CTNF 18/527,289 CTNF 85390 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3 and 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al (US 20200212478) . Regarding claim 1, Sakai teaches a solid electrolyte material composed of Li, M, and X wherein X can be at least one of Br and I (0009-0013) and M can be at least one of Y, Gd, Mg, Sr, and Ba 0047-0048). Sakai does not explicitly teach an embodiment wherein all of these elements are present. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to utilize all of these elements together insofar as Sakai teaches the combination and it is considered disclosed with sufficient specificity. Regarding claim 2, Sakai teaches X may further include at least one of Br and Cl (0051). Regarding claim 3, Sakai teaches Mg being used (0048). Regarding claims 13-15, Sakai teaches the solid electrolyte material, as discussed above. Sakai does not explicitly teach the X-ray diffraction pattern, as claimed. However, the material of Sakai is considered to be materially the same as the instantly claimed solid electrolyte material, and as such, a similar pattern would be expected. Regarding claim 16, Sakai teaches the solid electrolyte material, as discussed above. Sakai does not explicitly teach the material having a crystal phase belonging to a trigonal system, as claimed. However, the material of Sakai is considered to be materially the same as the instantly claimed solid electrolyte material, and as such, a similar crystal structure would be expected. Regarding claim 17, Sakai teaches a monoclinic crystal phase being observed (0155). Regarding claim 18, Sakai teaches a battery including a cathode, an anode, and an electrolyte layer disposed therebetween. At least one of the cathode, anode, and electrolyte layer includes the solid electrolyte material, as discussed above (0063-0065) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 4-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art is considered to be Sakai et al (US 20200212478), as discussed above . Sakai neither teaches nor renders obvious the solid electrolyte material being represented by the formula (1) as required by instant claim 4. Claims 5-12 depend from instant claim 4. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH A SLIFKA whose telephone number is (571)270-5838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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. /SARAH A. SLIFKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759 June 12, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/527,289 Page 2 Art Unit: 1759 Application/Control Number: 18/527,289 Page 3 Art Unit: 1759 Application/Control Number: 18/527,289 Page 4 Art Unit: 1759
Prosecution Insights