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 .
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.
Claims 1-6, 10-14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chao (CN-114976213-A) in view of Wen et al. (US 2021/0328268 A1). Chao is mapped to the English machine translation provided by the EPO.
In view of Claim 1, Chao discloses a solid polymer electrolyte comprising a charge transfer complex polymer matrix (Page 3, Example 1-5 has HQ and TCNQ).
Chao does not disclose a halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive.
Wen et al. discloses a halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive (Paragraph 0006-0007 – Formula I-II), that when used in an electrolyte system enables a lithium metal battery to be stably cycled at a high voltage (Paragraph 0075). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive as disclosed by Wen et al. in Chao’s polymer electrolyte to enable the lithium battery to be stably cycled at a high voltage.
In view of Claims 2-4, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Chao discloses that the charge transfer complex matrix comprises electron donors selected from at least hydroquinone (Page 6 – Example 1-5) and the charger transfer complex matrix comprises an electron acceptor selected from TCNQ (Page 6, Example 1-5). In regards to the limitation that the charger transfer complex polymer matrix comprises a polar ring polymer matrix, Chao discloses the same configuration as Applicants electron donor and electron acceptor, thus it must inherently be a polar ring polymer matrix.
In view of Claims 5-6, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claims 2-4. Chao discloses that the lithium organic salt is LiTFSI (Page 6, Examples 1-5).
In view of Claim 10, Chao discloses a solid polymer electrolyte comprising a charge transfer complex polymer matrix (Page 3, Example 1-5 has HQ and TCNQ).
Chao does not disclose a halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive.
Wen et al. discloses a halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive (Paragraph 0006-0007 – Formula I-II), that when used in an electrolyte system enables a lithium metal battery to be stably cycled at a high voltage (Paragraph 0075). Wen discloses the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive can be each of the chemical structures recited in claim 10 (Paragraph 0076). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive as disclosed by Wen et al. in Chao’s polymer electrolyte to enable the lithium battery to be stably cycled at a high voltage.
In view of Claims 11-12, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 1. Chao discloses that the charge transfer complex matrix comprises electron donors selected from at least hydroquinone (Page 6 – Example 1-5) and the charger transfer complex matrix comprises an electron acceptor selected from TCNQ (Page 6, Example 1-5). In regards to the limitation that the charger transfer complex polymer matrix comprises a polar ring polymer matrix, Chao discloses the same configuration as Applicants electron donor and electron acceptor, thus it must inherently be a polar ring polymer matrix.
In view of Claims 13-14, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Chao discloses that the lithium organic salt is LiTFSI (Page 6, Examples 1-5).
In view of Claim 16, Chao discloses a solid polymer electrolyte comprising a charge transfer complex polymer matrix (Page 3, Example 1-5 has HQ and TCNQ). Chao discloses that the charge transfer complex matrix comprises electron donors selected from at least hydroquinone (Page 6 – Example 1-5) and the charger transfer complex matrix comprises an electron acceptor selected from TCNQ (Page 6, Example 1-5). In regards to the limitation that the charger transfer complex polymer matrix comprises a polar ring polymer matrix, Chao discloses the same configuration as Applicants electron donor and electron acceptor, thus it must inherently be a polar ring polymer matrix.
Chao does not disclose a halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive.
Wen et al. discloses a halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive (Paragraph 0006-0007 – Formula I-II), that when used in an electrolyte system enables a lithium metal battery to be stably cycled at a high voltage (Paragraph 0075). Wen discloses the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive can be each of the chemical structures recited in claim 16 (Paragraph 0076). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive as disclosed by Wen et al. in Chao’s polymer electrolyte to enable the lithium battery to be stably cycled at a high voltage.
In view of Claims 17-18, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 11. Chao discloses that the lithium organic salt is LiTFSI (Page 6, Examples 1-5).
Claims 7-9, 15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chao (CN-114976213-A) in view of Wen et al. (US 2021/0328268 A1) in view of Zimmerman et al. (US 2021/0119213 A1). Chao is mapped to the English machine translation provided by the EPO.
In view of Claim 7, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 6. Modified Chao does not disclose that the charge transfer complex comprises PPS or TFBQ.
Zimmerman et al. discloses that a charge transfer complex that comprises PPS are useful as reactants in the syntheses of solid ionically conductive polymer material or electron donors or polymers which can be oxidized by electron acceptors (Paragraph 0053 & 0055). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use PPS as Chao’s undisclosed polymer as its disclosed by Zimmerman et al. that PPS is useful as a reactant in an analogous material and the selection of a known material based on its suitability for an intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. See MPEP 2144.07.
In view of Claims 8-9, Chao, Wen, and Zimmerman et al. are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 7. Wen discloses the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive can be each of the chemical structures recited in claim 9 (Paragraph 0076). In regards to the limitation that the “halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive has a molecular weight less than or equal to 150 grams per mole”, Wen discloses the same structure as recited by Applicant and thus would inherently, display the recited properties, namely allowing for “a molecular weight less than or equal to 150 grams per mole”. See MPEP 2112.01 I.
In view of Claim 15, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 14. Modified Chao does not disclose that the charge transfer complex comprises PPS or TFBQ.
Zimmerman et al. discloses that a charge transfer complex that comprises PPS are useful as reactants in the syntheses of solid ionically conductive polymer material or electron donors or polymers which can be oxidized by electron acceptors (Paragraph 0053 & 0055). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use PPS as Chao’s undisclosed polymer as its disclosed by Zimmerman et al. that PPS is useful as a reactant in an analogous material and the selection of a known material based on its suitability for an intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. See MPEP 2144.07.
In view of Claim 19, Chao and Wen are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 18. Modified Chao does not disclose that the charge transfer complex comprises PPS or TFBQ.
Zimmerman et al. discloses that a charge transfer complex that comprises PPS are useful as reactants in the syntheses of solid ionically conductive polymer material or electron donors or polymers which can be oxidized by electron acceptors (Paragraph 0053 & 0055). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use PPS as Chao’s undisclosed polymer as its disclosed by Zimmerman et al. that PPS is useful as a reactant in an analogous material and the selection of a known material based on its suitability for an intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. See MPEP 2144.07.
In view of Claim 20, Chao, Wen, and Zimmerman et al. are relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 19. Wen discloses the halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive can be each of the chemical structures recited in claim 9 (Paragraph 0076). In regards to the limitation that the “halogen functionalized sulfone-based plasticizer molecule additive has a molecular weight less than or equal to 150 grams per mole”, Wen discloses the same structure as recited by Applicant and thus would inherently, display the recited properties, namely allowing for “a molecular weight less than or equal to 150 grams per mole”. See MPEP 2112.01 I.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL P MALLEY JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-1638. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm 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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 571-272-1307. 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.
/DANIEL P MALLEY JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights