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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosures statement (IDS) submitted 03/04/2024 was received and has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted 03/04/2024 were received and are approved by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “about” in claims 16-17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The content ratio of terminally fluorinated glycol ether to ionic liquid is rendered indefinite by the use of the term “about.” For purpose of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as any range that approaches the claimed ratio ranges will read on claims 16-17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-13, 15, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (U.S. 20250140900).
With respect to claims 1-4, 12-13, and 15, Zhang discloses an electrochemical cell (20 - battery) (Fig. 3; [abstract]) comprising:
a cathode (24 - positive electrode) comprising oxygen or a metal oxide (specifically LiMeO.sub.2 wherein Me is Co, thus reading on claim 15)(Fig. 3; [0052]);
an anode (22 - negative electrode) comprising lithium metal (Fig. 3; [0056]);
a separator (26 – electrolyte membrane functions as separator) (Fig. 3; [0038]; and
an electrolyte (46) comprising:
a lithium fluorinated sulfonylimide salt ((LiN(FSO.sub.2).sub.2); [0015]; thus reading on claims 12-13);
a terminally fluorinated glycol ether (diluent; 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether; [0008]; thus reading on Formula I and claims 1-4 and 22); and
an ionic liquid ([abstract]).
With respect to claims 5-11, Zhang discloses the ionic liquid comprises the cation is one of 1-propyl-1-methylpyrrolidinium (Formula I; claim 6) or 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium (Formula II; claim 7) ([0006]) and the anion bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide ([0007]), thus reading on Formula II claims 5-11.
With respect to claims 21-22, Zhang discloses the terminally fluorinated glycol ether is 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether ([0008]) and the ionic liquid comprises 1-propyl-1-methylpyrrolidinium as the cation and bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide as the anion ([0006-0007]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wright et al. (U.S. 20250023104).
With respect to claim 14 and 16-17, Zhang discloses the presence of a terminally fluorinated glycol ether and ionic liquid (see above rejection of claim 1), but does not disclose the content of the terminally fluorinated glycol ether present in the electrolyte or the ratio between the terminally fluorinated glycol ether and ionic liquid. Zhang does disclose, however, that the terminally fluorinated glycol ether is present to act as a diluent ([0008]).
Wright discloses solvent components for an electrolyte ([0111]) and teaches the addition of a terminally fluorinated glycol ether (specifically 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether) as a diluent ([0112]). Wright further teaches that the addition of a diluent promotes the reduction of the viscosity of the electrolyte ([0112]).
Therefore, Wright teaches the inclusion of a diluent, specifically 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether, is a result-effective variable. Applicant is reminded that "obvious to try" is a valid rationale for an obviousness finding, for example, when there is a "design need" or "market demand" and there are a "finite number" of solutions (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)). In this instance, as the workable claimed range for the content of the terminally fluorinated glycol ether is anywhere over 50% by weight of the electrolyte (claim 14) or a ratio between the terminally fluorinated glycol ether to ionic liquid is 6 to 1 to 2:1 (claim 16) or 4 to 1 (claim 17), it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to try the claimed contents in order to arrive at a desired viscosity of the electrolyte.
Claim(s) 18-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishida et al. (U.S. 20030168764).
With respects to claims 18-20 and 23, Zhang discloses an electrochemical cell (20 - battery) (Fig. 3; [abstract]) comprising:
a cathode (24 - positive electrode) comprising oxygen or a metal oxide (Fig. 3; [0052]);
an anode (22 - negative electrode) comprising lithium metal (Fig. 3; [0056]);
a separator (26 – electrolyte membrane functions as separator) comprising an aluminum oxide-filled polymer (Fig. 3; [0038], [0044]); and
an electrolyte (46) comprising:
LiN(FSO.sub.2).sub.2; ([0015]);
1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3-tetrafluoropropyl ether; ([0008]); and
1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium as a cation ([0006]) and bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide as the anion ([0007]).
Zhang but does not disclose the polymer is a polyolefin, specifically polypropylene.
Nishida discloses a separator for a battery ([0040]) and teaches the separator should comprise polypropylene ([0040]). Nishida further teaches that the polypropylene improves the melt-down temperatures of the separators ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time that the application was filed to use polypropylene as taught by Nishida in the separator disclosed by Zhang in order to improve the melt-down temperature of the separator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN E BERRESFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-0641. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (572)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.
/J.E.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights