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 .
Specification
Examiner acknowledges receipt of an abstract of the disclosure presented on a separate sheet as required, wherein the abstract of disclosure was filed under published application US 2022/026011.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 4, lines 18-20, filed 8/25/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 16-19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Chikato JP 6413907 B2.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 5 and Page 6, Lines 1-16, filed 8/25/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 21-25, 28-29 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Chikato JP 6413907 B2 in view of Luthe.
Applicant has not rewritten claim 26 in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As such the objection to claim 26 stands.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikato JP 6413907 B2 in view of Luthe US 11,807,724. JP 6413907 B2 is a published patent henceforth to be referred to as the Chikato patent.
Regarding claim 16, Chikato discloses a method comprising providing a processing vessel containing sulfur-containing particles to be processed and milling media (Chikato Para [0019]: a coarse-grained material of the sulfide solid electrolyte is prepared. Next, the coarse-grained material is pulverized using a crushing device (e.g., a bead mill) with a crushing media); and simultaneously a) moving the processing vessel to cause interactions between the particles and the milling media to thereby reduce the size of the particles; and forming a sulfide-containing solid electrolyte (Chikato Para [0020]: by significantly increasing the peripheral speed of the rotating body that agitates the crushed media compared to conventional methods, a sulfide solid electrolyte material having a flattened shape and a small average particle size can be obtained). Chikato fails to disclose exposing the processing vessel to microwave radiation.
Luthe teaches a method of exposing a vessel to microwave radiation (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 39-41: the content can be irradiated with ultrasound, audible sound and/or actinic radiation, in particular microwave radiation). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chikato of providing a processing vessel containing sulfur-containing particles to be processed and milling media, and exposing the processing vessel and the milling media and to microwave radiation, as taught by Luthe, to produce reactive radicals on the particles to be ground, which open up new reaction paths (See Luthe Col. 17, Lines 43-44).
Regarding claim 17, Chikato in view of Luthe discloses a method, wherein the milling media is a microwave susceptor (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 10-11,16: Suitable spherical grinding or milling media consist of, for example…silicon carbide). Silicon carbide is recognized within the art as a microwave susceptor material (“A Study on Microwave Susceptor Material for Hybrid Heating”, Neeraj Kumar Bhoi et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1240 012097). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the milling media, disclosed in Chikato, to be a microwave susceptor, as taught by Luthe, given a person skilled in the art can select a suitable grinding media for an individual case on the basis of their general specialist knowledge (See Luthe Col. 17, Lines 16-18).
Regarding claim 18, Chikato in view of Luthe discloses a method, where in the milling media is microwave transparent (Chikato Para [0035]: Examples of materials for the grinding media include ceramics, glass, and metals.). Glass is recognized within the art as an optically transparent material.
Regarding claim 19, Chikato in view Luther discloses a method, wherein the processing vessel contains microwave susceptor media (Chikato Para [0035]: coarse material is pulverized using a crushing device that utilizes a crushing media; Luther Col. 17, Lines 10-11,16: Suitable spherical grinding or milling media consist of, for example…silicon carbide). Silicon carbide is recognized within the art as a microwave susceptor material (See Reference provided in claim 17).
Regarding claim 20, Chikato in view Luthe discloses a method, wherein the particles to be processed comprise argyrodite precursors (Chikato Para [0022]: Examples of the coarse grain material include Li2S, P2S5,…LiBr).
Claims 21-25, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikato in view of Luthe and further in view of Martinez US 2007/0017913 A1. US 2007/0017913 A1 is a published patent application, henceforth to be referred to as the Martinez patent.
Regarding claim 21, Chikato discloses a method comprising providing argyrodite precursor particles, and milling media in a reaction vessel (Chikato Para [0019]: a coarse-grained material of the sulfide solid electrolyte (for example, LiBr-L- Li2S - P2S5) is prepared. Next, the coarse-grained material is pulverized using a crushing device (e.g., a bead mill) with a crushing media); simultaneously rotating the reaction vessel and reduce the size of the argyrodite precursor particles (Chikato Para [0020]: by significantly increasing the peripheral speed of the rotating body that agitates the crushed media compared to conventional methods, a sulfide solid electrolyte material having a flattened shape and a small average particle size can be obtained); reacting the argyrodite precursor particles to form argyrodite particles; and reducing the size of the argyrodite particles (Chikato Para [0046]: by applying a predetermined total crushing energy, a sulfide solid electrolyte material having a flattened shape and a small average particle size can be obtained). Chikato fails to disclose providing microwave susceptor media; and exposing the reaction vessel to microwaves to thereby heat the microwave susceptor media.
Luthe teaches a method of providing microwave susceptor media to a vessel (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 10-11,16: Suitable spherical grinding or milling media consist of, for example…silicon carbide). Silicon carbide is recognized within the art as a microwave susceptor material (“A Study on Microwave Susceptor Material for Hybrid Heating”, Neeraj Kumar Bhoi et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1240 012097) and exposing the vessel to microwave radiation (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 39-41: the content can be irradiated with ultrasound, audible sound and/or actinic radiation, in particular microwave radiation). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chikato, to include providing microwave susceptor media to vessel and exposing the vessel to microwave radiation, as taught by Luthe, to produce reactive radicals on the particles to be ground, which open up new reaction paths (See Luthe Col. 17, Lines 43-44).
Martinez teaches a method of exposing microwave susceptor media to microwave radiation to thereby heat the microwave susceptor media (Martinez Para [0057]: The Microwave Oven irradiates the Microwave Susceptor with microwave energy; in turn the Microwave Susceptor converts the microwave energy to radiant/heat energy). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chikato in view of Luthe, to include exposing microwave susceptor media to microwave radiation to thereby heat the microwave susceptor media, as taught by Martinez, wherein by utilizing microwave energy through use of a microwave susceptor that will absorb microwave energy and convert it to heat energy and impart the energy to alter the physical characteristics of the material in contact with microwave susceptor media (See Martinez Para [0004]).
Regarding claim 22, Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez discloses a method, wherein the argyrodite precursor particles comprise LiX, Li2S, and P2S5, wherein X is a halogen (Chikato Para [0019]: a coarse-grained material of the sulfide solid electrolyte (for example, LiBr-L- Li2S - P2S5) is prepared).
Regarding claim 23, Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez discloses a method, wherein the argyrodite precursor particles further comprise elemental sulfur (Chikato Para [0007]: because sulfide solid electrolyte materials contain sulfur).
Regarding claim 24, Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez discloses a method, wherein the microwave susceptor media are the milling media (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 10-11,16: Suitable spherical grinding or milling media consist of, for example…silicon carbide). Silicon carbide is recognized within the art as a microwave susceptor material (See Reference provided in 17).
Regarding claim 25, Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez discloses a method wherein the microwave susceptor media and the milling media are different media (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 10-16: Suitable spherical grinding or milling media consist of, for example, zirconium dioxide (yttrium-stabilized), zirconium dioxide (cerium-stabilized), mixed zirconium oxide, zirconium silicate, aluminum oxide, steatite, diamond pearls, glass, carbon steel, chromium steel, nirosta steel, zirconium silicate/zirconium oxide/silicon nitride, boron carbide, silicon carbide or tungsten carbide.). Silicon carbide is recognized within the art as a microwave susceptor material (See Reference provided in claim 17). An artisan can select the suitable grinding media specifically for each particular case on the basis of its general knowledge (See Luther Col. 17, Lines 16-18), wherein silicon carbide is the microwave susceptor media to be used with another of the listed milling media material.
Regarding claim 28, Chikato discloses a method comprising providing precursor particles of a sulfide-containing solid electrolyte and milling media in a reaction vessel (Chikato Para [0019]: a coarse-grained material of the sulfide solid electrolyte is prepared. Next, the coarse-grained material is pulverized using a crushing device (e.g., a bead mill) with a crushing media); rotating the reaction vessel and reduce the size of the precursor particles (Chikato Para [0020]: by significantly increasing the peripheral speed of the rotating body that agitates the crushed media compared to conventional methods, a sulfide solid electrolyte material having a flattened shape and a small average particle size can be obtained); reacting the precursor particles to form sulfide-containing solid electrolyte particles (Chikato Para [0046]: by applying a predetermined total crushing energy, a sulfide solid electrolyte material having a flattened shape and a small average particle size can be obtained). Chikato fails to disclose providing microwave susceptor media in a reaction vessel; exposing the reaction vessel to microwaves to thereby heat the microwave susceptor media; and heating the precursor particles by contact with the microwave susceptor media.
Luthe teaches a method of providing microwave susceptor media to a vessel (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 10-11,16: Suitable spherical grinding or milling media consist of, for example…silicon carbide). Silicon carbide is recognized within the art as a microwave susceptor material (“A Study on Microwave Susceptor Material for Hybrid Heating”, Neeraj Kumar Bhoi et al 2019 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1240 012097) and exposing the vessel to microwave radiation (Luthe Col. 17, Lines 39-41: the content can be irradiated with ultrasound, audible sound and/or actinic radiation, in particular microwave radiation). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chikato, to include providing microwave susceptor media to vessel and exposing the vessel to microwave radiation, as taught by Luthe, to produce reactive radicals on the particles to be ground, which open up new reaction paths (See Luthe Col. 17, Lines 43-44).
Martinez teaches a method of exposing microwave susceptor media to microwave radiation to thereby heat the microwave susceptor media (Martinez Para [0057]: The Microwave Oven irradiates the Microwave Susceptor with microwave energy; in turn the Microwave Susceptor converts the microwave energy to radiant/heat energy) and heating by contact with the microwave susceptor media (Martinez Para [0004]: utilizing microwave energy through use of a microwave susceptor that will absorb and/or assimilate microwave energy and convert it to radiant/heat energy and impart the energy). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chikato in view of Luthe, to include exposing microwave susceptor media to microwave radiation to thereby heat the microwave susceptor media, as taught by Martinez, wherein by utilizing microwave energy through use of a microwave susceptor that will absorb microwave energy and convert it to heat energy and impart the energy to alter the physical characteristics of the material in contact with microwave susceptor media (See Martinez Para [0004]).
Claims 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Guo CN 111054506 A. CN 111054506 A is a published Chinese patent application, to be referred as the Guo patent.
Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez discloses the method of claim 21. Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez fails to disclose the method further comprising ending the microwave exposure and continuing to rotate the reaction vessel to further reduce argyrodite particle size.
Guo teaches a method for improving grinding comprising ending the microwave exposure and continuing to rotate the reaction vessel to further reduce argyrodite particle size (Guo Page 1, Summary of the Invention Step 3: Put the material after pulse microwave pretreatment in the ball mill for grinding). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez, with Guo, and include the step of upon ending the microwave exposure to continue to rotate the reaction vessel. Guo teaches a significant decrease in particle size when a grinded particle is subjected to microwave exposure and then undergoes additional grinding after the microwave exposure has ended (See Guo Examples 1-6 & Table 1), wherein, there is a higher mineral yield from grinding an ore that undergoes microwave pretreatment versus an ore that undergoes grinding only.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Dong KR 20200045941 A. KR 20200045941 A is a published patent application, to be referred to as the Dong patent.
Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez discloses the method of claim 28. Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez fails to the disclose the method further comprising reducing the size of the particles.
Dong teaches a method of reducing the size of the particles (Dong Para [0055]: The porous solid electrolyte prepared in Example 1 was subjected to a mechanical milling process to prepare a porous solid electrolyte powder). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of Chikato in view of Luthe and Martinez, with Dong, and include the step of further reducing the size of the particles so to allow the material to be further used (See Dong [0055]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARLINGTON N IBEKWE whose telephone number is (571)272-2474. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4:00pm.
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, Christopher Templeton can be reached at (571) 270-1477. 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.
D.N.I.
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725
