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 .
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.
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (CN 112820941), and further in view of Moon (US 2019/0386297) and Han (US 20240283024).
As to claim 1, Liu discloses a rechargeable lithium battery (page 7, discussed throughout), comprising:
a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material (page 7, discussed throughout);
a negative electrode comprising a negative electrode active material (page 7 discussed throughout); and
an electrolyte (page 1 discussed throughout),
the electrolyte comprises:
a lithium salt (page 5, lithium hexafluorophosphate, discussed throughout);
a non-aqueous organic solvent (page 5, discussed throughout);
a first additive represented by Chemical Formula 1 (page 3 cosolvent, page 5; 1,1,2,2, tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3,-tetrafluoropropyl ether and discussed throughout); and
a second additive represented by Chemical Formula 2 (page 5, lithium difluoro (oxalate) borate):R1—O—R2 Chemical Formula 1
wherein, in Chemical Formula 1,
R1 and R2 are each independently a fluorine atom or a C1 to C10 fluoroalkyl group (page 5; 1,1,2,2, tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3,-tetrafluoropropyl ether and discussed throughout);
PNG
media_image1.png
257
756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein, in Chemical Formula 2,
R3 and R4 are each independently a halogen atom or a C1 to C10 fluoroalkyl group (page 5, lithium difluoro (oxalate) borate).
Lui is silent to wherein, an active mass density of the negative electrode is greater than or equal to about 1.7 g/cc. Moon discloses a lithium battery ([0006]) wherein, the negative
electrode has active mass density in the rage of 1.60 g/cc to about 1.70 g/cc ([0051]). It would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the negative electrode active mass density and/or the active material from Moon within Lui because when the negative electrode has active mass density within the foregoing range, the active mass density is high, and accordingly, high energy density and high capacity may be obtained ([0051]). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Alternatively, should it be considered that Lui is silent to the use of lithium salt and the second additive only a single salt was used from Lui. Han discloses an electrolyte for a secondary battery (abstract) wherein lithium oxylyldifluoroborate (lithium difluorooxalato) is used within the electrolyte ([0063]-[0064]) in a range of 0.01 to 10 wt% bases of the total weight of the electrolyte solution ([0064]-[0068]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the same amount of lithium difluorooxalato from Han within Lui as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I) and because cycle characteristics may be improved, a side reaction of the battery due to excessive addition may be prevented, and residue or precipitation of unreacted material may be prevented ([0068], Han).
As to claim 2, modified Liu discloses wherein, the first additive is represented by Chemical Formula 1-1:
PNG
media_image2.png
228
810
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein, in Chemical Formula 1-1,
R11 to R15 are each a hydrogen atom or a fluorine atom, provided that at least one of R11 to R15 is a fluorine atom; and
R21 to R27 are each a hydrogen atom or a fluorine atom, provided that at least one of R21 to R27 is a fluorine atom (page 5; 1,1,2,2, tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3,-tetrafluoropropyl ether and discussed throughout).
As to claim 3, modified Liu discloses wherein, the first additive is represented by Chemical Formula 1-1-1:
PNG
media_image3.png
222
810
media_image3.png
Greyscale
( page 5; 1,1,2,2, tetrafluoroethyl-2,2,3,3,-tetrafluoropropyl ether and discussed throughout).
As to claim 4, modified Liu discloses wherein, both R3 and R4 are fluorine atoms (page 5, lithium difluoro (oxalate) borate; [0063], Han).
As to claim 5, modified Liu discloses wherein, the first additive is included in an amount of about 1 to about 20 wt % based on a total amount of the electrolyte (0.5 to 20%, page 5, and discussed throughout). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 6, modified Liu discloses wherein, the second additive is included in an amount of about 1 to about 10 wt % based on a total amount of the electrolyte ([0068], Han). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 7, modified Liu discloses wherein, a weight ratio of the first additive and the second additive is about 20:1 to about 2:1 (page 5, of Lui for the first additive and [0068], Han). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP 2144.05 I).
As to claim 8, modified Liu discloses wherein, the non-aqueous organic solvent comprises a carbonate-based solvent and a propionate-based solvent (page 5, discussed throughout).
As to claim 9, modified Liu discloses is silent to, the propionate-based solvent is included in an amount of greater than or equal to about 70 volume % based on a total amount of the non-aqueous organic solvent. Han discloses an electrolyte for a secondary battery (abstract) wherein propionate-based solvent is included in an amount of greater than or equal to about 70 volume % based on a total amount of the non-aqueous organic solvent ([0101], [0106], [0108]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the same solvent ratio from Han within Lui as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I).
As to claim 10, modified Liu discloses wherein, the lithium salt is LiPF6 (page 5, discussed throughout).
As to claim 11, modified Liu is silent to wherein, a concentration of the lithium salt is about 0.1 M to about 2.0 M. Han discloses an electrolyte for a secondary battery (abstract) wherein the lithium salt is within the range of 1 M to 3 M ([0030]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the concentration of the lithium salt from Han within Lui as within the range the electrolyte solution to obtain an optimum effect of forming a film for preventing corrosion of the surface of the electrode ([0030]).
As to claim 12, modified Liu discloses wherein, the positive electrode active material comprises lithium nickel-based oxide, lithium cobalt-based oxide, lithium manganese-based oxide, a lithium iron phosphate-based compound, cobalt-free lithium nickel-manganese-based oxide, or a combination thereof (page 7, discussed throughout; note that the translation says anode but that is the cathode as that is how batteries operate give that the cathode is the anode material). Alternatively Moon discloses wherein the positive electrode active material comprises lithium nickel-based oxide, lithium cobalt-based oxide, lithium manganese-based oxide, a lithium iron phosphate-based compound, cobalt-free lithium nickel-manganese-based oxide, or a combination thereof ([0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to use the positive electrode active material from Moon as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I).
As to claim 13, modified Liu discloses wherein, the negative electrode active material comprises a carbon-based negative electrode active material, a Si-based negative electrode active material, or a combination thereof (page 7, discussed throughout; note that the translation says cathode but that is the anode as that is how batteries operate give that the cathode is the anode material; [0008], Moon).
As to claim 14, modified Liu is silent to wherein, the rechargeable lithium battery has an upper charge limit voltage of greater than or equal to about 4.5 V. Han discloses a lithium ion battery (abstract) wherein the battery operating at a voltage of 4.45 V or more ([0104], discussed throughout). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art at the time of the effective filling date of the invention to have Lui operate at the voltage discloses within Han as a mere combing prior art elements according to known methods to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 I).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhau (US 2023/0268555) paragraph [0112] discusses the addition of instant claimed compound two as an additive with motivation for the additive. Kim (US 2016/0190646) Formula 1 can be instant claimed compound 1 as see table 1 example 4 for the more specific compound.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R OHARA whose telephone number is (571)272-0728. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights