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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1 (claims 1-13) in the reply filed on August 26th, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Applicant further respectfully submits that the Examiner has not provided any indication that the contents of the claims interpreted in light of the description were considered in making the assertion of a lack of unity and therefore has not met the burden necessary to support the assertion”. This is not found persuasive because as put forth in the previous restriction/election of record on August 12th, 2026, Groups 1 and 2 lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Tamura et al. (JP2013143299A as cited in IDS and using Machine Translation as English version), hereinafter Tamura, whereby Tamura discloses a modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder (i.e., at least sulfide- based inorganic solid electrolytes treated with flame retardant process, etc., as disclosed in [0031], also see [0007], [0044], Examples 1-2 in Table 1 and Example 3 in Table 2).
Claims 14-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on August 26th, 2026.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
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 1, and 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kota et al. (JP2020075855(A) and using Machine Translation as English version), hereinafter Kato, in view of Yoshida et al. (WO 2021/065230 A1 and using U.S. PGPub US 2022/0336853 A1 as Machine Translation of English version), hereinafter Yoshida.
Regarding claim 1, Kato discloses a method for producing modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0001], also see Title, [0006]-[0007], [0013], [0033], [0044], [0057]), the method comprising:
supplying a sulfide solid electrolyte (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0010] exposing a solid electrolyte containing an argyrodite-type crystal structure to a gas, etc., and further discloses in [0014] the argyrodite-type solid electrolytes examples of empirical formulas include Li7-xPS6-xXx (X = Cl, Br, I, etc.), etc., such that the skilled artisan would appreciate that exposing said solid electrolyte to said gas necessitates supplying said sulfide solid electrolyte, etc., also see [0007], [0011]-[0012], etc.),
to a gas flow having a dew point of -40°C or less (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0016]-[0017] argyrodite-type solid electrolyte is exposed to a gas with a dew point of -60°C or higher and -20°C or lower, etc., which at least provides a range that overlaps the claimed range of a gas flow having a dew point of -40°C or less, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.)).
Kato further discloses [0033]-[0040] 1.5 g of powder sample ref. 41 was weighed, etc., and the dew point is controlled by adjusting the flow rates of unhumidified nitrogen and humidified nitrogen, etc., whereby unhumidified nitrogen was supplied at a flow rate of 800 mL/min and humidified nitrogen at a flow rate of 10-30 mL/min (i.e., total flow rate of about 1 L/min), etc., whereby it was confirmed that hydrogen sulfide generation peaked approximately two minutes after the start of exposure and then rapidly decreased (i.e., at least 2 min exposure or more), etc., which at least provides 1L/min flow rate × 2 min exposure = 2 L divided by 1.5 g of powder = 2L/1.5 g = 1.33 m3/kg or more, etc., which at least provides a range that overlaps and/or encompasses the claimed range of a flow rate of 1 m³/kg or more and 100 m³/kg or less per unit supply weight of the sulfide solid electrolyte, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see [0032]-[0040], Table 1).
As discussed above, since Kato discloses in [0016]-[0017] argyrodite-type solid electrolyte is exposed to a gas with a dew point of -60°C or higher and -20°C or lower, etc., this at least provides fluidizing the sulfide solid electrolyte with the gas flow, lacking any further distinction thereof.
However, Kato is silent as to using a dry classifier.
Yoshida teaches method of manufacturing sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material (Title). Yoshida further teaches in [0011] providing a method of manufacturing a sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material, etc., whereby as taught in [0027] a sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material in a vitreous state is prepared, etc., whereby as taught in [0043]-[0044] it is preferable that the mechanochemical process is performed in an inert atmosphere (also see [0063]-[0064]). Yoshida further teaches in [0066] the method of manufacturing the sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material according to the present embodiment, optionally, the step of crushing, classifying, or granulating the obtained sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material may be further performed, whereby it is preferable that classification is performed in an inert gas atmosphere, etc., which at least provides using a dry classifier, lacking any further distinction thereof.
Yoshida further teaches in [0016] a sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material having improved lithium ionic conductivity can be provided.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida with the teachings of Tamura, whereby the method including the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder, gas flow, etc., as disclosed by the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida further includes using a dry classifier as taught by Yoshida so that a sulfide-based inorganic solid electrolyte material having improved lithium ionic conductivity can be provided.
Regarding claim 3, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses the sulfide solid electrolyte is supplied in the form of powder to the gas flow (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0033], also see [0013], [0028], [0044], [0057], Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses mixing a solid electrolyte raw material in a solvent to provide a raw material mixture (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0046] mixed raw materials were dispersed under nitrogen in a mixed solvent of dehydrated toluene, etc.), and
heat-treating the raw material mixture (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0047]-[0048] heated at 200C for 2 hours, etc., to obtain a calcined product, etc., lacking any further distinction thereof, also see [0048] for an additional firing process, etc., also see [0031], [0055], etc.).
Regarding claim 5, Kato discloses the method including the powder as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder is powder used for forming a solid electrolyte layer or an electrode layer (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0025] the modified solid electrolyte can be used as a component for lithium-ion batteries, such as the positive electrode, negative electrode, and electrolyte layer, etc.).
Regarding claim 6, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses the gas flow is circulated (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0033]-[0040], such that the skilled artisan would appreciate that the flow or nitrogen as indicated by the arrows as discussed in [0032] and shown in Fig. 1 at least provides the gas flow is circulated lacking any further distinction thereof).
Regarding claim 7, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder is powder of a solid electrolyte containing a lithium atom, a phosphorus atom, and a sulfur atom (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0014] the argyrodite-type solid electrolytes examples of empirical formulas include Li7-xPS6-xXx (X = Cl, Br, I, etc.), which at least provides a solid electrolyte containing a lithium atom, a phosphorus atom, and a sulfur atom, etc.).
Regarding claim 8, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 7. Kato further discloses the powder of a solid electrolyte further contains a halogen atom (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0010] exposing a solid electrolyte containing an argyrodite-type crystal structure to a gas, etc., and further discloses in [0014] the argyrodite-type solid electrolytes examples of empirical formulas include Li7-xPS6-xXx (X = Cl, Br, I, etc.), which at least provides said solid electrolyte further contains a halogen atom such as Cl, Br, I, etc., lacking any further distinction thereof).
Regarding claim 9, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder contains an argyrodite type crystal structure (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0010] exposing a solid electrolyte containing an argyrodite-type crystal structure to a gas, etc., and further discloses in [0014] the argyrodite-type solid electrolytes examples of empirical formulas include Li7-xPS6-xXx (X = Cl, Br, I, etc.)).
Regarding claim 10, Kato discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. Kato further discloses the gas flow is a gas flow of an inert gas (i.e., at least as disclosed in [0016] the gas used for exposure is preferably an inert gas such as nitrogen or argon, etc.).
Claims 2 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato and Yoshida as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tamura et al. (JP2013143299(A) as cited in IDS and using Machine Translation as English version), hereinafter Tamura.
Regarding claim 2, Kato and Yoshida discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. However, Kato is silent as to pulverizing the sulfide solid electrolyte.
Tamura teaches electrode material, electrode and battery using the same (Title). Tamura further teaches in [0044] producing glass solid electrolytes and simultaneously pulverizing them into fine powder, etc., whereby the method can utilize various types of ball mills, rotatory ball mills, rolling ball mills, vibrating ball mills, etc., which at least provides pulverizing the sulfide solid electrolyte, lacking any further distinction thereof.
Tamura further teaches in [0007] the compaction state of electrode material particles changes depending on the degree of compression, and by adjusting the degree of compression, the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida with the teachings of Tamura, whereby the method including the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder as disclosed by the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida further includes pulverizing the sulfide solid electrolyte as taught by Tamura so that the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Regarding claim 11, Kato and Yoshida discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. However, Kato is silent as to the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder has a particle diameter of 0.1 µm or more and 10.0 µm or less.
Tamura teaches electrode material, electrode and battery using the same (Title). Tamura further teaches in [0053] the average particle size of the sulfide-based solid electrolyte is preferably 0.01 µm or more and 1000 µm or less, etc., which at least provides a range that overlaps and/or encompasses the claimed range of the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder has a particle diameter of 0.1 µm or more and 10.0 µm or less, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.).
Tamura further teaches in [0007] the compaction state of electrode material particles changes depending on the degree of compression, and by adjusting the degree of compression, the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida with the teachings of Tamura, whereby the method including the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder as disclosed by the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida further includes the particle diameter range as taught by Tamura so that the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Regarding claim 12, Kato and Yoshida discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. However, Kato is silent as to the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder has a degree of compaction calculated by the following expression of 0.400 or more: ((Degree of compaction) = ((packed bulk density)-(aerated bulk density))/(packed bulk density)).
Tamura teaches electrode material, electrode and battery using the same (Title). Tamura further teaches in [0076] the initial bulk density of the positive electrode material was 0.474 g/cm3 and the density after 1000 taps was 0.828 g/cm3, and therefore the compressibility of this cathode material was 0.428, which at least provides a value that is within the claimed range of the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder has a degree of compaction calculated by the following expression of 0.400 or more: ((Degree of compaction) = ((packed bulk density)-(aerated bulk density))/(packed bulk density)), thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see Examples 1-2, Table 1, Example 3, Table 2, [0072]-[0085]).
Tamura further teaches in [0007] the compaction state of electrode material particles changes depending on the degree of compression, and by adjusting the degree of compression, the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida with the teachings of Tamura, whereby the method including the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder as disclosed by the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida further includes the degree of compaction as taught by Tamura so that the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Regarding claim 13, Kato and Yoshida discloses the method as discussed above in claim 1. However, Kato is silent as to the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder has an aerated bulk density of 0.050 g/cm³ or more and 1.000 g/cm³ or less.
Tamura teaches electrode material, electrode and battery using the same (Title). Tamura further teaches in [0076] the initial bulk density of the positive electrode material was 0.474 g/cm3 and the density after 1000 taps was 0.828 g/cm3, and therefore the compressibility of this cathode material was 0.428, which at least provides a value that is within the claimed range of the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder has an aerated bulk density of 0.050 g/cm³ or more and 1.000 g/cm³ or less, thus a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05, I.) (also see Examples 1-2, Table 1, Example 3, Table 2, [0072]-[0085]).
Tamura further teaches in [0007] the compaction state of electrode material particles changes depending on the degree of compression, and by adjusting the degree of compression, the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida with the teachings of Tamura, whereby the method including the modified sulfide solid electrolyte powder as disclosed by the combined teachings of Kato and Yoshida further includes the density as taught by Tamura so that the particles can be densely packed, resulting in improved battery performance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Makino et al. (U.S. PGPub US 2018/0287211 A1) discloses all-solid state secondary battery, particles for all-solid state secondary battery, solid electrolyte composition for all-solid state secondary battery, and electrode sheet for all-solid state secondary battery, and methods for manufacturing same (Title), whereby as disclosed in [0128] the classification method is not particularly limited, and it is possible to use a sieve, a wind power classifier, or the like depending on the necessity, both of dry-type classification and wet-type classification can be carried out, etc.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA PATRICK MCCLURE whose telephone number is (571)272-2742. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached on (571) 272-1330. 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.
/JOSHUA P MCCLURE/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights