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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 18 March 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims and Other Notes
Claims 1, 3, and 5–9 are pending.
Claims 2 and 4 are canceled.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The paragraph numbers cited in this Office Action in reference to the instant application are referring to the paragraph numbering of the PG-Pub of the instant application. See US 2024/0405285 A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 3, and 5–9 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 1 recites the limitation "wherein the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion in the solid material." The term "strongly" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite (see strongly, New Oxford American Dictionary). The term "strongly" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion" is indefinite.
Claims 3 and 5 are directly dependent from claim 1 and include all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claims 3 and 5 are also 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 the limitation "wherein the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion in the solid material." The term "strongly" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "strongly" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the limitation "the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion" is indefinite.
Claims 7–9 are directly dependent from claim 6 and include all the limitations of claim 6. Therefore, claims 7–9 are also 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 Interpretation
Claim 1 recites the limitations "the salt and solidifying agent create a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway;" and "wherein the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material." These limitations are directed to a manner of operating disclosed ionically conducting electrolyte (e.g., when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K), it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §§ 2114 and 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states "[e]xpressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim."
"Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Gabano discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., [0023]–[0026]); and Zhamu discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., TABLE 1, [0154]). The salt and solidifying agent of both Gabano and Zhamu are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
Where applicant claims a composition in terms of a function, property or characteristic and the composition of the prior art is the same as that of the claim but the function is not explicitly disclosed by the reference, the examiner may make a rejection under both 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103, expressed as a 102/103 rejection. "There is nothing inconsistent in concurrent rejections for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 and for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102." In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 n.4, 195 USPQ 430, 433 n.4 (CCPA 1977). This same rationale should also apply to product, apparatus, and process claims claimed in terms of function, property or characteristic. Therefore, a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection is appropriate for these types of claims as well as for composition claims.
Claims 1, 3, and 6–9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Gabano et al. (EP 0252494 A1, hereinafter Gabano).
Regarding claim 1, Gabano discloses an ionically conducting electrolyte comprising:
a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt (see composition, [0023]);
wherein the liquefied gas solvent comprises a vapor pressure above 100 kPa at 293.15K (see SO2 liquid, [0024]);
the solidifying agent is a solid, liquid, or a gas at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see dimethylsulfone, [0025]);
the salt is soluble in the ionically conducting electrolyte at 100 kPa and 293.15K, thereby maintaining the ionically conducting electrolyte in a liquid phase (see lithium chloride, [0026]); and
the salt and solidifying agent create a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see composition, [0023]);
wherein the solidifying agent is selected from the group consisting of: diphenyl sulfone, bis(4-fluorophenyl) sulfone, dimethyl sulfone, ethyl methyl sulfone, butadiene sulfone, 1,3-propanesultone, 1-propene-1,3-sultone, 2-bornanone, 2,3-borananedione, 2-norbornanone, or any combination thereof (see dimethylsulfone, [0025]);
a molar ratio of the salt to the solidifying agent is between 0.1:1 and 1:5 (see lithium chloride, [0026]; see dimethylsulfone, [0025]); and
wherein the solidifying agent is coordinated to a cation of the salt in the solid material (see composition, [0023]).
Gabano does not explicitly disclose:
the solid material is non-ionically conducting, thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway; and
wherein the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion of the salt in the solid material
However, these limitations are directed to a manner of operating disclosed ionically conducting electrolyte (e.g., when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K), it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §§ 2114 and 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states "[e]xpressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Gabano discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., [0023]–[0026]). "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. If the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Therefore, the salt and solidifying agent of Gabano are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material.
Regarding claim 3, Gabano discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an ionically conducting electrolyte:
wherein the liquefied gas solvent is selected from a group consisting of: dimethyl ether, methyl ethyl ether, fluoromethane, difluoromethane, trifluoromethane, fluoroethane, tetrafluoroethane, pentafluoroethane, 1,1-difluoroethane, 1,2-difluoroethane, 1,1,1-trifluoroethane, 1,1,2-trifluoroethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane, pentafluoroethane, chloromethane, chloroethane, thionyl fluoride, thionyl chloride fluoride, phosphoryl fluoride, phosphoryl chloride fluoride, sulfuryl fluoride, sulfuryl chloride fluoride, 1-fluoropropane, 2-fluoropropane, 1,1-difluoropropane, 1,2-difluoropropane, 2,2-fluoropropane, 1,1,1-trifluoropropane, 1,1,2-trifluoropropane, 1,2,2-trifluoropropane, fluoroethylene, cis-1,2-fluoroethylene, 1,1-fluoroethylene, 1-fluoropropylene, 2-propylene, chlorine, chloromethane, bromine, iodine, ammonia, methyl amine, dimethyl amine, trimethyl amine, molecular oxygen, molecular nitrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, methyl vinyl ether, difluoro ethylene, nitrous oxide, nitrogen dioxide, nitrogen oxide, carbon disulfide, hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen chloride or any combination thereof (see SO2 liquid, [0024]).
Regarding claim 6, Gabano discloses an electrochemical device comprising a positive first electrode and a negative second electrode in contact with the ionically conducting electrolyte (see elements D, [0023]); and a housing enclosing an ionically conducting electrolyte, the first electrode and second electrode (see elements D, [0023]), the ionically conducting electrolyte comprising:
a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt (see composition, [0023]);
wherein the liquefied gas solvent comprises a vapor pressure above 100 kPa at 293.15K (see SO2 liquid, [0024]);
the solidifying agent is a solid, liquid, or a gas at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see dimethylsulfone, [0025]);
the salt is soluble in the ionically conducting electrolyte at 100 kPa and 293.15K, thereby maintaining the ionically conducting electrolyte in a liquid phase (see lithium chloride, [0026]); and
the salt and solidifying agent create a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see composition, [0023]);
wherein the solidifying agent is selected from the group consisting of: diphenyl sulfone, bis(4-fluorophenyl) sulfone, dimethyl sulfone, ethyl methyl sulfone, butadiene sulfone, 1,3-propanesultone, 1-propene-1,3-sultone, 2-bornanone, 2,3-borananedione, 2-norbornanone, or any combination thereof (see dimethylsulfone, [0025]);
a molar ratio of the salt to the solidifying agent is between 0.1:1 and 1:5 (see lithium chloride, [0026]; see dimethylsulfone, [0025]); and
wherein the solidifying agent is coordinated to a cation of the salt in the solid material (see composition, [0023]).
Gabano does not explicitly disclose:
the solid material is non-ionically conducting, thereby terminating ionic conduction between the positive first electrode and the negative second electrode and preventing thermal runaway; and
wherein the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion of the salt in the solid material
However, these limitations are directed to a manner of operating disclosed ionically conducting electrolyte (e.g., when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K), it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §§ 2114 and 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states "[e]xpressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Gabano discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., [0023]–[0026]). "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. If the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Therefore, the salt and solidifying agent of Gabano are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between the positive first electrode and the negative second electrode and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material.
Regarding claim 7, Gabano discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an electrochemical device:
wherein one of the electrodes is selected from a group consisting of: graphite, carbon, activated carbon, vanadium oxide, and lithium titanate, titanium disulfide, molybdenum disulfide, lithium iron phosphate, lithium cobalt phosphate, lithium nickel phosphate, lithium cobalt oxide, lithium nickel manganese oxide, lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide, and lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide (see porous carbon cathode, [0023]).
Regarding claim 8, Gabano discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an electrochemical device:
wherein one of the electrodes is selected from a group consisting of: lithium metal, sodium metal, calcium metal, magnesium metal, aluminum metal, and zinc metal (see strip of lithium, [0023]).
Regarding claim 9, Gabano discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an electrochemical device:
wherein the electrochemical device is a lithium battery (see lithium, [0023]).
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zhamu et al. (US 2018/0375156 A1, hereinafter Zhamu).
Regarding claim 1, Zhamu discloses an ionically conducting electrolyte comprising:
a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt (TABLE 1, [0154]);
wherein the liquefied gas solvent comprises a vapor pressure above 100 kPa at 293.15K (see fluoropropane, [0154]);
the solidifying agent is a solid, liquid, or a gas at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see 1,3-propane sultone, [0154]);
the salt is soluble in the ionically conducting electrolyte at 100 kPa and 293.15K, thereby maintaining the ionically conducting electrolyte in a liquid phase (see LiBF4, [0154]); and
the salt and solidifying agent create a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K (TABLE 1, [0154]);
wherein the solidifying agent is selected from the group consisting of: diphenyl sulfone, bis(4-fluorophenyl) sulfone, dimethyl sulfone, ethyl methyl sulfone, butadiene sulfone, 1,3-propanesultone, 1-propene-1,3-sultone, 2-bornanone, 2,3-borananedione, 2-norbornanone, or any combination thereof (see 1,3-propane sultone, [0154]);
a molar ratio of the salt to the solidifying agent is between 0.1:1 and 1:5 (TABLE 1, [0154]); and
wherein the solidifying agent is coordinated to a cation of the salt in the solid material (TABLE 1, [0154]).
Zhamu does not explicitly disclose:
the solid material is non-ionically conducting, thereby terminating ionic conduction between the positive first electrode and the negative second electrode and preventing thermal runaway; and
wherein the solidifying agent is strongly coordinated to a salt cation and salt anion of the salt in the solid material
However, these limitations are directed to a manner of operating disclosed ionically conducting electrolyte (e.g., when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K), it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §§ 2114 and 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states "[e]xpressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Zhamu discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., TABLE 1, [0154]). "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. If the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Therefore, the salt and solidifying agent of Zhamu are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between the positive first electrode and the negative second electrode and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material.
Regarding claim 5, Zhamu discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and further discloses an electrochemical device:
wherein the salt is selected from a group consisting of: LiTFSI, LiFSI, LiPF6, LiBOB, LiBF4, LiDFOB, LiNO3, or any combination thereof (see LiBF4, [0154]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue Gabano contains no disclosure of any solvent venting step, no formation of a non-ionically conducting solid residue, and no mechanism for terminating ionic pathways. On the contrary, the reference requires the continued presence of the liquid phase to achieve its stated high-conductivity performance (P7/¶4). It is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §§ 2114 and 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states "[e]xpressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Claim 1 is directed to an ionically conducting electrolyte; and claim 6 is directed to an electrochemical device. A solvent venting step, formation of a non-ionically conducting solid residue when the solvent is vented, and terminating ionic pathways are directed to how the ionically conducting electrolyte and electrochemical device are operated and do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. Gabano discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., [0023]–[0026]). "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Therefore, the salt and solidifying agent of Gabano are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material.
Applicants argue Gabano teaches away from the formation of an insulating solid upon venting (P7/¶4). Gabano discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., [0023]–[0026]). The salt and solidifying agent of Gabano are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material. Therefore, the ionically conducting electrolyte is capable of forming an insulating solid upon venting.
Applicants argue Zhamu discloses preventing solvent escape and maintaining continuous ionic conductivity, with additives such as fluoroethylene carbonate used to stabilize the liquid state (P7/¶4). It is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP §§ 2114 and 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states "[e]xpressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Claim 1 is directed to an ionically conducting electrolyte; and claim 6 is directed to an electrochemical device. A solvent escape, preventing continuous ionic conductivity, and preventing stabilization of the liquid state are directed to how the ionically conducting electrolyte and electrochemical device are operated and do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. "Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties." A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Zhamu discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., TABLE 1, [0154]). Therefore, the salt and solidifying agent of Zhamu are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material.
Applicants argue Zhamu fails to disclose the claimed venting-induced solidification step, much less the resulting electrode-terminating safety function (P8/¶1). Zhamu discloses a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt identical to the claimed mixtures (e.g., TABLE 1, [0154]). The salt and solidifying agent of Zhamu are capable of creating a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K, the solid material is non-ionically conducting thereby terminating ionic conduction between a first electrode and a second electrode of an electrochemical device and preventing thermal runaway, and the solidifying agent is capable of strongly coordinating to a salt cation and a salt anion in the solid material. Therefore, the ionically conducting electrolyte of Zhamu is capable of inducing solidification upon venting and resulting electrode-terminating safety function.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zheng (WO 2022/266797 A1; see English language equivalent, US 2024/0162440 A1) discloses an ionically conducting electrolyte comprising a mixture of a liquefied gas solvent, a solidifying agent, and a salt (see electrolyte, [0054]); wherein the liquefied gas solvent comprises a vapor pressure above 100 kPa at 293.15K (see fluoroethylene, [0054]); the solidifying agent is a solid, liquid, or a gas at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see 1,3-propane sultone, [0054]); the salt is soluble in the ionically conducting electrolyte at 100 kPa and 293.15K, thereby maintaining the ionically conducting electrolyte in a liquid phase (see LiPF6, [0054]); and the salt and solidifying agent create a solid material at 100 kPa and 293.15K when the liquefied gas solvent is vented from the mixture at 100 kPa and 293.15K (see electrolyte, [0054]); wherein the solidifying agent is selected from the group consisting of: diphenyl sulfone, bis(4-fluorophenyl) sulfone, dimethyl sulfone, ethyl methyl sulfone, butadiene sulfone, 1,3-propanesultone, 1-propene-1,3-sultone, 2-bornanone, 2,3-borananedione, 2-norbornanone, or any combination thereof (see 1,3-propane sultone, [0054]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sean P Cullen, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:00 am to 4:00 pm CT, Friday 6:00 am to 12:00 pm CT.
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, Basia A Ridley can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/Sean P Cullen, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights