DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7, 9, and 10-12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (2) as being anticipated by Yushin, et. al. (US 20130273246 A1)
Regarding Claim 1, Yushin teaches an electrode structure used for a solid-state battery (“[0026] Structures and techniques are accordingly provided herein that address the conventional limitations and barriers for such batteries by providing for a novel architecture of solid-electrolyte-containing electrodes with improved mechanical properties as well as a reduced content of conductive carbon and solid electrolyte,” wherein a solid-electrolyte containing electrodes / battery is a solid state battery), comprising: a conductive structure (“[0043] porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix 604”), wherein the conductive structure comprises a conductor and a plurality of continuous pores formed on the conductor (see above), and the conductor is made of electronic conduction (see above; “[0065] In some applications, it may be advantageous for this matrix material to form a continuous porous film with open interconnected porosity and pore size sufficiently small to utilize a significant amount (e.g., over about 80%) of the available ion storage capacity of electrolytes at charge-discharge rates used in a given application ( FIGS. 27-32)”) and ionic conduction materials (“[0043] FIG. 6 is a cross-sectional illustration of another example active material particle design. In this example, the active particle 600 is a composite particle composed of active material 602 and a porous, electrically-conductive scaffolding matrix 604 . The scaffolding matrix offers an alternative mechanism for introducing pores into the active particle structure. In this example, the active material 602 is illustrated as a collection of individual active (nano)particles . . . [i]n some applications it may be advantageous for active (nano)particles to be of very small size, such as 1-10 nm in the smallest dimension, in order to enhance the reversible ion insertion and extraction rate,” which indicates ionic conduction, i.e. the ions of the active material 602 and the reversible ion insertion and extraction.”) Yushin at [0026, 43, 65].
Yushin teaches an electrode material (active material 602) wherein the electrode material comprises a plurality of active material particles (see the active material 602 nanoparticles), which are used to fill the continuous pores (“[0043] the scaffolding matrix offers an alternative mechanism for introducing pores into the active particle structure”) and in electrical contact with each other so as to form an electrical connection with the conductive structure (electrode active materials are in electrical contact with each other via electron transfer, but this is more specifically indicated by “[0041] in some applications, such shell(s) [i.e. the scaffolding matrix] may also improve electrical connectivity between the individual particles or between the particles and the conductive carbon.” Yushin at [0041 – 43].
Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the electrode structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the electronic conduction and ionic conduction materials comprise a plurality of conductive active particles (“[0044] Particles described in FIG. 6 can be made by infiltration of the active material into the porous electrically conductive scaffold, such as porous carbon” indicates the materials of the scaffold are porous carbon conductive active particles), and the conductive active particles are stacked together to form the conductor and are in electrical contact with each other (see above). Yushin at [0044].
Claim 2 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 7, Claim 7 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches electrode structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the electrode structure includes an interface intermediate layer that is disposed on the conductive structure and covering the continuous pores, wherein the interface intermediate layer exhibits both electronic conductivity and ionic conductivity. Yushin at [0070](“[0070] As discussed above, in some applications, it may be advantageous to produce thin conformal metal ion permeable coating(s) on the electrode surface (around each individual particle, electrically connected within the electrode) prior to coating with or infiltrating with a solid electrolyte in order to reduce the resistance of the electrode/electrolyte interface. In some applications, it may be advantageous for such coatings to be electrically insulative in order to prevent, for example, a formation of ion-depleted regions near the electrode/electrolyte interface.”)
Claim 7 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 9, Claim 9 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches a battery structure, comprising: a positive electrode layer; a negative electrode layer; and a solid electrolyte layer, configured between the positive electrode layer and the negative electrode layer, wherein the positive electrode layer or the negative electrode layer comprises an electrode structure according to claim 1. Yushin at [0013]. (“[0013] A metal or metal-ion battery composition is provided that comprises anode and cathode electrodes along with an electrolyte ionically coupling the anode and the cathode. At least one of the electrodes includes active material particles provided to store and release ions during battery operation. Each of the active material particles includes internal pores configured to accommodate volume changes in the active material during the storing and releasing of the ions. The electrolyte comprises a solid electrolyte ionically interconnecting the active material particles.”).
Claim 9 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 10, Yushin teaches a method for manufacturing an electrode structure (“[0012] Embodiments disclosed herein address the above stated needs by providing improved battery components, improved batteries made therefrom, and methods of making and using the same”), comprising: Step 1: using an electronic conduction and ionic conduction material to form a conductive structure, wherein the conductive structure includes a conductor and multiple continuous pores formed on the conductor (“[0044] Particles described in FIG. 6 can be made by infiltration of the active material into the porous electrically conductive scaffold, such as porous carbon. Porous carbon particles can be synthesized by carbonization from various organic and inorganic precursors. Organic precursors can be, for example, polymers. Polymer particles can be synthesized by emulsion, precipitation, dispersion, suspension, seeded polymerization, etc. The degree of particle porosity can be tuned by adding porogen (a pore forming agent) to the polymerization system, which will phase separate during polymerization. Additional porosity can be obtained by chemical or physical activation of the carbonized particle. Another example of porous carbon particle formation is hydrothermal carbonization, followed by activation. The active material can then be infiltrated into a porous carbon matrix using solution, suspension, or melt infiltration methods.”; and Step2: filling the continuous pores of the conductive structure with an electrode material (“[0044] The active material can then be infiltrated into a porous carbon matrix using solution, suspension, or melt infiltration methods. In some applications, it may be advantageous to first infiltrate a precursor compound into the pores and then convert it into active material”), establishing an electrical connection with the conductive structure (see “[0042] such shells may improve electrical connectivity between the individual particles or between the particles and the conductive carbon . . . . [wherein the active particle comprises a] [0043] porous, electrically conductive scaffolding matrix 604.”).
Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 11, Claim 11 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the electronic conduction and ionic conduction material comprises a plurality of conductive active particles (“[0044] Particles described in FIG. 6 can be made by infiltration of the active material into the porous electrically conductive scaffold, such as porous carbon” indicates the materials of the scaffold are porous carbon conductive active particles). Yushin at [0044].
Claim 11 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 12, Claim 12 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the electrode material comprises a plurality of active material particles (active material nanoparticles 602). Yushin at [0043].
Claim 12 is anticipated by Yushin.
Regarding Claim 15, Claim 15 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches “Step 3: forming an interface intermediate layer on the conductive structure and covering the continuous pores, wherein the interface intermediate layer exhibits both electronic conductivity and ionic conductivity.” Yushin at [0070](“[0070] As discussed above, in some applications, it may be advantageous to produce thin conformal metal ion permeable coating(s) on the electrode surface (around each individual particle, electrically connected within the electrode) prior to coating with or infiltrating with a solid electrolyte in order to reduce the resistance of the electrode/electrolyte interface. In some applications, it may be advantageous for such coatings to be electrically insulative in order to prevent, for example, a formation of ion-depleted regions near the electrode/electrolyte interface.”)
Claim 15 is anticipated by Yushin.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 3, 13-14, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yushin.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the electrode structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the continuous pores is a cylindrical channel(“[0065] Returning to FIGS. 19-36, in some applications, it may be advantageous for the matrix material to be composed of individual particles electrically connected with a thermally stable carbonized binder ( FIGS. 19-20). In some applications, it may be advantageous for these particles to be essentially spherical ( FIG. 19-20). In some applications, it may be advantageous for these particles to be cylindrical or elongated in shape ( FIGS. 21-28)”; as shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 4, these pores may take a cylindrical shape, and because the overall matrix material may form cylindrical particles, this strongly implies cylindrical pores within these cylindrical shaped overall matrix particles, as these matrices “[0043] introducing pores into the active particle structure”). Yushin at [0043, 65], Fig. 2, 4.
PNG
media_image1.png
541
394
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
559
360
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 – 5 of Yushin. The Office notes that while the channels between circular pores, because they are shown in cross section, are cylindrical. As an additional note, these span most of Fig. 2, at least suggesting a channel which passes “from one side to the other.”
Yushin further clarifies that “[0065] [i]n some applications, it may be advantageous to have low tortuosity for the path of metal ions, such as in the case where elongated particles exhibit some degree of vertical alignment ( FIGS. 21-26).” Further, “[0052] In some applications, it may be advantageous to create pores in the outer shell of the particles (e.g., as in the designs of FIGS. 5, 8, 11, and 13).” However, Yushin does not teach the cylindrical channel passes through the conductor from one side to the other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to modify the cylindrical pores of Yushin, such that the cylindrical channel passes through the conductor from one side to the other, because Yushin teaches a benefit to low tortuosity, particularly when the elongated particles exhibit vertical alignment, i.e., the cylindrical pores are vertical, and within such an arrangement, the lowest tortuosity path for the pores while maximizing the ability of ions tor travel through the conductor would be a straight line through the entire conductor.
Claim 3 is obvious over Yushin.
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 relies upon Claim 3. Claim 3 is obvious over modified Yushin.
Yushin teaches “[0037] the internal porosity of the active particles can be used to accommodate these volume changes so that charge/discharge cycles do not cause failure of the particle/solid electrolyte interface, and do not induce formation of cracks in the solid electrolyte. The overall porosity can be optimized to maximize the volumetric capacity, while avoiding the critical stresses that cause rapid composite failure or fatigue during battery cycling.” In other words, the porosity, i.e. the percentage of pores within the material, is a result effective variable which impacts volumetric capacity (when balanced against the risk of crack formation). This also strongly implies the number of pores would impact the capacity by the same token.
Similarly, Yushin teaches “[0065] In this case, higher electrical conductivity and better mechanical (structural) stability may be achieved. In some applications, it may be advantageous to have low tortuosity for the path of metal ions, such as in the case where elongated particles exhibit some degree of vertical alignment ( FIGS. 21-26). In this case, shorter average ion diffusion lengths may lead to higher power performance. In some applications, it may be advantageous for this matrix material to form a continuous porous film with open interconnected porosity and pore size sufficiently small to utilize a significant amount (e.g., over about 80%) of the available ion storage capacity of electrolytes at charge-discharge rates used in a given application ( FIGS. 27-32). In this case, higher (compared to the case when some of the pores between conductive particles are too large) volumetric capacity may be achieved. If a larger space existed between the individual particles, the electrolyte in such a space may not be fully utilized for ion storage (because the high electrical resistance of the electrolyte with no conductive matrix prevents reduction/oxidation reactions from taking place).” This indicates pore size and porosity are result effective variables which impact ion storage capacity. Tortuosity, as previously noted within the Claim 3 analysis, also impacts conductivity. Because the tortuosity, and size of the pores are result effective variables, this logically indicates the radius of the cylindrical channel of continuous pores as previously modified is a result effective variable.
Finally, Yushin indicates “[0043] In general, the characteristic dimensions of the individual active (nano)particles (e.g., a diameter of individual active particles, in an idealized spherical case) may be in the range of about 0.1% to about 50% of the characteristic dimensions of the composite active particle 600 . In some applications it may be advantageous for active (nano)particles to be of very small size, such as 1-10 nm in the smallest dimension, in order to enhance the reversible ion insertion and extraction rate. In some applications, it may be advantageous for the scaffold to be composed of very thin (e.g., less than 0.4 nm) interconnected fragments of electrically conductive material. Porous carbon with a high specific surface area (e.g., greater than 1000 m2 /g) is an example of such a scaffold.” This indicates that the dimensions of the conductor, i.e. the length, width, and height, correspond to the dimensions of the composite active particle and are optimized to enhance reversible ion insertion and extraction rates; further, because these scaffolds offer a mechanism for introducing pores, they have a secondary effect on the ion storage capacity because they modify the pore radius and total number of continuous pores.
However, Yushin is silent as to wherein a relationship between the continuous pores and the length, width and height of the conductor is expressed as follows:
0.3 ≤ (n x π x R2 x H)/(L x W x H) ≤ 0.6,
wherein n is the total number of the continuous pores; w is a ratio of a circumference of a circle to a diameter of the circle; R is the average radius of the cylindrical channel of the continuous pores; H is the height of the conductor; L is the length of the conductor; W is the width of the conductor.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to further modify the electrode structure of Yushin, such that a relationship between the continuous pores and the length, width and height of the conductor is expressed as follows:
0.3 ≤ (n x π x R2 x H)/(L x W x H) ≤ 0.6,
wherein n is the total number of the continuous pores; w is a ratio of a circumference of a circle to a diameter of the circle; R is the average radius of the cylindrical channel of the continuous pores; H is the height of the conductor; L is the length of the conductor; W is the width of the conductor, because n, R, L, W, and H are result effective variables as demonstrated by Yushin, and it would be obvious to arrive at the claimed relationship to optimize ion diffusion lengths, ion storage capacity, and reversible ion insertion / extraction.
Claim 4 is obvious over Yushin.
Regarding Claim 13, Claim 13 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the method as claimed in claim 10. The previously recited method of Yushin comprises the steps recited within the embodiments pertaining to Fig. 6. By contrast, however, the steps as applied to Fig. 3, namely “[0039] In yet another example, porous particles may be produced by a so-called “balling” method, according to which smaller (for example, nanosize) particles are agglomerated together using a binder, which can be removed at later stages or transformed into a solid (e.g., a solid carbon, by carbonization of organic binders). In some examples, the particles can be further annealed in a controlled environment to induce sintering of individual nanoparticles.” Yushin further teaches that this differs from traditional sintering in that “[0008] However, in order for the active particles to be electrically connected, high amounts of conductive carbon additive powder is used (sometimes as high as 30% or more).” Yushin teaches that “[0090] In some embodiments, a combination of two of the example processes #1, #2 and/or #3 (or individual steps from some of these processes) described above may offer improved mechanical properties of the composite electrode compared to any of the processes alone, while offering advantages comparable to that described in processes #1 and #2. For example, if process #2 is used to create the first layer of inorganic electrolyte and process #3 is used to create the second and other inorganic-organic composite electrolyte layers, the result may provide improved mechanical properties of the composite electrode as compared to process #2 alone.” This is taken to indicate that Yushin discloses that it would be obvious to combine steps from different embodiments, but does not specifically disclose the combination of “the step of using the electronic conduction and ionic conduction material to form the conductive structure comprises: stacking the conductive active particles to form the conductive structure; and sintering the conductive structure to make the conductive active particles connect to each other so as to form an integrated structure.”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to apply the aggregating and sintering step of the third embodiment, such that “the step of using the electronic conduction and ionic conduction material to form the conductive structure comprises: stacking the conductive active particles to form the conductive structure; and sintering the conductive structure to make the conductive active particles connect to each other so as to form an integrated structure,” because lower amounts of conductive carbon are required, and this thereby increases the volumetric capacity of the electrode.
Claim 13 is obvious over Yushin.
Regarding Claim 14, Claim 14 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the method as claimed in claim 10. Yushin as previously articulated also teaches “the step of filling the continuous pores of the conductive structure with an electrode material comprises: filling the active material particles in the continuous pores and electrically contacting each other” because Yushin teaches “[0044] Particles described in FIG. 6 can be made by infiltration of the active material into the porous electrically conductive scaffold, such as porous carbon.”
The previously recited method of Yushin comprises the steps recited within the embodiments pertaining to Fig. 6. By contrast, however, the steps as applied to Fig. 3, namely “[0039] In yet another example, porous particles may be produced by a so-called “balling” method, according to which smaller (for example, nanosize) particles are agglomerated together using a binder, which can be removed at later stages or transformed into a solid (e.g., a solid carbon, by carbonization of organic binders). In some examples, the particles can be further annealed in a controlled environment to induce sintering of individual nanoparticles.” Yushin further teaches that this differs from traditional sintering in that “[0008] However, in order for the active particles to be electrically connected, high amounts of conductive carbon additive powder is used (sometimes as high as 30% or more).” Yushin teaches that “[0090] In some embodiments, a combination of two of the example processes #1, #2 and/or #3 (or individual steps from some of these processes) described above may offer improved mechanical properties of the composite electrode compared to any of the processes alone, while offering advantages comparable to that described in processes #1 and #2. For example, if process #2 is used to create the first layer of inorganic electrolyte and process #3 is used to create the second and other inorganic-organic composite electrolyte layers, the result may provide improved mechanical properties of the composite electrode as compared to process #2 alone.” This is taken to indicate that Yushin discloses that it would be obvious to combine steps from different embodiments, but does not specifically disclose the combination of “sintering the conductive structure to make the conductive active particles connect to each other so as to form an integrated structure.”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to apply the aggregating and sintering step of the third embodiment, such that it comprises “sintering the active material particles to connect with the conductors of the conductive structure so as to form an electrical connection,” because lower amounts of conductive carbon are required, and this thereby increases the volumetric capacity of the electrode.
Claim 14 is obvious over Yushin.
Regarding Claim 17, Claim 17 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin teaches the method as claimed in claim 10, wherein each of the continuous pores is a cylindrical channel(“[0065] Returning to FIGS. 19-36, in some applications, it may be advantageous for the matrix material to be composed of individual particles electrically connected with a thermally stable carbonized binder ( FIGS. 19-20). In some applications, it may be advantageous for these particles to be essentially spherical ( FIG. 19-20). In some applications, it may be advantageous for these particles to be cylindrical or elongated in shape ( FIGS. 21-28)”; as shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 4, these pores may take a cylindrical shape, and because the overall matrix material may form cylindrical particles, this strongly implies cylindrical pores within these cylindrical shaped overall matrix particles, as these matrices “[0043] introducing pores into the active particle structure”). Yushin at [0043, 65], Fig. 2, 4.
PNG
media_image1.png
541
394
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
559
360
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 – 5 of Yushin. The Office notes that while the channels between circular pores, because they are shown in cross section, are cylindrical. As an additional note, these span most of Fig. 2, at least suggesting a channel which passes “from one side to the other.”
Yushin further clarifies that “[0065] [i]n some applications, it may be advantageous to have low tortuosity for the path of metal ions, such as in the case where elongated particles exhibit some degree of vertical alignment ( FIGS. 21-26).” Further, “[0052] In some applications, it may be advantageous to create pores in the outer shell of the particles (e.g., as in the designs of FIGS. 5, 8, 11, and 13).” However, Yushin does not teach the cylindrical channel passes through the conductor from one side to the other.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to modify the cylindrical pores of Yushin, such that the cylindrical channel passes through the conductor from one side to the other, because Yushin teaches a benefit to low tortuosity, particularly when the elongated particles exhibit vertical alignment, i.e., the cylindrical pores are vertical, and within such an arrangement, the lowest tortuosity path for the pores while maximizing the ability of ions tor travel through the conductor would be a straight line through the entire conductor.
Claim 17 is obvious over Yushin.
Regarding Claim 18, Claim 18 relies upon Claim 17. Claim 17 is obvious over modified Yushin.
Yushin teaches “[0037] the internal porosity of the active particles can be used to accommodate these volume changes so that charge/discharge cycles do not cause failure of the particle/solid electrolyte interface, and do not induce formation of cracks in the solid electrolyte. The overall porosity can be optimized to maximize the volumetric capacity, while avoiding the critical stresses that cause rapid composite failure or fatigue during battery cycling.” In other words, the porosity, i.e. the percentage of pores within the material, is a result effective variable which impacts volumetric capacity (when balanced against the risk of crack formation). This also strongly implies the number of pores would impact the capacity by the same token.
Similarly, Yushin teaches “[0065] In this case, higher electrical conductivity and better mechanical (structural) stability may be achieved. In some applications, it may be advantageous to have low tortuosity for the path of metal ions, such as in the case where elongated particles exhibit some degree of vertical alignment ( FIGS. 21-26). In this case, shorter average ion diffusion lengths may lead to higher power performance. In some applications, it may be advantageous for this matrix material to form a continuous porous film with open interconnected porosity and pore size sufficiently small to utilize a significant amount (e.g., over about 80%) of the available ion storage capacity of electrolytes at charge-discharge rates used in a given application ( FIGS. 27-32). In this case, higher (compared to the case when some of the pores between conductive particles are too large) volumetric capacity may be achieved. If a larger space existed between the individual particles, the electrolyte in such a space may not be fully utilized for ion storage (because the high electrical resistance of the electrolyte with no conductive matrix prevents reduction/oxidation reactions from taking place).” This indicates pore size and porosity are result effective variables which impact ion storage capacity. Tortuosity, as previously noted within the Claim 3 analysis, also impacts conductivity. Because the tortuosity, and size of the pores are result effective variables, this logically indicates the radius of the cylindrical channel of continuous pores as previously modified is a result effective variable.
Finally, Yushin indicates “[0043] In general, the characteristic dimensions of the individual active (nano)particles (e.g., a diameter of individual active particles, in an idealized spherical case) may be in the range of about 0.1% to about 50% of the characteristic dimensions of the composite active particle 600 . In some applications it may be advantageous for active (nano)particles to be of very small size, such as 1-10 nm in the smallest dimension, in order to enhance the reversible ion insertion and extraction rate. In some applications, it may be advantageous for the scaffold to be composed of very thin (e.g., less than 0.4 nm) interconnected fragments of electrically conductive material. Porous carbon with a high specific surface area (e.g., greater than 1000 m2 /g) is an example of such a scaffold.” This indicates that the dimensions of the conductor, i.e. the length, width, and height, correspond to the dimensions of the composite active particle and are optimized to enhance reversible ion insertion and extraction rates; further, because these scaffolds offer a mechanism for introducing pores, they have a secondary effect on the ion storage capacity because they modify the pore radius and total number of continuous pores.
However, Yushin is silent as to w herein a relationship between the continuous pores and the length, width and height of the conductor is expressed as follows:
0.3 ≤ (n x π x R2 x H)/(L x W x H) ≤ 0.6,
wherein n is the total number of these continuous pores; rc is a ratio of a circumference of a circle to a diameter of the circle; R is the average radius of the cylindrical channel of the continuous pores; H is the height of the conductor; L is the length of the conductor; W is the width of the conductor.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to further modify the method of Yushin, such that a relationship between the continuous pores and the length, width and height of the conductor is expressed as follows:
0.3 ≤ (n x π x R2 x H)/(L x W x H) ≤ 0.6,
wherein n is the total number of these continuous pores; rc is a ratio of a circumference of a circle to a diameter of the circle; R is the average radius of the cylindrical channel of the continuous pores; H is the height of the conductor; L is the length of the conductor; W is the width of the conductor.
wherein n is the total number of the continuous pores; w is a ratio of a circumference of a circle to a diameter of the circle; R is the average radius of the cylindrical channel of the continuous pores; H is the height of the conductor; L is the length of the conductor; W is the width of the conductor, because n, R, L, W, and H are result effective variables as demonstrated by Yushin, and it would be obvious to arrive at the claimed relationship to optimize ion diffusion lengths, ion storage capacity, and reversible ion insertion / extraction.
Claim 18 is obvious over Yushin.
Claims 5-6, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yushin, in view of Balagopal, et. al. (US2014197351A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin is silent as to the average porosity.
Balagopal teaches a porous support for an electrode for a lithium ion battery, wherein, “[0056] Additionally, while such supports can have any suitable porosity that allows the described materials to function as intended, in some non-limiting embodiments, the porosity of such ceramic supports is quite high so that the liquid solutions on either side of the supports may be in intimate contact with a large area of the electrolyte membrane. Porosity, as a percent of total volume for electrolyte supports, generally ranges from about 30 to about 70% porosity. In some non-limiting embodiments, the porous substrate also has a similar thermal expansion and good bonding with the lithium-ion-conducting membrane as well as good mechanical strength. If electrode materials are utilized as structural supports, then similar characteristics for these may also be present.” Further, Balagopal teaches “[0050] the porosity of the porous supports is substantially continuous open-porosity so that liquid solutions on either side of the lithium-ion-conducting ceramic membranes may be in intimate contact with a large area of the dense-layers of lithium-ion-conducting ceramic material, and in some instances, the continuous open-porosity ranges from about 30 volume % to about 90 volume %.” The Office notes that while a liquid is discussed here, the electrolyte material of this section of Balagopal is a solid electrolyte, indicating this refers to the impregnation and formation step. Id. at [0048, 51].
One of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the structure of Yushin, such that it comprises the conductive structure has an average porosity of 30 to 60%, because Balagopal teaches this permits “intimate contact” with a large area (i.e., effective impregnation of the active material particles), and because an overlapping range presents a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 5 is obvious over Yushin, in view of Balagopal.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin is silent as to the average porosity.
Balagopal teaches a porous support for an electrode for a lithium ion battery, wherein, “[0056] Additionally, while such supports can have any suitable porosity that allows the described materials to function as intended, in some non-limiting embodiments, the porosity of such ceramic supports is quite high so that the liquid solutions on either side of the supports may be in intimate contact with a large area of the electrolyte membrane. Porosity, as a percent of total volume for electrolyte supports, generally ranges from about 30 to about 70% porosity. In some non-limiting embodiments, the porous substrate also has a similar thermal expansion and good bonding with the lithium-ion-conducting membrane as well as good mechanical strength. If electrode materials are utilized as structural supports, then similar characteristics for these may also be present.” Further, Balagopal teaches “[0050] the porosity of the porous supports is substantially continuous open-porosity so that liquid solutions on either side of the lithium-ion-conducting ceramic membranes may be in intimate contact with a large area of the dense-layers of lithium-ion-conducting ceramic material, and in some instances, the continuous open-porosity ranges from about 30 volume % to about 90 volume %.” The Office notes that while a liquid is discussed here, the electrolyte material of this section of Balagopal is a solid electrolyte, indicating this refers to the impregnation and formation step. Id. at [0048, 51].
One of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the structure of Yushin, such that it comprises the conductive structure has an average porosity of 30 to 40%, because Balagopal teaches this permits “intimate contact” with a large area (i.e., effective impregnation of the active material particles), and because an overlapping range presents a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 6 is obvious over Yushin, in view of Balagopal.
Regarding Claim 19, Claim 19 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin is silent as to the average porosity.
Balagopal teaches a porous support for an electrode for a lithium ion battery, wherein, “[0056] Additionally, while such supports can have any suitable porosity that allows the described materials to function as intended, in some non-limiting embodiments, the porosity of such ceramic supports is quite high so that the liquid solutions on either side of the supports may be in intimate contact with a large area of the electrolyte membrane. Porosity, as a percent of total volume for electrolyte supports, generally ranges from about 30 to about 70% porosity. In some non-limiting embodiments, the porous substrate also has a similar thermal expansion and good bonding with the lithium-ion-conducting membrane as well as good mechanical strength. If electrode materials are utilized as structural supports, then similar characteristics for these may also be present.” Further, Balagopal teaches “[0050] the porosity of the porous supports is substantially continuous open-porosity so that liquid solutions on either side of the lithium-ion-conducting ceramic membranes may be in intimate contact with a large area of the dense-layers of lithium-ion-conducting ceramic material, and in some instances, the continuous open-porosity ranges from about 30 volume % to about 90 volume %.” The Office notes that while a liquid is discussed here, the electrolyte material of this section of Balagopal is a solid electrolyte, indicating this refers to the impregnation and formation step. Id. at [0048, 51].
One of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the method of Yushin, such that it comprises the conductive structure has an average porosity of 30 to 60%, because Balagopal teaches this permits “intimate contact” with a large area (i.e., effective impregnation of the active material particles), and because an overlapping range presents a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 19 is obvious over Yushin, in view of Balagopal.
Regarding Claim 20, Claim 20 relies upon Claim 10. Claim 10 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin is silent as to the average porosity.
Balagopal teaches a porous support for an electrode for a lithium ion battery, wherein, “[0056] Additionally, while such supports can have any suitable porosity that allows the described materials to function as intended, in some non-limiting embodiments, the porosity of such ceramic supports is quite high so that the liquid solutions on either side of the supports may be in intimate contact with a large area of the electrolyte membrane. Porosity, as a percent of total volume for electrolyte supports, generally ranges from about 30 to about 70% porosity. In some non-limiting embodiments, the porous substrate also has a similar thermal expansion and good bonding with the lithium-ion-conducting membrane as well as good mechanical strength. If electrode materials are utilized as structural supports, then similar characteristics for these may also be present.” Further, Balagopal teaches “[0050] the porosity of the porous supports is substantially continuous open-porosity so that liquid solutions on either side of the lithium-ion-conducting ceramic membranes may be in intimate contact with a large area of the dense-layers of lithium-ion-conducting ceramic material, and in some instances, the continuous open-porosity ranges from about 30 volume % to about 90 volume %.” The Office notes that while a liquid is discussed here, the electrolyte material of this section of Balagopal is a solid electrolyte, indicating this refers to the impregnation and formation step. Id. at [0048, 51].
One of ordinary skill the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to modify the structure of Yushin, such that it comprises the conductive structure has an average porosity of 30 to 40%, because Balagopal teaches this permits “intimate contact” with a large area (i.e., effective impregnation of the active material particles), and because an overlapping range presents a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 20 is obvious over Yushin, in view of Balagopal.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yushin, in view of Waschman, et. al. (US 20210257658 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Claim 8 relies upon Claim 7. Claim 7 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin is silent as to the components of the interface intermediate layer contain elements selected from the group consisting of lithium (Li), sodium (Na), titanium (Ti), lanthanum (La), nickel (Ni), aluminum (Al), strontium (Sr), barium (Ba), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), cobalt (Co), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe) and a combination of two or more thereof. However, Yushin does disclose that common examples of Li-ion solid state electrolytes include sulfide and oxide based garnet electrolytes. Yushin at [0006].
Waschman teaches “[0507] In some embodiments, an interface layer is used to reduce Li metal -Garnet Interfacial Impedance. While there is tremendous interest in solid-state batteries and progress has been made on increasing the lithium ion conductivity of SSEs, there has been little success on the development of high-performance batteries using these SSEs. A major issue is the high interfacial impedance between SSEs and solid electrode materials. This interfacial impedance between Li metal and the garnet SSE may be reduced using an ultrathin Al2 O3 interface layer, deposited by atomic layer deposition (ALD), as illustrated in FIG. 43(a )-(c ).”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to modify the electrode structure as claimed in claim 7, such that the components of the interface intermediate layer contains aluminum (Al) in the form of ultrathin alumina, because Waschman teaches this may reduce interfacial impedance in certain configurations of garnet electrolytes.
Claim 8 is obvious over Yushin, in view of Waschman.
Regarding Claim 16, Claim 16 relies upon Claim 15. Claim 15 is anticipated by Yushin.
Yushin is silent as to the components of the interface intermediate layer contain elements selected from the group consisting of lithium (Li), sodium (Na), titanium (Ti), lanthanum (La), nickel (Ni), aluminum (Al), strontium (Sr), barium (Ba), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), cobalt (Co), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe) and a combination of two or more thereof. However, Yushin does disclose that common examples of Li-ion solid state electrolytes include sulfide and oxide based garnet electrolytes. Yushin at [0006].
Waschman teaches “[0507] In some embodiments, an interface layer is used to reduce Li metal -Garnet Interfacial Impedance. While there is tremendous interest in solid-state batteries and progress has been made on increasing the lithium ion conductivity of SSEs, there has been little success on the development of high-performance batteries using these SSEs. A major issue is the high interfacial impedance between SSEs and solid electrode materials. This interfacial impedance between Li metal and the garnet SSE may be reduced using an ultrathin Al2 O3 interface layer, deposited by atomic layer deposition (ALD), as illustrated in FIG. 43(a )-(c ).”
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would find it obvious to modify the method of Yushin, such that the components of the interface intermediate layer contains aluminum (Al) in the form of ultrathin alumina, because Waschman teaches this may reduce interfacial impedance in certain configurations of garnet electrolytes.
Claim 16 is obvious over Yushin, in view of Waschman.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNA RAJAN HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-9997. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:30 PM M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.R.H./Examiner , Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights