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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on January 5th, 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 18-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakazawa (US20200036041) in view of Abe (US20180301758).
Regarding Claim 18, Nakazawa discloses an energy storage device (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, [001], [0015]) comprising:
A first electrode (positive electrode, [0019]);
A second electrode (negative electrode, [0020]);
A separator between the first electrode and the second electrode ([0397]); and
An electrolyte system ([0018]) comprising:
A cyanate-based compound (isocyanate compound, [0170]);
A linear carbonate ([0093]);
A cyclic carbonate ([0093]); and
A Li-containing salt ([0077]);
Nakazawa discloses that various isocyanates can be used including monoisocyanates, dissocyanates and triisocyanates ([0170-0182]). Nakazawa also lists phenyl isocyanate as a potential monoisocyanate compound ([0172]).
Abe discloses wherein an electrolyte can include monoisocyanates including phenyl isocyanate ([0055]). Abe further discloses wherein the isocyanate compound can be 2-isocyanatomethyl acrylate ([0063]). Abe teaches that this composition provides improved charging storage properties ([001]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the chemical composition of Nakazawa with the teachings of Abe to have wherein the cyanate-based compound is 2-isocyanatomethyl acrylate. This modification would yield the expected result of improved charging storage properties.
Regarding Claim 19, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the linear carbonate is selected from the group consisting of ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC), dimethyl carbonate (DMC), and diethyl carbonate (DEC) ([0099]).
Regarding Claim 20, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses comprises a co-solvent selected from the group consisting of methyl acetate ([0391], [0462]), ethyl acetate ([0462]), methyl propionate ([0462]), and gamma butyrolactone (example of cyclic carbonate, can use more than one cyclic carbonate, [0110]).
Regarding Claim 21, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the cyclic carbonate is selected from the group consisting of fluoroethylene carbonate, di-fluoroethylene carbonate, trifluoropropylene carbonate, ethylene carbonate, ([0073-0074]).
Regarding Claim 22, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the cyclic carbonate is a fluorine containing cyclic carbonate ([0075]).
Regarding Claim 23, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the cyclic carbonate is FEC ([0073-0074]).
Nakazawa does not directly disclose wherein the fluorine containing cyclic carbonate is at a concentration of 5% or more.
Nakazawa discloses wherein the amount of fluorinated cyclic carbonate contained in the electrolytic solution can be 10 % by mass or less ([0076]), which overlaps the instant claim range of 5% or more.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Nakazawa to have wherein the fluorine containing cyclic carbonate is at a concentration of 5% or more.
Regarding Claim 24, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa does not directly disclose wherein the electrolyte is substantially free of non-fluorine containing cyclic carbonates.
However, the examiner notes that Nakazawa discloses that the cyclic carbonates used are preferably fluorine containing cyclic carbonate ([0028], [0072]), and although Nakazawa discloses the use of cyclic carbonates with no fluorine atoms, they can be interchanged for linear carbonates ([0093]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Nakazawa to have wherein the electrolyte is substantially free of non-fluorine containing cyclic carbonate.
Regarding Claim 25, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the Li-containing salt is a fluorinated Li salt ([0077-0088]).
Regarding Claim 26, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa does not directly disclose wherein the Li-containing salt has a concentration of about 1 M or more.
Nakazawa discloses wherein the molar concentration of the lithium salt can be 3.0 M or less ([0091]), which overlaps the instant claim range of 1 M or more.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Nakazawa to have wherein the Li-containing salt has a concentration of about 1 M or more.
Regarding Claim 27, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein at least on of the first electrode and the second electrode is a Si-based electrode ([0330]).
Regarding Claim 28, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the Si-based electrode is an anode ([0330]).
Regarding Claim 29, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the anode is a Si-dominant anode ([0330]).
Regarding Claim 30, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above.
The examiner notes that “self-supporting composite material film” is defined by the applicant as a precursor mixture that can contain graphite particles and is pyrolyzation.
Nakazawa discloses wherein the anode can include carbonaceous materials including pyrolysates such as graphite ([0645]). Therefore it is the examiner’s opinion that Nakazawa discloses a self-supporting composite material film.
Regarding Claim 31 & 32, Nakazawa in view of Abe discloses the limitations as set forth above. Nakazawa does not directly disclose wherein the Si-based electrode comprises:
Greater than 50 % and less than about 97% by weight of silicon particles,
and greater than 0% and less than about 90% by weight of one or more types of carbon phases,
wherein at least one of the one or more types of carbon phases is substantially continuous phase that holds the Si-based electrode together such that the silicon particles are distributed throughout the Si-based electrode.
Nakazawa discloses wherein the negative electrode active material can be 70% by weight or more ([0348]), and the electrically conductive material can be present in the negative electrode by 3% weight or more ([0349]), where the electrically conductive material is a carbon based material ([0262], [0264]), which overlaps the instant claim range of Greater than 0 % and less than about 99% by weight of silicon particles, and greater than 0% and less than about 90% by weight of one or more types of carbon phases. Nakazawa further discloses wherein the carbon material can be amorphous carbon ([004]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Nakazawa to have wherein Si-based electrode comprises: greater than 50 % and less than about 97% by weight of silicon particles, and greater than 0% and less than about 90% by weight of one or more types of carbon phases, wherein at least one of the one or more types of carbon phases is substantially continuous phase that holds the Si-based electrode together such that the silicon particles are distributed throughout the Si-based electrode.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments, see Claims, filed January 5th, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nakazawa in view of Abe.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKITH R SRIPATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 am - 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
/ANKITH R SRIPATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728