DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim s 1, 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ( US - 20190140267 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘ Nair ’ , in view of ( US - 20190252689 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Xu’, in further view of ( US - 20190273258 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Thomas- Alyea ’ Regarding Claim 1 , Nair teaches a n electrochemical device comprising: a positive electrode (Nair, cathode film , 120 , Fig. 1) a negative electrode (Nair, anode film , 150 , Fig. 1) ; and an electrolyte having lithium ion conductivity (Nair, “ A standard electrolyte which contained 1M LiPF6 in EC/DEC solvent (volume ratio=1:1) was used . ”, see [0099]) , wherein: the negative electrode includes a negative current collector and a negative electrode material layer supported on the negative current collector (Nair, current collector , 160 , Fig. 1) , the negative electrode material layer contains a negative electrode active material capable of being reversibly doped with lithium ions (Nair, anode film , 150 , Fig. 1) the negative electrode active material contains a carbon material (Nair, “ The anode film 150 may be constructed from lithium metal, lithium metal foil or a lithium alloy foil (e.g. lithium aluminum alloys), or a mixture of a lithium metal and/or lithium alloy and materials such as carbon (e.g. coke, graphite), nickel, copper, tin, indium, silicon, oxides thereof, or combinations thereof . ”, see [0042]) , the negative electrode material layer includes a coating region on a surface layer portion of the negative electrode material layer (Nair, SEI film stack, Fig. 1) (Nair, “ Examples of materials that may be included in the SEI film stack 140 include, but are not limited to a chalcogenide film (e.g., CuS , Cu2Se, Cu2S, Cu2Te, CuTe , Bi2Te3, or Bi2Se3 film) or composite chalcogenide film optionally in combination with at least one of a lithium carbonate (Li2CO3) film, a lithium oxide (Li2O) film, a lithium nitride film (Li3N), and a lithium halide film (e.g. LiF , LiCl, LiBr , or LiI ) ”, see [0045]) , Nair teaches a coating SEI of lithium carbonate (Li 2 Co 3 ) (Nair, “ Examples of materials that may be included in the SEI film stack 140 include, but are not limited to a chalcogenide film (e.g., CuS , Cu2Se, Cu2S, Cu2Te, CuTe , Bi2Te3, or Bi2Se3 film) or composite chalcogenide film optionally in combination with at least one of a lithium carbonate (Li2CO3) film, a lithium oxide (Li2O) film, a lithium nitride film (Li3N), and a lithium halide film (e.g. LiF , LiCl, LiBr , or LiI ) ”, see [0045]). Nair does not teach when-an Ols spectrum for the coating region has a peak in a range from 530eV to 534eV of a binding energy the O1s spectrum being measures by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy . Xu teaches that a O 1s spectrum of carbon-oxygen single and double bond are indicated by a signal between 530 eV and 534 eV (Xu, “ significant and broad peak in oxygen 1s spectrum (FIG. 5(b)) indicates the existence of C ═ O (531.4 eV) and C—O (532.9 eV), and S—O/S ═ O (533.6 eV), which are from the oxidative decomposition ”, see [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the O1s signal is indicative of a lithium carbonate bond on the surface of the negative electrode. Nair does not teach an intensity of the peak in the O1s spectrum (Lithium Carbonate) increases as a measuring position changes from a surface layer of the coating region toward inside of the coating region. Thomas- Alyea teaches a coating of lithium carbonate and that it is beneficial to have gradient of lithium carbonate (Thomas Alyea , “ A metal carbonate can have a low conductivity and a high surface energy with the metal. Therefore, it can be desirable to have a coating of, for example, Li.sub.2CO.sub.3 on the first surface and have no Li.sub.2CO.sub.3 on the second surface. However, it can be difficult to avoid all exposure of the second surface to air during fabrication of the second electrolyte and during assembly of the second electrolyte into a battery. Therefore, the second surface can contain trace amounts of metal carbonate ”, see [0045]). Nair and Thomas Alyea are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery coatings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the SEI layer as taught in Nair to have less lithium . carbonate towards the surface as taught in Thomas- Alyea , in order to minimize the negative effects of lithium carbonate on electronegativity. Regarding Claim 4 , Modified Nair teaches t he electrochemical device according to Claim 1, wherein the electrolyte contains an imide-based electrolyte (Nair, “ electrolytes infused in cell components 120, 130, 140 and 150 can be comprised of a liquid/gel or a solid polymer and may be different in each. In some implementations, the electrolyte primarily includes a salt and a medium (e.g., in a liquid electrolyte, the medium may be referred to as a solvent; in a gel electrolyte, the medium may be a polymer matrix). The salt may be a lithium salt. The lithium salt may include, for example, LiPF6, LiAsF6, LiCF3SO3, LiN (CF3SO3)3, LiBF6, and LiClO4, lithium bistrifluoromethanesulfonimidate (e.g., LiTFSI ) , ”, see [0049]) . Regarding Claim 5 , Modified Nair teaches t he electrochemical device according to Claim 4, wherein the imide-based electrolyte contains an anion containing fluorine and sulfur (Nair, “ electrolytes infused in cell components 120, 130, 140 and 150 can be comprised of a liquid/gel or a solid polymer and may be different in each. In some implementations, the electrolyte primarily includes a salt and a medium (e.g., in a liquid electrolyte, the medium may be referred to as a solvent; in a gel electrolyte, the medium may be a polymer matrix). The salt may be a lithium salt. The lithium salt may include, for example, LiPF6, LiAsF6, LiCF3SO3, LiN (CF3SO3)3, LiBF6, and LiClO4, lithium bistrifluoromethanesulfonimidate (e.g., LiTFSI ), ”, see [0049]) . Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ( US - 20190140267 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘ Nair ’ , in view of ( US - 20190252689 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Xu’, in further view of ( US - 20190273258 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Thomas- Alyea ’, further view of ( US - 20180019464 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Xia’ Regarding Claim 2 , Modified Nair teaches the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein: an F1s spectrum for the coating region has a peak in a range from 684.8 eV to 685.3 eV of a binding energy the F1s spectrum being measured by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, (Nair, “ Examples of materials that may be included in the SEI film stack 140 include … in combination with at least one of a lithium carbonate (Li2CO3) film, a lithium oxide (Li2O) film, a lithium nitride film (Li3N), and a lithium halide film (e.g. LiF , LiCl, LiBr , or LiI ) ”, see [0045])(Xu, “ the LiF peak at 684.4 eV, both of which are likely due to decomposition of CF3SO3Li salt on the Li anode surface ”, see [0078]) Modified Nair does not teach an intensity of the peak in the F1s spectrum ( LiF ) decreases as a measuring positions changes from the surface layer of the coating region towards the inside of the coating region . Xia teaches an intensity of the peak in the F1s spectrum ( LiF ) decreases as a measuring positions changes from the surface layer of the coating region towards the inside of the coating region (Xia, “ wherein the surface layer comprises an intimate mixture of Ni, Co, Mn, LiF and Al.sub.2O.sub.3; and wherein the surface layer has an Al content that increases from the Al content of the core at the inner interface to at least 10 mol % at the outer interface, and a F content that increases from less than 0.05 mol % at the inner interface to at least 3 mol % at the outer interface ” . , see [0010]). Xia teaches that LiF protects the lithium in the particle (Xia, “ It can be speculated that the LiF film protects the Li in the particle, thus preventing it from reacting with carbon to form Li2CO3. The obtained surface layer has the following function: the thin layer comprising LiF replaces the reactive surface base layer, thus reducing the base content practically to zero at the core's surface, and improves the overall safety . ”, see [0053]). Modified Nair and Xia are analogous as they are both of the same field of protective layers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied LiF primarily to the surface in order to protect the particle and reduce the lithium carbonate content at the surface layer and improve the overall safety of the cell. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ( US - 20190140267 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘ Nair ’ , in view of ( US - 20190252689 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Xu’, in further view of ( US - 20190273258 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Thomas- Alyea ’, further view of ( US - 20180019464 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Xia’ in further view of ‘ Tailoring Lithium Deposition via an SEI‐Functionalized Membrane Derived from LiF Decorated Layered Carbon Structure ’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Wang’ Regarding Claim 3 , Modified Nair teaches the electrochemical device according to Claim 2, wherein: the peak intensity A being at an apex of the peak in the O 1s spectrum, peak intensity B being an apex of the peak in the F1s spectrum (Nair, “ Examples of materials that may be included in the SEI film stack 140 include, … and a lithium halide film (e.g. LiF , LiCl, LiBr , or LiI ) ”, see [0045]) (Xu, “ the LiF peak at 684.4 eV, both of which are likely due to decomposition of CF3SO3Li salt on the Li anode surface ”, see [0078]). Modified Nair does not teach a C1s spectrum for the surface layer portion of the negative electrode material layer has substantially no peak attributed to a bond of the carbon material at a depth from the surface layer of the coating region where the ratio A/B is maximum, the C is spectrum being measured by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and a ratio A/B of a peak intensity A to a peak intensity B increases and then decreases as a measuring position changes from the surface layer of the coating region . Wang teaches that lithium fluoride ( LiF , attributed to peak B) has a strong interaction favorable with carbon materials (Wang, “( LiF ) decorated layered structure of stacked graphene (SG), leading to the formation of an SEI-functionalized membrane that retards electron transfer by three orders of magnitude to avoid undesirable Li deposition on the top surface, and ameliorates Li+ ion migration to enable uniform and dendrite-free Li deposition beneath such an interlayer. ”, see Abstract) Wang also teaches that LiF forms a compounds with graphite (Wang, “ Li+ + e-+ LiF + C 17 = Li 2 FC 17 +101.8 kJ ”, see pg. 5) . Wang does not teach the same beneficial interaction with lithium carbonate (Li 2 CO 3 , attributed to peak A). Modified Nair and Wang are analogous as they are both of the same field of SEI coatings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have taken the Li 2 CO 3 and LiF SEI layer , as taught in Modified Nair , and to have modified it to have graphene in only the LiF layer in order to avoid undesirable Li deposition on the surface . The interactions between carbon and LiF would demonstrate an initial low B in the LiF layer, as LiF is used to form C-F bonds, which would correlate to an increasing then decreasing A/B ratio (The examiner notes that this modification would make C1 have no peak in the lithium carbonate layer, where A is high and B is low [highest A/B ratio] , as there would be no presence of graphite .) Claim s 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ( US - 20190140267 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘ Nair ’ , in view of ( US - 20190252689 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Xu’, in further view of ( US - 20190273258 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘Thomas- Alyea ’, further view of ( US - 20190027319 - A1 ) hereinafter referred to as ‘ Umetsu ’ Regarding Claim 6 , Modified Nair teaches t he electrochemical device according to Claim 1, wherein: the positive electrode includes a positive current collector and a positive electrode material layer supported on the positive current collector (Nair, cathode film and current collector , 120 and 110 , see Fig. 1) Modified Nair does not teach the positive electrode material layer contains a carbon material as a positive electrode active material and constitutes a polarizable electrode layer. Umestu teaches the positive electrode material layer contains a carbon material as a positive electrode active material and constitutes a polarizable electrode layer ( Umetsu , “ When activated carbon is used as the positive electrode active material, there are no particular restrictions on the type of activated carbon or its starting material. However, preferably the pores of the activated carbon are optimally controlled to obtain both a high input/output characteristic and high energy density . ”, see [0114]) . Umetsu teaches that using this material allows for the suppressing of gas generation due to the decomposition of lithium compounds ( Umetsu , “ According to the invention there is provided a nonaqueous lithium power storage element wherein thermal runaway during internal short circuiting is suppressed, gas generation due to decomposition of lithium compound under high-temperature environmental conditions is reduced ”, see [0091]) Modified Nair and Umetsu are analogous as they are both of the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention as taught in Nair to have activated carbon as the positive electrode material to suppress gas generation due to the breakdown of lithium compounds. Regarding Claim 7 , Modified Nair teaches t he electrochemical device according to Claim 6, wherein a specific surface area of the carbon material contained in the positive electrode material ranges from 1500 m 2 /g to 2500 m 2 /g ( Umetsu , “ in order to obtain a high input/output characteristic, activated carbon satisfying 0.3<V1≤0.8 and 0.5≤V2≤1.0 and exhibiting a specific surface area of 1,500 m2/g to 3,000 m2/g ”, see [0115]) , The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 1,500 to 3,000 m^2/g broadly overlaps the claimed range of 1500 m 2 /g to 2500 m 2 /g . Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05. inclusive, an average particle diameter of the carbon material contained in the positive electrode material is less than or equal to 10 µm ( Umetsu , “ The mean particle diameter of activated carbon 1 is … even more preferably 3 to 10 μm ”, see [0130]) , a total pore volume of the carbon material contained in the positive electrode material ranges from 0.5 cm 3 /g to 1.5 cm 3 /g inclusive ( Umetsu , “ On the other hand, the mesopore volume is … V1 for activated carbon 2 is even more preferably 1.2 cc/g to 1.8 cc/g . ”, see [0131]) , and an average pore size of the carbon material contained in the positive electrode material ranges from 1 nm to 3 nm, inclusive ( Umetsu , “ The mean pore size of the activated carbon 1 is preferably 17 Å or greater, more preferably 18 Å or greater and even more preferably 20 Å or greater, from the viewpoint of increasing the output of the obtained power storage element. From the viewpoint of increasing capacitance, the mean pore size of activated carbon 1 is preferably no greater than 25 Å . ”, see [0121]) (The examiner notes that 2 5 angstrom is 2. 5 nm) . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (703)756-1909 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm . 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760 . 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. /S.P.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 1752 /NICHOLAS A SMITH/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752