “the composite” which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “the composite” refers to the composite cathode active material in Claim 1, lines 9-10, or the composite of “i) M2S, M being Li or Na, ii) an alkali metal salt, iii) an inorganic electronically-conductive structure, and iv) a two-dimensional carbonaceous structure and/or a fibrous carbonaceous material” in Claim 1 lines 11-14.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a two-dimensional carbonaceous structure” in lines 13 and 19 which render the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear what Applicant means by “two-dimensional”, as there is no definition in the Applicant’s specification. It is unclear if two-dimensional means a shape with a size in only two dimensions, or if two-dimensional means a shape with a size much smaller in one directions than in the other two.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a size of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is larger than a size of lithium sulfide and the alkali metal salt” in lines 2-4 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if a size of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure must be larger than both the size of the lithium sulfide and the size of the alkali metal salt, or if a size of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure must be larger than the combined sizes of the lithium sulfide and the alkali metal salt.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the particle sizes of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S gradually decrease in order of: the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S” in lines 5-7 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if what is claimed is that the inorganic electronic-conductive structure is larger than the alkali metal salt which is larger than the M2S, or that each constituent has particles with a range of sizes, with the gradient of ranges being largest for the inorganic electronic-conductive structure, smaller for the alkali metal salt, and even smaller for the M2S.
Claim 4 recites the limitations “a size of the M2S is identical to or smaller than a size of the alkali metal salt” in lines 2-3, and “the particle sizes of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S gradually decrease in order of: the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S” in lines 5-7 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if a size of the M2S can be identical to a size of the alkali metal salt, or if a size of the M2S must be smaller than a size of the alkali metal salt.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the inorganic electronically-conductive structure has a one-dimensional structure form or a two-dimensional structure form” which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear what Applicant means by “one-dimensional” and “two-dimensional”, as there is no definition in the Applicant’s specification. It is unclear if one-dimensional means a shape with a size in only one dimension, or if one-dimensional means a shape with sizes much smaller in two directions than in the third. It is unclear if two-dimensional means a shape with a size in only two dimensions, or if two-dimensional means a shape with a size much smaller in one directions than in the other two.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure comprises a transition metal sulfide, a metal sulfide comprising at least one metal selected from among elements in Groups 3 to 5 of the Periodic Table or a combination thereof” in lines 4-6 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if inorganic electronically-conductive structure contains either a transition metal sulfide or a metal sulfide comprising at least one metal selected from among elements in Groups 3 to 5 of the Periodic Table, including combinations of metals selected from among elements in Groups 3 to 5 of the Periodic Table, or if the inorganic electronically-conductive structure includes a metal sulfide, or a metal sulfide comprising at least one metal selected from among elements in Groups 3 to 5 of the Periodic Table, or a combination of the two elements.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the inorganic electronically-conductive structure has a one-dimensional structure form or a two-dimensional structure form, wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure comprises a transition metal sulfide, a metal sulfide comprising at least one metal selected from among elements in Groups 3 to 5 of the Periodic Table or a combination thereof, wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure comprises titanium, vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, cobalt, nickel, copper, zinc, niobium, tantalum, molybdenum, tungsten, or a combination thereof, and wherein the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is: at least one metal oxide selected from among VO2, ReO2, CrO2, ReO2, VO2, SnO2, TiO2, ZrO2, Al2O3, TeN, TiN, TiO, TiOx (0.75<x<1.45), TinO2n-1 (4<n<10), ReO3, CrO2, and VO2; at least one metal sulfide selected from among ZrS2, FeS, FeS2, CuS, Cu2S, CuS2, Cu9S8, Cu7S4, CoS, CoS2, Co3S4, Co9S8, NiS, NiS2, Ni9S8, Ni3S2, VS, VS2, V2S3, V2S5, VS4, NbS2, NbS3, NbS4, NbS5, Nb2S3, Nb2S5, TaS2, TaS3, TaS4, TaS5, Ta2S3, Ta2S5, Cr2S3, CrS3, MoS2, MoS3, MoS4, WS2, WS3, WS4, WS5, MnS, Mn2S3, TiS2, NiNb3S6, Cu2MoS4, and Cu4Mo6S8; or a combination thereof” in lines 1-19 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if each limitation beginning with “wherein” (on lines 2, 4, 7, 10) are in the alternative to one another, if each limitation is required, or if there is some combination of these limitations that are required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the composite cathode active material has a structure in which iii) the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is supported on iv) the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more” in lines 2-4 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. As “a fibrous carbonaceous material” in Claim 1 lines 13-14 is an optional limitation, and Claim 9 does not appear to be actively claiming that the carbonaceous structure is the fibrous carbonaceous structure, it is unclear how the inorganic electronically-conductive structure can be supported by it in embodiments where it is not present.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the first anode active material layer" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this is the first anode active material in Claim 12, as Claim 16 is not dependent on Claim 12, or if this is a separate first anode active material layer entirely.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the first anode active material layer" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this is the first anode active material in Claim 12, as Claim 16 is not dependent on Claim 12, or if this is a separate first anode active material layer entirely.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the anode current collector" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this is the anode current collector in Claim 12, as Claim 16 is not dependent on Claim 12, or if this is a separate anode current collector entirely.
Claims 2-19 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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 1-3, 6, 9-13, 15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099).
Regarding Claim 1, Huang teaches a solid secondary battery (solid state battery) including a cathode layer, an anode layer, and a solid electrolyte layer between the cathode layer and the anode layer ([0039] and [0069]). The cathode layer comprises: a cathode current collector ([0035]) and a cathode active material layer on at least one side of the cathode current collector ([0024]and [0037]). The cathode active material layer comprises a composite cathode active material, wherein the composite cathode active material comprises a composite (the composite is formed by dry ball milling the materials, which results in a solid solution of the M2S and the alkali metal salt [0018]) of M2S, M being Li or Na (Li2S, [0010]), an alkali metal salt (LiI, [0010]), and a two-dimensional carbonaceous structure and/or a fibrous carbonaceous material (conductive carbon material, [0010], which can be graphene, a two-dimensional carbonaceous structure, or carbon nanofibers, a fibrous carbonaceous material [0015]).
Huang does not teach the composite cathode active material containing an inorganic electronically--conductive structure, nor the inorganic electronically-conductive structure having an electronic conductivity of 10-3 S/cm or more.
Holme teaches a solid secondary battery comprising with a cathode layer, an anode layer, and a solid electrolyte layer between the cathode layer and the anode layer ([0017] and fig. 5 ref. #505, #507, #503). Holme further teaches an inorganic electronically-conductive structure included in a composite cathode active material (mixed electron-ion conducting component (MEIC), [0138]), or Li+ ionic conductor, [0142]), which allow for both electron and lithium-ion transport (for the MEIC, [0138) or to increase ionic conductivity of the electrode (for the Li+ ionic conductor, [0142]).
The inorganic electronic-conductive structure has an electronic conductivity of 1×10-7 siemens per centimeter (S/cm) or more (for the MEIC, [0138]) or of 1×10-4 siemens per centimeter (S/cm) or more (for the Li+ ionic conductor, [0142]) which overlap with the claimed range of 1×10-3 siemens per centimeter (S/cm) or more. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the inorganic electronic-conductive structure of Holme in the composite cathode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion to increase electron and lithium-ion conductivity in the electrode.
Huang and Holme do not explicitly teach the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more.
Gernov teaches a solid composite cathode for a battery (electric current producing cell) that includes carbon nanofibers and sulfur (abstract). The carbon nanofibers have a length of about 1 to about 200 µm and a diameter of 10 to 1000 nanometers (page 12, column 8, lines 24-36). Gernov further teaches an aspect ratio of between 20 to 500 of the carbon nanofibers (page 11, column 6, lines 30-33), which allows for an effective range of the carbon nanofibers (page 13, column 10, lines 5-30) to increase the volumetric densities of electroactive sulfur-based cathodes without sacrificing the high specific capacity of the materials (page 10, column 4, lines 7-10). This range overlaps with the claimed range of an aspect ratio of 2 or more. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more as taught by Gernov in the cathode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion to increase the volumetric densities of electroactive sulfur-based cathodes without sacrificing the high specific capacity of the materials.
Regarding Claim 2, Huang teaches the fibrous carbonaceous material is a rod structure with a circular shape cross-section that is carbon nanofibers ([0015]).
Furthermore, the above imported carbon nanofibers of Gernov have a length of about 1 to about 200 µm and a diameter of 10 to 1000 nanometers (page 12, column 8, lines 24-36), which overlap with the claimed range of a length of about 1 µm to about 50 µm, and a diameter of about 10 nm to about 10 µm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 3, Huang further teaches an amount of the fibrous carbonaceous material and/or the two-dimensional carbonaceous structure is in a range of 0 parts by weight to 30 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite (abstract). This overlaps with the claimed range of about 1 part by weight to about 40 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Huang does not teach an amount of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure in the composite is in a range of about 1 part by weight to about 20 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite.
Holme further teaches an amount of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure in the composite is in a range of about 1 part by weight to 100 parts by weight of the composite cathode active material to about 50 parts by weight to 100 parts by weight of the composite cathode active material ([0139], for the MEIC) or 20 parts by weight to 100 parts by weight of the composite cathode active material or less (for the Li+ ionic conductor, [0142]), which allow for sufficient lithium ion and electron transport for functioning of the device ([0139]). These ranges overlap with the claimed of 1 part by weight to about 20 parts by weight, with respect to 100 parts by weight of the composite. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the amount of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure as taught by Holme in the composite cathode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this amount for sufficient lithium ion and electron transport for functioning of the device.
Huang further teaches a molar ratio of the M2S to the alkali metal salt is about 69:31 to 96:4. This is determined by the range of the M2S in the composite cathode active material (30%-80% Li2S, abstract) and the range of the alkali metal salt in the composite cathode active material (10-40% LiI, abstract). When standardizing to 100 grams of the composite cathode active material, this would result in the first range being calculated from 30 grams of Li2S (which is 0.6572 moles, calculated with the molar mass of Li2S being 45.95 grams/mole) and 40 grams of LiI (which is 0.2988 moles, calculated with the molar mass of LiI being 133.85 grams/mole), resulting in a ratio of 69:31 Li2S to LiI. The second ratio is calculated from 80 grams of Li2S (which is 1.741 moles) and 10 grams of LiI (which is 0.0747 moles), resulting in a ratio of 96:4 Li2S to LiI.
The molar ratio of the M2S to the alkali metal salt of 69:31 to 96:4 overlaps with the claimed range of 50:50 to about 95:5. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 6, Holme further teaches the above-imported inorganic electronic-conductive structure comprises MoS2 (molybdenum sulfide, [0138]), which is a transition metal sulfide with molybdenum that has a two-dimensional form.
Regarding Claim 9, as modified Huang teaches both the inorganic electronically-conductive structure (of Holme, mixed electron-ion conducting component (MEIC), [0138]), or Li+ ionic conductor, [0142]) and the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more (carbon nanofibers, a fibrous carbonaceous material [0015]), and as it is formed by a ball milling of the components (Huang, [0055]), the composite cathode active material has a structure in which the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is supported on the fibrous carbonaceous material having an aspect ratio of 2 or more.
Regarding Claim 10, Huang further teaches the cathode active material layer further comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte ([0024] and [0030]). The amount of the solid electrolyte is about 0 parts by weight to about 40 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the cathode active material layer (0% to 40% weight, [0024]). This range overlaps with the claimed range of about 10 parts by weight to about 60 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the cathode active material layer. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 11, Huang further teaches the alkali metal salt is a binary lithium salt including LiI or LiBr (abstract).
Regarding Claim 12, Huang further teaches the solid secondary battery includes an anode layer (negative electrode, [0039]).
Huang does not teach the anode layer comprises an anode current collector and a first anode active material layer on the anode current collector.
Holme further teaches an anode layer that comprises an anode current collector made of TaN, TiN, Cu, Fe, stainless steel, steel, W, Ni, Mo, or alloys thereof ([0170]), and a first anode active material layer on the anode current collector ([0168]-[0170]). The anode active material of the first anode active material layer comprises at least one selected from a carbon-based anode active material such as porous carbon nanotubes, carbon buckyballs, carbon fibers, activated carbon, graphite, porous silicon, aerogels, zeolites, xerogels ([0169]), or a metal-based anode active material such as silicon (Si) or tin (Sn) ([0168]).
Holme further teaches the anode layer comprises an anode current collector ([0171] and a lithium host layer (negative electrode active material layer) on one surface of the anode current collector, the lithium host layer comprises a lithium host structure, the lithium host structure comprises a carbon-based lithium host (carbon nanotubes) ([0169]), and the solid secondary battery comprises a first inactive member (silicon wafer) on one side surface of the anode layer ([0207], fig. 5, substrate foil).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the anode layer of Holme in the solid secondary battery of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to us this anode layer as it allows for the intercalation of lithium ions (Holme, [0168]) and can relieve swelling of the anode layer (Holme, [0169]).
Regrading Claim 13, Holme teaches the above imported anode active material of the first anode active material layer comprises at least one selected from a carbon-based anode active material such as porous carbon nanotubes, carbon buckyballs, carbon fibers, activated carbon, graphite, porous silicon, aerogels, zeolites, xerogels ([0169]), or a metal-based anode active material such as silicon (Si) or tin (Sn) ([0168]).
Regarding Claim 15, Holme teaches the above imported anode layer comprises an anode current collector ([0171] and a lithium host layer (negative electrode active material layer) on one surface of the anode current collector, the lithium host layer comprises a lithium host structure, the lithium host structure comprises a carbon-based lithium host (carbon nanotubes) ([0169]), and the solid secondary battery comprises a first inactive member (silicon wafer) on one side surface of the anode layer ([0207], fig. 5, substrate foil).
Regarding Claim 17, Huang does not teach the solid secondary battery further comprises an inactive elastic member on a side of the cathode layer or the anode layer.
Regarding Claim 18, Huang teaches the electrolyte layer comprises a sulfide-based solid electrolyte ([0040]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Sung et. al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0301694) and Chen et. al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0162901).
Huang, Holme, and Gernov are relied upon as described above.
Modified Huang does not teach the size of the M2S.
Holme further teaches the particle of the M2S used (lithium sulfide) is 5 nm or less ([0022]) to increase mass transport speed in the electrode ([0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the size of M2S as taught by Holme in the positive electrode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this size to improve mass transport speed.
Modified Huang does not explicitly teach the particle size of the inorganic electronic-conductive structure.
Modified Huang does teach that the inorganic electronic-conductive structure may be MoS2 (Holme, molybdenum sulfide, [0138]). Sung teaches a lithium-sulfur secondary battery includes a cathode current collector and a cathode electrode on the cathode current collector (abstract). Sung also teaches that the cathode electrode includes MoS2 (metal sulfide catalyst, [0006]-[0007]), which has an average particle size ranging from 1 nm to 100 µm ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the particle size of MoS2 as taught by Sung in the electrode of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this size range as when it is below this range it is difficult to sufficiently adsorb the cathode active material particles, and when it is above this range it may be difficult to uniformly disperse the metal sulfide catalyst particles, thus reducing the capacity of the cathode electrode (Sung, [0061]).
Modified Huang does not teach the particle size of the alkali metal salt.
Chen teaches a solid-state lithium conducting electrolyte and cathode active material (catholyte) (abstract). The electrode active material contains a lithium-phosphorus-sulfur-iodine (LPSI) ion conductor ([0108], the LPSI and electrode slurry are laminated together), which is made via milling lithium sulfide and an alkali metal salt (LiI) with other components ([0137]). The alkali metal salt (LiI) has a workable range of 1 nm to 100 nm ([0050] and [0122]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the workable range of the alkali metal salt as taught by Chen in the cathode active material of modified Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this range of sizes as it would allow for the combination of the alkali salt with the lithium sulfide and other components with a reasonable expectation of success.
Within the size ranges of the M2S, alkali salt, and inorganic electronic-conductive structure of modified Holme, a particle size of the M2S is less than or equal to a particle size of the alkali metal salt, and a size of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure is larger than a size of lithium sulfide and the alkali metal salt, and the particle sizes of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S gradually decrease in order of: the inorganic electronically-conductive structure, the alkali metal salt, and the M2S.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Qiao (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 106207185), Chen et. al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0162901) and Park (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0018767). For prior art discussion see English translations for CN- 106207185-A.
Huang, Holme, and Gernov are relied upon as described above.
Modified Huang further teaches that the inorganic electronically-conductive structure may be MoS2 (Holme, molybdenum sulfide, [0138]).
Modified Huang does not teach the inorganic electronically-conductive structure has a length of about 1 µm to about 50 µm, and a thickness of about 0.01 µm to about 10 µm
Qiao teaches a MoS2 micron rod with hollow structure that is used as an additive in a lithium-ion battery (abstract and page 11, paragraph 1). Qiao also teaches the MoS2 micron rod has a length of 2 µm to 50 µm, and a thickness (diameter) of 50 nm to 20 µm (page 6, paragraph 3, lines 1-2), the size of which allows for improved dispersibility (page 12, paragraph 2, lines 5-6). The ranges of lengths and thickness overlap with the claimed ranges of a length of about 1 µm to about 50 µm, and a thickness of about 0.01 µm to about 10 µm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the size of MoS2 as taught by Qiao in the electrode active material of modified Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this size to improve dispersibility of the inorganic electronically-conductive structure in the electrode active material.
Modified Huang does not teach the M2S has a size of about 0.1 nm to about 10 µm.
Holme further teaches the particle of the M2S used (lithium sulfide) is 5 nm or less ([0022]) to increase mass transport speed in the electrode ([0091]). This overlaps with the claimed range of 0.1 nm to about 10 µm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the size of M2S as taught by Holme in the positive electrode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this size to improve mass transport speed.
Modified Huang does not teach the alkali metal salt has a size of about 1 nm to about 10 µm.
Chen teaches a solid-state lithium conducting electrolyte and cathode active material (catholyte) (abstract). The electrode active material contains a lithium-phosphorus-sulfur-iodine (LPSI) ion conductor ([0108], the LPSI and electrode slurry are laminated together), which is made via milling lithium sulfide and an alkali metal salt (LiI) with other components ([0137]). The alkali metal salt (LiI) has a workable range of 1 nm to 100 nm ([0050] and [0122]). This overlaps with the claimed range of about 1 nm to about 10 µm. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the workable range of the alkali metal salt as taught by Chen in the cathode active material of modified Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this range of sizes as it would allow for the combination of the alkali salt with the lithium sulfide and other components with a reasonable expectation of success.
Modified Huang does not teach the composite has a particle size of 10 µm or less
Park teaches a composite cathode active material for a lithium battery (title). Park further teaches the size of the composite (average particle diameter) may be in a range of about 10 nm to 500 μm, which allows for a lithium battery including the composite cathode active material having improved physical properties ([0081]). This range overlaps with the claimed range of 10 μm or less. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the composite size as taught by Park in the composite cathode active material of modified Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this size as it allows for improved physical properties when used in a battery (Park, [0081]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Tao (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 115472797). For prior art discussion see English translations for CN-115472797-A.
Huang, Holme, and Gernov are relied upon as described above.
Modified Huang further teaches that the inorganic electronically-conductive structure may be MoS2 (Holme, molybdenum sulfide, [0138]).
Huang does not explicitly teach that in an X-ray diffraction (XRD) spectrum of the composite cathode active material, a first diffraction angle of each of a first peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5°, a second peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 32.5°±0.5°, and a third peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 58.5°±0.5° in the composite is less than a second diffraction angle of each of a fourth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5°, a fifth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 32.5°±0.5°, and a sixth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 58.5°±0.5° in an XRD spectrum of MoS2 used to prepare the composite, respectively, and an intensity of the first peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5° is less than an intensity of the fourth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5° in the XRD spectrum of the MoS2 used to prepare the composite.
Tao teaches a sodium battery with a molybdenum sulfide (molybdenum disulfide) composite for the electrode of a sodium-battery (abstract). Tao also teaches that, in an X-ray diffraction (XRD) spectrum of the composite active material, an offset of the molybdenum sulfide peaks to a smaller diffraction angle, which represents an increase in interlayer expansion (page 31, paragraph 2, lines 1-5), in turn allowing for increased ion intercalation (page 30, paragraph 3, lines 3-5). Tao also shows an intensity of a peak at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5° is less than an intensity of the fourth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 14.5°±0.5° in the XRD spectrum of the MoS2 used to prepare the composite (fig. 3). Tao teaches that the molybdenum sulfide in the composite with a lower intensity of the X-ray diffraction peak relative to the molybdenum sulfide used to prepare the composite allows for increased ion intercalation (page 32, paragraph 3, lines 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use MoS2 in the composite that has lower diffraction angles that the MoS2 used to prepare the composite as taught by Tao in the electrode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a composite with this property for the increased ion intercalation.
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Hayashi (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0317337).
Huang, Holme, and Gernov are relied upon as described above.
Regarding Claim 8, Modified Huang does not teach explicitly teach in an X-ray diffraction (XRD) spectrum of the composite, a first lattice constant (d1) derived from a seventh peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of 27°±2.0° corresponding to a (111) crystal plane of the M2S is larger than a second lattice constant (d2) derived from an eighth peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 27°±2.0° corresponding to a (111) crystal plane of the M2S in an XRD spectrum of the M2S used to prepare the composite, nor a size of the first lattice constant (d1) is 5.78 angstrom (Å) or more,
Hayashi teaches a positive electrode active material comprising M2S used in a composite with an alkali metal salt (abstract). Hayashi also teaches a first lattice constant (d1) derived from a peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of 27°±2.0° corresponding to a (111) crystal plane of the M2S is larger than a second lattice constant (d2) derived from a peak appearing at a diffraction angle (2θ) of about 27°±2.0° corresponding to a (111) crystal plane of the M2S in an XRD spectrum of the M2S used to prepare the composite (fig. 2), giving lattice constants of up to approximately 5.87 Å, which allows for an increase in ionic conductivity (fig. 3, as the lattice constant increases the ionic conductivity increases). The lattice constant of 5.87 Å lies within the claimed range of 5.78 Å or more. Since the prior art recites a value within the claimed range, the claimed range is considered obvious over the prior art (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a composite with a larger lattice constant of M2S than the than of the M2S used to prepare the composite as taught by Hayashi in the electrode active material of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion as it leads to increased ionic conductivity (Hayashi, fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Huang does not explicitly teach the anode active material of the first anode active material layer comprises a mixture of a metal-based anode active material and a carbon-based material, a metal-based anode active material supported on a carbon-based material, or a combination thereof.
Hayashi further teaches the anode active material comprises a mixture of a metal-based anode active material such as indium (In) or tin (Sn) ([0065]-[0066]) and a carbon-based material (electrical conducting material) such as natural graphite, artificial graphite, AB, VGCF, carbon nanotube and activated carbon ([0068]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use an anode active material with a metal-based anode active material and a carbon-based material as taught by Hayashi in the anode of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion as the mixture will allow for improved electrical conductivity over using solely a metal-based anode active material layer.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Affinito et. al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0068001).
Huang, Holme, and Gernov are relied upon as described above.
Huang further teaches the solid secondary battery includes an anode layer (negative electrode, [0039]).
Huang does not teach the anode layer comprises an anode current collector and a first anode active material layer on the anode current collector.
Holme further teaches an anode layer that comprises an anode current collector made of TaN, TiN, Cu, Fe, stainless steel, steel, W, Ni, Mo, or alloys thereof ([0170]), and a first anode active material layer on the anode current collector ([0168]-[0170]). The anode active material of the first anode active material layer comprises at least one selected from a carbon-based anode active material such as porous carbon nanotubes, carbon buckyballs, carbon fibers, activated carbon, graphite, porous silicon, aerogels, zeolites, xerogels ([0169]), or a metal-based anode active material such as silicon (Si) or tin (Sn) ([0168]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the anode layer of Holme in the solid secondary battery of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to us this anode layer as it allows for the intercalation of lithium ions (Holme, [0168]) and can relieve swelling of the anode layer (Holme, [0169]).
Modified Huang does not explicitly teach a second anode active material layer between the anode current collector and the first anode active material layer, and the first anode active material layer is thicker than the second anode active material layer.
Affinito teaches electrochemical cells and a method for assembling electrochemical cells with release layers (abstract). Affinito also teaches an anode layer containing a first anode active material layer and a second anode active material layer, wherein the second anode active material layer (first anode active layer) is between the anode current collector and the first anode active material layer (second anode active layer) ([0129]). The second anode active material layer is a plated layer ([0131], lithium plates on the current collector to form the anode active material layer) Affinito further teaches the first anode active material layer (second anode active layer) is thicker than the second anode active material layer (first anode active layer) ([0129]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the two anode active material layers with differing thicknesses of Affinito in the anode of modified Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion as it allows for one to incorporate a targeted amount of anode active material in an electrochemical cell to better match the requirements or capacity of the cathode, and/or to achieve a specific energy density target, while reducing excessive waste of anode active material (Affinito, [0130]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0175494) in view of Holme (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0170493) and Gernov (US Patent No. 6,194,099), further in view of Oh et. al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0014031).
Huang, Holme, and Gernov are relied upon as described above.
The above imported anode of Holme further teaches the anode layer comprises an anode current collector with a metal layer that comprises stainless steel, titanium (Ti), or nickel (Ni) ([0170]).
Modified Huang does not teach at least one of the cathode current collector or the anode current collector comprises a base film and a metal layer on at least one surface of the base film, and wherein the base film comprises a polymer, the polymer comprising polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), polyimide (PI), or a combination thereof.
Oh teaches one-sided electrode with reduced twisting for a secondary battery (title). Oh further teaches a base film (electrode distortion-preventing layer) on one surface of an electrode active material layer ([0037] fig. 2 ref. # 120, #130). The base film is made of a polymer ([0015]) that is selected from polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP), or a combination thereof ([0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the base film layer of Oh in the anode or cathode of Huang. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this inclusion as it prevents distortion of the electrode, in turn improving the ease of manufacture (Oh, [0026]-[0027]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Myles Alan Lovasz whose telephone number is (571)272-0214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/MAL/
Myles Alan LovaszExaminer, Art Unit 1788 06/08/2026
/ALEXANDRE F FERRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights