DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. Information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted June 27, 2024, has been received and considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
4. All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
5. Claim 1 recites “a compound including an aromatic ring in which two or more elements selected from the group consisting of N, S, and O are each independently bonded”. The limitation “two or more elements selected from the group consisting of N, S, and O” encompasses e.g. two Ns, two Ss, two Os, N and S, N and O, and S and O. This interpretation is supported by the instant disclosure’s exemplification of species having only N atoms (of the three choices), having N and O atoms, and having N and S atoms.
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.
6. Claim 6 is 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 “at least one of the carbon atoms in R2, which are bonded to oxygen atoms at both terminals, does not have a fluorine atom”. The structure described is unclear and indefinite. What does it mean for at least one of the carbons in R2 to be bonded to oxygen atoms at both terminals? For example, what terminal is referred to? The language is vague. The scope of the claim, “F-substituted alkylene” encompasses CF2 as R2 and if the limitation quoted above were applied to a Formula 1 variation having this CF2 alkylene linker, the resulting formula would be non-sensical and impossible since the C would be required to have F attached and prohibited from having F attached.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
7. Claims 1-2, 7-9, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang US PG Publication 2016/0261000 in view of Jito US PG Publication 2002/0117469 and Hirayama JP2017-019746.
Regarding Claims 1-2, 7-9, and 11-12, Zhang discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode (cathode) 110/120 and a negative electrode (anode) 140 not having a negative-electrode active material (lithium anode 150 is formed in situ on a surface of the copper (para 0068) current collector, para 0037), and an electrolyte solution (para 0038-0039), wherein the electrolyte solution contains a lithium salt (para 0039-0040) (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Fig 1 and paras 0034-0042, 0068-0069). Zhang does not specifically disclose wherein at least a part of a surface of the negative electrode facing the positive electrode is coated with a compound including an aromatic ring in which two or more elements selected from the group consisting of N, S, and O are each independently bonded. However, in the same field of endeavor of lithium secondary battery design, Jito teaches that it is beneficial to form an antirust layer on a current collector to prevent corrosion, and that such a layer is formed from e.g. benzotriazole (para 0012, 0042). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to coat at least a part of a surface of the negative electrode of Zhang facing the positive electrode with a compound including an aromatic ring in which two or more elements selected from the group consisting of N, S, and O are each independently bonded, such as benzotriazole (meeting Claim 12) which has one or more nitrogen atoms bonded to the aromatic ring (meeting Claim 11) because Jito teaches that it is beneficial to form an antirust layer from this material on a copper current collector to prevent corrosion.
Zhang modified by Jito discloses the use of e.g. ethylene carbonate as an electrolyte solvent (para 0039 of Zhang) and also discloses the use of an ether compound not having a fluorine atom in the electrolyte (para 0039, diethyl ether, meeting Claim 2), but does not specifically disclose wherein the electrolyte solution contains at least one of a compound represented by Formula (1) or a compound represented by Formula (2):
PNG
media_image1.png
371
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, in the same field of endeavor of lithium ion battery design, Hirayama discloses that a fluorine-containing chain ether compound is used beneficially as a solvent in a non-aqueous secondary battery electrolyte to improve oxidation resistance which can be used in conjunction with e.g. ethylene carbonate in high-energy density devices such as lithium-ion batteries (see entire disclosure and especially para 0024-0025, 0043-0046) and see below for an example from paras 0024-0025 of the compounds corresponding with Formula (2) and having a F/(H+F) ratio of 6/14 or 0.42 and having 2 carbons in R5 and having a carbon atom in R4 which is bonded to an O atom but not to a F atom (meeting Claims 7-9):
PNG
media_image2.png
512
920
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include in the electrolyte solution of Zhang modified by Jito a compound represented by Formula (2) because Hirayama teaches that a fluorine-containing chain ether compound such as this is used beneficially as a solvent in electrolyte of high-energy density devices such as lithium-ion batteries to improve oxidation resistance, particularly in conjunction with e.g. ethylene carbonate, which Zhang uses.
Regarding Claim 10, Zhang discloses wherein the lithium salt includes at least LiN(SO2F)2 (LiFSI) (para 0039).
8. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang US PG Publication 2016/0261000 in view of Jito US PG Publication 2002/0117469 and Hirayama JP2017-019746, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Itabashi US PG Publication 2019/0312307.
Regarding Claim 3, Zhang modified by Jito and Hirayama discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejection of Claim 1, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. The prior art does not specifically disclose wherein the electrolyte solution further contains a chain-like fluorine compound having at least one of a monovalent group represented by Formula (A) or Formula (B) where a wavy line represents bonding site in a monovalent group:
PNG
media_image3.png
429
435
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, in the same field of endeavor of lithium secondary batteries, Itabashi discloses that fluorinated linear ethers such as the following provide flame-retardant effects to the electrolyte solution (see para 0083):
PNG
media_image4.png
203
664
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include in the electrolyte solution of Zhang modified by Jito and Hirayama a compound represented by Formula (B) because Itabashi teaches that fluorinated linear ethers such as the Formula (B) compound shown provides flame-retardant effects to the electrolyte solution.
9. Claims 1-2, 5-6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang US PG Publication 2016/0261000 in view of Jito US PG Publication 2002/0117469 and Hirayama JP2017-019746, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Ansari US PG Publication 2021/0098827.
Regarding Claims 1-2 and 5, Zhang discloses a lithium secondary battery comprising a positive electrode (cathode) 110/120 and a negative electrode (anode) 140 not having a negative-electrode active material (lithium anode 150 is formed in situ on a surface of the copper (para 0068) current collector, para 0037), and an electrolyte solution (para 0038-0039), wherein the electrolyte solution contains a lithium salt (para 0039-0040) (see entire disclosure and especially e.g. Fig 1 and paras 0034-0042, 0068-0069). Zhang does not specifically disclose wherein at least a part of a surface of the negative electrode facing the positive electrode is coated with a compound including an aromatic ring in which two or more elements selected from the group consisting of N, S, and O are each independently bonded. However, in the same field of endeavor of lithium secondary battery design, Jito teaches that it is beneficial to form an antirust layer on a current collector to prevent corrosion, and that such a layer is formed from e.g. benzotriazole (para 0012, 0042). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to coat at least a part of a surface of the negative electrode of Zhang facing the positive electrode with a compound including an aromatic ring in which two or more elements selected from the group consisting of N, S, and O are each independently bonded, such as benzotriazole (meeting Claim 12) which has one or more nitrogen atoms bonded to the aromatic ring (meeting Claim 11) because Jito teaches that it is beneficial to form an antirust layer from this material on a copper current collector to prevent corrosion.
Zhang modified by Jito discloses the use of e.g. ethylene carbonate as an electrolyte solvent (para 0039 of Zhang) and also discloses the use of an ether compound not having a fluorine atom in the electrolyte (para 0039, diethyl ether, meeting Claim 2), but does not specifically disclose wherein the electrolyte solution contains at least one of a compound represented by Formula (1) or a compound represented by Formula (2):
PNG
media_image1.png
371
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, in the same field of endeavor of lithium ion battery design, Ansari discloses that alkoxyethane based compound, specifically 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1,2-dimethoxyethane, is used beneficially as a co-solvent in a non-aqueous secondary battery electrolyte with e.g. ethylene carbonate to improve battery safety and electrochemical performance ( such as lithium-ion batteries, see entire disclosure and especially para 0037-0045, 0049) and see below for the structure of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1,2-dimethoxyethane, corresponding with Formula (1) and having a F/(H+F) ratio of 4/6 or 0.66 (meeting Claim 5):
PNG
media_image5.png
508
791
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include in the electrolyte solution of Zhang modified by Jito a compound represented by Formula (1) because Ansari discloses that alkoxyethane based compounds, specifically 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1,2-dimethoxyethane, are used beneficially as a co-solvent in a non-aqueous secondary battery electrolyte with e.g. ethylene carbonate to improve battery safety and electrochemical performance.
Regarding Claim 6, Zhang modified by Jito and Ansari does not specifically disclose wherein the electrolyte solution contains the compound represented by Formula (1) and at least one of the carbons in R2, which are bonded to oxygen atoms at both terminals, does not have a fluorine atom. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the compound represented by Formula (1) such that at least one of the terminal carbons of R2 does not have an F atom attached to it in order to e.g. tune the electron withdrawing properties of the compound because the mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 10, Zhang discloses wherein the lithium salt includes at least LiN(SO2F)2 (LiFSI) (para 0039).
10. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang US PG Publication 2016/0261000 in view of Jito US PG Publication 2002/0117469 and Hirayama JP2017-019746, as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Ansari US PG Publication 2021/0098827.
Regarding Claim 4, Zhang modified by Jito and Hirayama discloses the claimed battery as described in the rejection of Claim 1, which is incorporated herein in its entirety. The prior art does not specifically disclose wherein the electrolyte solution contains a compound represented by Formula (1) in addition to a compound represented by Formula (2).
However, in the same field of endeavor of lithium ion battery design, Ansari discloses that alkoxyethane based compound, specifically 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1,2-dimethoxyethane, is used beneficially as a co-solvent in a non-aqueous secondary battery electrolyte with e.g. ethylene carbonate to improve battery safety and electrochemical performance (such as lithium-ion batteries, see entire disclosure and especially para 0037-0045, 0049) and see below for the structure of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1,2-dimethoxyethane, corresponding with Formula (1):
PNG
media_image5.png
508
791
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include in the electrolyte solution of Zhang modified by Jito and Hirayama a compound represented by Formula (1) because Ansari discloses that alkoxyethane based compounds, specifically 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1,2-dimethoxyethane, are used beneficially as a co-solvent in a non-aqueous secondary battery electrolyte with e.g. ethylene carbonate to improve battery safety and electrochemical performance.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Taniki JP6558453 discloses an anode-less battery having a protective coating on the copper current collector (see abstract and e.g. para 0031, 0064).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA S PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-3597. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 5:30a to 3p Eastern Time.
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, Ula Tavares-Crockett can be reached on 5712721481. 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.
/LISA S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights