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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment filed November 18, 2025:
Claims 1-6 and 10 are pending. Claims 7-9 have been canceled as per Applicant’s request;
The 112 and 103 rejections set forth in the previous Office Action are withdrawn in light of the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe et al. (JP 2015-207392A) in view of Maheshwari et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0364750).
As to claims 1 and 10, Tanabe discloses an energy storage device comprising a lithium transition metal oxide electrode and a graphite electrode along with a separator disposed between the two electrodes and an electrolyte (paras. [0064]-[0068]). Tanabe further teaches that the negative electrode active material can be any number of conventional materials including graphite based and silicon based materials (para. [0020]). The electrolyte includes Diallyl hexane-1,6-diyldicarbamate:
PNG
media_image1.png
252
1040
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the additive above, reading on one additive species specifically listed in claim 10, diallyl hexane- 1,6-diyldicarbamate, and thus also reading on the more generic formula of claim 1 (applied to claims 1 and 10).
Tanabe itself recognized that the negative electrode active material can be graphite or any number of alternative conventional active materials including silicon (para. [0020]).
Tanabe does not specifically exemplify using silicon as one electrode (claims 1 or 10); of the silicon based electrodes having greater than 50% silicon (claim 2), the electrode being a self-supporting composite film claim 3 or the particular composite film of claim 4.
Maheshwari teaches of strong, flexible light weight, self-supporting anodes (abstract) comprising a mixture of carbon and metal particles. The additive metal can readily be silicon and the electrode of Maheshwari is used as an anode in lithium batteries. The combination of metal particles dispersed in the carbon matrix of Maheshwari provides for an electrode that exhibited a combination of good cycle stability, suppressed volumetric change during cycling, excellent conducting capability, restrained electrolyte decomposition, to name only some advantages (para. [0007], claims 1 and 10). The ratio of carbon to silicon ranges between 100:0 to 50:50 (para. [0036]) with exemplary metal loadings of 20 wt%, 30wt%, 40wt% and 50wt% (tin or silicon being equivalent substitutes; see Examples as applied to claims 2-4). There is a reasonable expectation that substitution of graphite for other materials for the anode, recognized by Tanabe itself, would have effectively resulted in a functional battery within the context of Tanabe. Therefore, replacement of graphite with silicon would have been reasonably within the skill of the ordinary worker in the art to effectively achieve the same benefits of Tanabe. Furthermore, modifying the anode to be the specific material taught by Maheshwari provides additional motivation relating to the particular anode material as having combination of good cycle stability, suppressed volumetric change during cycling, excellent conducting capability, restrained electrolyte decomposition, to name only some advantages.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to modify the anode of Tanabe to be a free-standing electrode comprising a carbon matrix which hosts silicon particles therein, as taught by Maheshwari, since it would have provided an anode that exhibited a combination of good cycle stability, suppressed volumetric change during cycling, exhibited excellent conducting capability, and had restrained electrolyte decomposition.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe et al. (JP 2015-207392A) in view of Maheshwari et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0364750) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0172711) or Im et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0177999).
Tanabe teaches that the electrolyte can include fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC; paras. [0017]; [0034]).
Tanabe does not explicitly teach of the additive and a silicone negative electrode in any specific example where the electrolyte includes FEC (claim 5), and be substantially free of non-fluorine containing cyclic carbonates (claim 6).
Yang teaches that electrolyte solvents of a mixture of dimethyl carbonate and fluoroethylene carbonate alone in the presence of silicon based anodes provides various benefits. FEC aids in SEI (solid electrolyte interphase) formation on the anode. DMC prevents formation of undesired SEI products of FEC (paras. [0009]-[0011]). A mixture of FEC and DMC is void of any other cyclic carbonates (as applied to claims 5 and 6). Im teaches of electrolyte solvents comprising a mixture of FEC and a linear ester solvent such as ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC). FEC was known in Im as a solvent component which formed an SEI coating layer on the negative electrode, thereby preventing decomposition of the electrolyte and improving storage characteristics of the battery (para. [0017]). Im further teaches that when using fluorinated carbonates, the inclusion of other cyclic carbonates (fluorine-free cyclic carbonates) battery performance is deteriorated (para. [0022]). Therefore Im teaches that when providing FEC as a solvent component in an electrolyte, other non-fluorinated cyclic carbonates are not desired. The exclusion of non-fluorinated cyclic carbonates from FEC solvent additives was shown by Im to exhibit better performance (see tables 2 and 3).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrolyte of Tanabe to be FEC:DMC or FEC with only other linear carbonates as taught by Yang or Im since it would have provided a solvent mixture having good SEI formation on the anode, prevented formation of undesired SEI products from FEC and improved battery performance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6 and 10 have been considered but are moot in light of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGG CANTELMO whose telephone number is (571)272-1283. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7am to 5pm.
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 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.
/GREGG CANTELMO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725