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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/20/24 has been considered by the examiner. Note the foreign patent documents and the nonpatent literature documents are contained in the parent case (16/956,761).
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 2-21 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 2 recites:
PNG
media_image1.png
58
639
media_image1.png
Greyscale
which is indefinite because it is unclear if the vanadium oxide of the claim requires lithium and sodium ions within the structure of the vanadium oxide of the produced battery or if the vanadium oxide is intercalated with lithium and sodium ions during use of the electrode in the rechargeable battery (during cycling).
Similarly, claim 4 recites:
PNG
media_image2.png
55
636
media_image2.png
Greyscale
which is indefinite and indicates the sodium ions of claim 2 are not required to be intercalated into the vanadium oxide structure of the produced battery (before cycling/use in the battery). If the sodium ion are required to be intercalated in claim 2, it is unclear how claim 4 further limits the subject matter of claim 2.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the cathode" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the metastable" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests “the metastable polymorph”. See also claim 7.
Claim 6 recites “is configured to reversibly intercalate with one of more Li+ and Na+”, which is indefinite. It is unclear how the vanadium oxide “is configured to” reversibly intercalate “one or more Li+ and Na+”. Furthermore, it is unclear what encompasses the metastable polymorph vanadium oxide of claim 6. Examiner notes the rejection of claim 2 and that claim to recite “Li+ and Na+”. See also claim 7. It is unclear what encompasses the metastable polymorph vanadium oxide of claim 7 and how the claim further limits the subject matter of claim 6.
Claim 8 recites:
PNG
media_image3.png
53
634
media_image3.png
Greyscale
which is indefinite as it is unclear what encompasses the metastable polymorph vanadium oxide of claim 8 and how the claim further limits the subject matter of claim 7. It is unclear if the Li+ and/or Na+ ions are required by the presently claimed invention. Applicant is not claiming a method of cycling a battery. Applicant is not claiming a method of making vanadium oxide.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the electrolyte or suspension" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. See also claim 14.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the cathode" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. See also claim 14.
Claim 14 recites “the electrolyte or suspension comprising a metal ion is configured to serve as a metal ion source for the cathode”, which is indefinite as the claim does not require how the electrolyte or suspension “is configured to serve as a metal ion source”.
Claim 20 recites:
PNG
media_image4.png
78
651
media_image4.png
Greyscale
which is indefinite as it is unclear what structure (intercalated with ions or not intercalated with ions) the recited lattice constants are attempting to define. See also claim 21.
To the extent the claims are understood in view of the 35 USC 112 rejections above, note the following prior art rejections.
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.
Claim(s) 2-16 and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over, Horrocks et al., Mitigating Cation Diffusion Limitations and Intercalation-Induced Framework Transitions in a 1D Tunnel-Structured Polymorph of V2O5, Chem, Mater, 2017, 29, 10386-10397.
Regarding claim 2-4, 9-16 and 18-19, Horrocks teaches a cell comprising a cathode and an anode. The cathode comprises a mixture of -V2O5 nanowires, conductive carbon material and binder coated on an aluminum foil current collector (2.2; page 10388). See Figure 1. The -V2O5 nanowires have 1D tunnels that are perpendicular to the growth direction of the nanowire (page 10389). Horrocks teaches Li-ion insertion into the -V2O5 framework. Horrocks teaches similar results have been predicted upon Mg-ion insertion within the 1D -V2O5 framework and such a change in occupancy with increasing cation concentration (x) has also been observed for b-NaxV2O5 (top page 10391). A lithium anode and a metal ion containing electrolyte are described at page 10388, Section 2.2. The electrolyte contains cyclic or chain carbonate solvent.
Regarding claim 5-8, the abstract of Horrocks teaches the -V2O5 is a metastable polymorph that reversibly accommodates lithium ions without distortion of the structural framework. The structural framework is an attractive intercalation host. The -V2O5 nanostructures were topochemically inserted with lithium ions (See Figure 2 description and Section 2).
Regarding claims 20-21, Horrocks teaches the -V2O5 has features that together define ID tunnels that propagate along the b-direction and define an open framework amendable to cation intercalation and diffusion (page 10398). The -V2O5 nanostructures were topochemically inserted with lithium ions. The silver was leached from the -V2O5 nanowires (See Figure 2 description and Section 2). See also Figures 1, 2 and page 10389-10390 regarding lattice constants.
Horrocks does not explicitly teach both lithium ions and sodium ions are present in the -V2O5 nanostructures of the cathode. However, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made because Horrocks at least suggests sodium ions may be intercalated, along with lithium ions, within the 1D -V2O5 framework. Horrocks teaches Li-ion insertion into the -V2O5 framework. Horrocks teaches similar results have been predicted upon Mg-ion insertion within the 1D -V2O5 framework and such a change in occupancy with increasing cation concentration (x) has also been observed for b-NaxV2O5 (top page 10391). Horrocks teaches it was known in the art to intercalate lithium ions and sodium ions into the -V2O5 framework.
**
Claim(s) 2-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marley et al., Emptying and filling a tunnel bronze, Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 1712-1718 in view of Arthur et al., US 2016/0111720 A1.
Marley teaches a stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5) and demonstrates the ability of this framework to accommodate Li and Mg ions (abstract). See at least Figures 1 and 4. Marley teaches the stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5) may be used for an ion battery.
Marley does not explicitly teach a magnesium or magnesium ion battery. However, Arthur teaches a magnesium electrochemical cell having a positive electrode containing a metastable V2O5 material (abstract). One of skill would have been motivated to use stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5) containing Mg ions of Marley for a cathode of a magnesium battery as taught by Arthur. See Figure 2 of Arthur depicting performance of the metastable V2O5 material. Arthur teaches the cathode may include the metastable V2O5 material in addition to a polymeric binder and a conductive agent [0069-0070]. The cathode may include a current collector [0081-0082]. The magnesium electrochemical cell further includes an anode wherein the anode includes a Mg metal or a Mg alloy [[0077]. Marley teaches the electrolyte comprising a metal ion and an organic solvent [0079-0080]. The anode may comprise carbon particles, such as carbon black [0077]. Acetylene black is taught at [0088]. The current collector may be a carbon paper or a carbon cloth [0082].
Marley does not explicitly teach both lithium ions and sodium ions are present in the stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5) of the cathode. However, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made because Marley at least suggests sodium ions may be intercalated, along with lithium ions, within the stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5). Marley teaches Li-ion insertion into the stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5). Marley teaches b-phase vanadium oxide bronzes have been extensively studied since Wadsley discovered that b-NaxV2O5 has the ability to accommodate a range of sodium concentrations (page 1714, first column). Marley teaches it was known in the art to intercalate lithium ions and sodium ions into the stable tunnel structured polymorph of V2O5 (-V2O5). Regarding the lattice constants of claim 20, see Table S2 and Table S4 of Marley.
Conclusion
Marley does not teach or suggest claim 21 as the equation at page 1714 indicates evidence of AgCl.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY DOVE whose telephone number is (571)272-1285. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-3:00.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/TRACY M DOVE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights