DETAILED OFFICIAL 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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending and under consideration on the merits.
Examiner Note
It is noted that all references hereinafter to Applicant’s Specification are to the published application US 2024/0234815 A1, unless stated otherwise. Further, it is noted that italicized text in parentheses recited in any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 indicates the element of the claimed invention to which the preceding prior art element corresponds. Additionally, any italicized text utilized hereinafter is to be interpreted as emphasis placed thereupon.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 6, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 3, “claim 1,further” constitutes a grammatical error, as there is no space between the comma and “further”, which hinders the readability of the claim. In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “claim 1, further.”
Regarding claim 6, “compriseing” constitutes a typographical error, which hinders the readability of the claim. In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “[[compriseing]]comprising.”
Regarding claim 11, “wherein electrolytic solution” constitutes inconsistent antecedent basis relative to it already being introduced in claim 6, which hinders the readability of the claim. In order to overcome the objection, the following amendment is respectfully suggested: “wherein the electrolytic solution.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 6-20 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “compriseing the electrolytic solution.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 6 is an independent claim, where claim 6 does not introduce an electrolytic solution. Therefore, it is unclear what element or feature is intended to be limited by the electrolytic solution species. For the purposes of examination, claim 6 is interpreted as instead reciting “comprising an electrolytic solution.”
Claims 8 and 20 each recite the limitations “0.05 ≤ c/f × 100 ≤ 1”, “0.08 ≤ e/f × 100 ≤ 3”, and “0.02 ≤ g/f × 100 ≤ 1”, which renders the claims indefinite. The variables c, e, and g each have units that are different from the unit of the variable f, therefore, it is unclear how the values are unitless. For the purposes of examination, claims 8 and 20 are each interpreted as instead reciting “0.05 %/μm ≤ c/f × 100 ≤ 1 %/μm”, “0.08 %/μm ≤ e/f × 100 ≤ 3 %/μm”, and “0.02 %/μm ≤ g/f × 100 ≤ 1 %/μm.”
Claim 14 recites the limitations “comprising the electrochemical device” and “comprises the electrolytic solution.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for both of these limitations in the claim. Claim 14 is an independent claim, where claim 14 does not introduce an electrochemical device, as well as, does not introduce an electrolytic solution. Therefore, it is unclear what element or feature is intended to be limited by the electrochemical device and the electrolytic solution species. For the purposes of examination, claim 14 is interpreted as instead reciting “An electronic device comprising [[the]]an electrochemical device, wherein the electrochemical device comprises [[the]]an electrolytic solution.”
Claims 7-13 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent upon claim 6 and therefore include, and do not remedy the aforementioned deficiencies.
Claims 15-20 are indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they are directly or ultimately dependent upon claim 14 and therefore include, and do not remedy the aforementioned deficiencies.
Appropriate action is required.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoichi et al. (JP 2015/181106 A, herein English machine translation is utilized for all citations; “Yoichi”). Yaws (Yaws' Handbook of Physical Properties for Hydrocarbons and Chemicals: Organic Compounds, Knovel, 2008; “Yaws”) is relied upon as an evidentiary reference in support of the rejection.
Regarding claim 1, Yoichi discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte (an electrolytic solution) [0010] comprising ethylene carbonate (EC) in a volume X and propylene carbonate (PC) in a volume Y, wherein 0<X/Y<1.5 [0010, 0014, 0056, 0154, 0162, 0181]. Included in the non-aqueous electrolyte is, inter alia fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) [0030, 0048, 0154, 0181].
Yoichi Example 5-1 discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte includes ethylene carbonate at 5% by volume, propylene carbonate at 25% by volume, and fluoroethylene carbonate at 2% by mass [0181, Example 5-1]. Through calculation, ethylene carbonate is present in an amount 6.61% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.3214 g/cm3 x 5%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws) and propylene carbonate is present in an amount 30.12% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.2047 g/cm3 x 25%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws). In view thereof, a ratio of ethylene carbonate to propylene carbonate is 6.61% by mass to 30.12% by mass respectively, or 0.22 ethylene carbonate to propylene carbonate, of which is within the claimed range 0.1 ≤ a/b ≤ 0.75 (see MPEP 2131.03).
Additionally, the above calculated mass % of propylene carbonate (30.12% by mass), is within the claimed mass percent range, 12% to 35% (see MPEP 2131.03), and the aforementioned fluoroethylene carbonate content at 2% by mass is within the claimed mass percent range, 0.2% to 2.5% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 2, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, the above calculated mass % of ethylene carbonate (6.61% by mass) is within the claimed mass percent range, 1.0% ≤ a ≤ 20% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 3, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte of Example 5-1 additionally includes vinylene carbonate (VC) in an amount 2% by mass (further comprising an additive A, wherein the additive A comprises… vinylene carbonate) [0154, 0181].
Regarding claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 above reads on the electrolytic solution defined by claim 4. Vinylene carbonate is in an amount 2% by mass ((a) the additive A comprises vinylene carbonate, wherein, based on the mass of the electrolytic solution, a mass percent A1 of the vinylene carbonate is 0.01% to 2%) [0154, 0181], of which is within the claimed mass percent range, 0.01% to 2% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 5, in view of the rejection of claim 1 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte of Example 5-1 additionally includes, inter alia ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) in an amount 40% by volume [0154, 0181]. Through calculation, ethyl methyl carbonate is present in an amount 40.48% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.012 g/cm3 x 40%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws) ((k) the electrolytic solution further comprises a chain carbonate, wherein, based on the mass of the electrolytic solution, a mass percent of the chain carbonate is d; the chain carbonate comprises… ethyl methyl carbonate; 0.04 ≤ a/d ≤ 0.35 or 30% ≤ d ≤ 60%), of which is within the claimed mass percent range, 30% ≤ d ≤ 60% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 6, Yoichi discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (an electrochemical device) [0001, 0010-0013, 0151, 0160, 0182] comprising a non-aqueous electrolyte (an electrolytic solution) [0010]. The non-aqueous electrolyte comprises ethylene carbonate (EC) in a volume X and propylene carbonate (PC) in a volume Y, wherein 0<X/Y<1.5 [0010, 0014, 0056, 0154, 0162, 0181]. Included in the non-aqueous electrolyte is, inter alia fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) [0030, 0048, 0154, 0181].
Yoichi Example 5-1 discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte includes ethylene carbonate at 5% by volume, propylene carbonate at 25% by volume, and fluoroethylene carbonate at 2% by mass [0181, Example 5-1]. Through calculation, ethylene carbonate is present in an amount 6.61% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.3214 g/cm3 x 5%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws) and propylene carbonate is present in an amount 30.12% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.2047 g/cm3 x 25%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws). In view thereof, a ratio of ethylene carbonate to propylene carbonate is 6.61% by mass to 30.12% by mass respectively, or 0.22 ethylene carbonate to propylene carbonate, of which is within the claimed range 0.1 ≤ a/b ≤ 0.75 (see MPEP 2131.03).
Additionally, the above calculated mass % of propylene carbonate (30.12% by mass), is within the claimed mass percent range, 12% to 35% (see MPEP 2131.03), and the aforementioned fluoroethylene carbonate content at 2% by mass is within the claimed mass percent range, 0.2% to 2.5% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 10, in view of the rejection of claim 6 above, the above calculated mass % of ethylene carbonate (6.61% by mass) is within the claimed mass percent range, 1.0% ≤ a ≤ 20% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 11, in view of the rejection of claim 6 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte of Example 5-1 additionally includes vinylene carbonate (VC) in an amount 2% by mass (further comprising an additive A, wherein the additive A comprises… vinylene carbonate) [0154, 0181].
Regarding claim 12, the rejection of claim 11 above reads on the electrolytic solution defined by claim 12. Vinylene carbonate is in an amount 2% by mass ((a) the additive A comprises vinylene carbonate, wherein, based on the mass of the electrolytic solution, a mass percent A1 of the vinylene carbonate is 0.01% to 2%) [0154, 0181], of which is within the claimed mass percent range, 0.01% to 2% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 13, in view of the rejection of claim 6 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte of Example 5-1 additionally includes, inter alia ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) in an amount 40% by volume [0154, 0181]. Through calculation, ethyl methyl carbonate is present in an amount 40.48% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.012 g/cm3 x 40%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws) ((k) the electrolytic solution further comprises a chain carbonate, wherein, based on the mass of the electrolytic solution, a mass percent of the chain carbonate is d; the chain carbonate comprises… ethyl methyl carbonate; 0.04 ≤ a/d ≤ 0.35 or 30% ≤ d ≤ 60%), of which is within the claimed mass percent range, 30% ≤ d ≤ 60% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 14, Yoichi discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (an electrochemical device) [0001, 0010-0013, 0151, 0160, 0182] for an electronic device (an electronic device comprising an electrochemical device) (see 112(b) claim rejection above for claim interpretation) [0002, 0190-0191] comprising a non-aqueous electrolyte (an electrolytic solution) [0010]. The non-aqueous electrolyte comprises ethylene carbonate (EC) in a volume X and propylene carbonate (PC) in a volume Y, wherein 0<X/Y<1.5 [0010, 0014, 0056, 0154, 0162, 0181]. Included in the non-aqueous electrolyte is, inter alia fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) [0030, 0048, 0154, 0181].
Yoichi Example 5-1 discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte includes ethylene carbonate at 5% by volume, propylene carbonate at 25% by volume, and fluoroethylene carbonate at 2% by mass [0181, Example 5-1]. Through calculation, ethylene carbonate is present in an amount 6.61% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.3214 g/cm3 x 5%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws) and propylene carbonate is present in an amount 30.12% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.2047 g/cm3 x 25%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws). In view thereof, a ratio of ethylene carbonate to propylene carbonate is 6.61% by mass to 30.12% by mass respectively, or 0.22 ethylene carbonate to propylene carbonate, of which is within the claimed range 0.1 ≤ a/b ≤ 0.75 (see MPEP 2131.03).
Additionally, the above calculated mass % of propylene carbonate (30.12% by mass), is within the claimed mass percent range, 12% to 35% (see MPEP 2131.03), and the aforementioned fluoroethylene carbonate content at 2% by mass is within the claimed mass percent range, 0.2% to 2.5% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 15, in view of the rejection of claim 14 above, the above calculated mass % of ethylene carbonate (6.61% by mass) is within the claimed mass percent range, 1.0% ≤ a ≤ 20% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 16, in view of the rejection of claim 14 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte of Example 5-1 additionally includes vinylene carbonate (VC) in an amount 2% by mass (further comprising an additive A, wherein the additive A comprises… vinylene carbonate) [0154, 0181].
Regarding claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 above reads on the electrolytic solution defined by claim 17. Vinylene carbonate is in an amount 2% by mass ((a) the additive A comprises vinylene carbonate, wherein, based on the mass of the electrolytic solution, a mass percent A1 of the vinylene carbonate is 0.01% to 2%) [0154, 0181], of which is within the claimed mass percent range, 0.01% to 2% (see MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding claim 18, in view of the rejection of claim 14 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte of Example 5-1 additionally includes, inter alia ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC) in an amount 40% by volume [0154, 0181]. Through calculation, ethyl methyl carbonate is present in an amount 40.48% by mass (calculation: mass = density x volume, mass % = 1.012 g/cm3 x 40%; wherein the density is evidenced by Yaws) ((k) the electrolytic solution further comprises a chain carbonate, wherein, based on the mass of the electrolytic solution, a mass percent of the chain carbonate is d; the chain carbonate comprises… ethyl methyl carbonate; 0.04 ≤ a/d ≤ 0.35 or 30% ≤ d ≤ 60%), of which is within the claimed mass percent range, 30% ≤ d ≤ 60% (see MPEP 2131.03).
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 7-9 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoichi, evidenced by Yaws, as applied to claims 6 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) above, in view of Tatsumi et al. (US 2010/0196761 A1; “Tatsumi”).
Regarding claim 7, in view of the rejection of claim 6 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery includes a positive electrode (positive electrode plate) [0127], with a positive electrode active material layer comprising a positive electrode active material (the positive electrode plate comprises a positive material layer, the positive material layer comprises a positive active material) [0107-0127]. The positive electrode active material is a lithium transition metal compound [0107-0127].
Yoichi remains silent regarding a particle diameter of the positive active material satisfies 0.4 μm ≤ Dv50 ≤ 20 μm, and 2 μm ≤ Dv90 ≤ 40 μm.
Tatsumi is directed towards a lithium secondary battery, including a positive electrode and a transition metal compound positive electrode active material [0025-0026, 0039-0040]. Tatsumi teaches that the transition metal compound has an average particle size D50 of 10-40 μm [0035-0036], where, if the D50 is smaller than 10 μm, the packing density tends to be low [0035], and if the D50 is larger than 40 μm, coating of a current collector cannot be carried out uniformly, or the active material is likely to be peeled from the current collector [0035]. The average particle size D50 is the accumulative 50% value in a volume based particle size distribution obtained by a laser scattering particle size distribution measuring apparatus [0036]. Tatsumi additionally teaches that the D90 (accumulative 90% value) is preferably at most 70 μm [0036, 0038], in order to allow for easy coating of the electrode [0038]. If the D50 exceeds 70 μm, uniform coating of the current collector tends to be difficult or the active material is likely to be peeled from the current collector [0038]. Tatsumi exemplifies a LiCoO2 D90 of 27.3 μm [0082, Example 1] and a Li1.01Ni0.79Co0.18Al0.02O2 D90 of 27.2 μm [0111, Example 13].
Yoichi and Tatsumi each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – positive active material. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the positive electrode active material lithium transition metal compound of Yoichi so that the D50 is between 10-40 μm and so that the D90 is for example 27.2 μm or 27.3 μm, and does not exceed 70 μm, in order to obtain the predictable results of excellent packing density and uniform/easy coating ability [Tatsumi, 0035-0038] (see MPEP 2144.05(II)).
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the positive electrode active material lithium transition metal compound of Yoichi would have the D50 between 10-40 μm and the D90 for example between 27.2-27.3 μm, wherein both ranges overlap their respective claimed range, 0.4 μm ≤ Dv50 ≤ 20 μm and 2 μm ≤ Dv90 ≤ 40 μm, thereby rendering each range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 8, in view of the rejection of claim 7 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte may further comprise a cyclic compound having an S=O bond [0010], of which includes, e.g. 1,3-propanesultone, 1,4-butanesultone, or 1,3-propensultone (a sultone compound) [0010, 0031]. When included, the sultone compound is in an amount 0.001%-10% by mass in the non-aqueous electrolyte [0032]. Through calculation, the ratio of the mass percent of the sultone compound to the D50 multiplied by 100 is between 0.0025-100 %/μm (calculations: lower bound = 0.001%/40 μm x 100; upper bound = 10%/10 μm x 100), of which overlaps with the claimed range, 0.08 ≤ e/f × 100 ≤ 3, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 9, in view of the rejection of claim 7 above, modified Yoichi further discloses that the positive active material lithium transition metal compound may further comprise another element(s) (element M) [0125-0126], of which includes, inter alia Al and Mg [Yoichi, 0125-0126].
Yoichi remains silent regarding based on a mass of metal elements except lithium in the positive active material, a mass percent of the element M is less than or equal to 0.5%.
Tatsumi is directed towards a lithium secondary battery, including a positive electrode and a transition metal compound positive electrode active material [0025-0026, 0039-0040]. Tatsumi further teaches a metal element other than nickel, cobalt and manganese may be contained in the transition metal compound [0040, 0064-0066], of which may be, inter alia aluminum and magnesium [0039-0040], and in an amount 0.001 mol%-5 mol% [0040].
Yoichi and Tatsumi each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – positive active material comprising element M. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the positive electrode active material lithium transition metal compound of Yoichi so that the another element is in an amount 0.001 mol%-5 mol%, in order to improve volume capacity density and durability for charge and discharge cycles [Tatsumi, 0022].
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the positive electrode active material lithium transition metal compound of Yoichi would have the another element in an amount 0.001 mol%-5 mol%, wherein one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would reasonably be able to calculate and understand that another element in an amount 0.001 mol%-5 mol%, when converted to mass percent for the specific element used in a specific lithium transition metal compound formula, overlaps with the claimed range, less than or equal to 0.5%, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)). The exact conversion calculation would therefore depend on the mol% of the other metal elements other than lithium included in the lithium transition metal compound.
Regarding claim 19, in view of the rejection of claim 14 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery for an electronic device includes a positive electrode (positive electrode plate) [0127], with a positive electrode active material layer comprising a positive electrode active material (the positive electrode plate comprises a positive material layer, the positive material layer comprises a positive active material) [0107-0127]. The positive electrode active material is a lithium transition metal compound [0107-0127].
Yoichi remains silent regarding a particle diameter of the positive active material satisfies 0.4 μm ≤ Dv50 ≤ 20 μm, and 2 μm ≤ Dv90 ≤ 40 μm.
Tatsumi is directed towards a lithium secondary battery, including a positive electrode and a transition metal compound positive electrode active material [0025-0026, 0039-0040]. Tatsumi teaches that the transition metal compound has an average particle size D50 of 10-40 μm [0035-0036], where, if the D50 is smaller than 10 μm, the packing density tends to be low [0035], and if the D50 is larger than 40 μm, coating of a current collector cannot be carried out uniformly, or the active material is likely to be peeled from the current collector [0035]. The average particle size D50 is the accumulative 50% value in a volume based particle size distribution obtained by a laser scattering particle size distribution measuring apparatus [0036]. Tatsumi additionally teaches that the D90 (accumulative 90% value) is preferably at most 70 μm [0036, 0038], in order to allow for easy coating of the electrode [0038]. If the D50 exceeds 70 μm, uniform coating of the current collector tends to be difficult or the active material is likely to be peeled from the current collector [0038]. Tatsumi exemplifies a LiCoO2 D90 of 27.3 μm [0082, Example 1] and a Li1.01Ni0.79Co0.18Al0.02O2 D90 of 27.2 μm [0111, Example 13].
Yoichi and Tatsumi each constitute prior art which is directly analogous to the claimed invention – positive active material. In view of the combined teachings of the foregoing prior art, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the positive electrode active material lithium transition metal compound of Yoichi so that the D50 is between 10-40 μm and so that the D90 is for example 27.2 μm or 27.3 μm, and does not exceed 70 μm, in order to obtain the predictable results of excellent packing density and uniform/easy coating ability [Tatsumi, 0035-0038] (see MPEP 2144.05(II)).
In accordance with the aforesaid modifications, the positive electrode active material lithium transition metal compound of Yoichi would have the D50 between 10-40 μm and the D90 for example between 27.2-27.3 μm, wherein both ranges overlap their respective claimed range, 0.4 μm ≤ Dv50 ≤ 20 μm and 2 μm ≤ Dv90 ≤ 40 μm, thereby rendering each range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 20, in view of the rejection of claim 19 above, Yoichi further discloses that the non-aqueous electrolyte may further comprise a cyclic compound having an S=O bond [0010], of which includes, e.g. 1,3-propanesultone, 1,4-butanesultone, or 1,3-propensultone (a sultone compound) [0010, 0031]. When included, the sultone compound is in an amount 0.001%-10% by mass in the non-aqueous electrolyte [0032]. Through calculation, the ratio of the mass percent of the sultone compound to the D50 multiplied by 100 is between 0.0025-100 %/μm (calculations: lower bound = 0.001%/40 μm x 100; upper bound = 10%/10 μm x 100), of which overlaps with the claimed range, 0.08 ≤ e/f × 100 ≤ 3, thereby rendering the range obvious (MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Pertinent Prior Art
The following constitutes a list of prior art which are not relied upon herein, but are considered pertinent to the claimed invention and/or written description thereof. The prior art are purposely made of record hereinafter to facilitate compact/expedient prosecution, and consideration thereof is respectfully suggested.
Bo et al., US 2019/0214680 A1 – is directed towards an electrolytic solution [0020] and teaches that the electrolytic solution comprises, inter alia fluoroethylene carbonate in an amount 0.5 wt% to 20 wt% [0027-0028]. Additionally, the electrolytic solution includes an organic solvent combination in a ratio of, inter alia ethylene carbonate (EC):propylene carbonate (PC):diethyl carbonate (DEC)=1:2:6 [0043].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNA X. COLTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-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, Aaron Austin can be reached at (571)272-8935. 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.
/JENNA X. COLTON/Examiner, Art Unit 1782
/AARON AUSTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1782
Prosecution Insights