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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Tables 1-5 have errors in the example names (e.g., Embodiment 1-2 is written as “Embodiments 1 to 2”).
Appropriate correction is required.
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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) 1-6 and 9-18 is/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 Lim et al. (US 2019/0356021 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lim discloses an electrochemical device (lithium-ion battery) with a positive electrode comprising a current collector (aluminum foil) and positive electrode active material (NCM-333) layer; and an electrolyte comprising a fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide salt (LiFSI) and a fluorine containing substance (FEC) (Lim Example 8a, Table 1 and [0115]-[0118]).
The positive current collector of Lim is a fresh aluminum foil (Lim [0116]), which is assumed to have no pores. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to select a foil with no pores, as no pores are specified or implied. X is therefore 0, so AX/B=0, which falls within the range of the instant claim.
Regarding claim 2, LiFSI is included at 0.7 M, or about 11 wt%, which falls within the range of the instant claim (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 3, FEC is included at 2 wt%, which falls within the range of the instant claim (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 4, Lim uses LiFSI (Lim Table 1).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Lim uses FEC (fluoroethylene carbonate) (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 9, X is therefore 0, so X/F=0, which falls within the range of the instant claim.
Regarding claim 10, the electrolyte includes succinotrile (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 11, the succinotrile is included at 3 wt% (Lim Example 8a, Table 1), which falls within the range of the instant claim.
Regarding claim 12, LiFSI is included at 0.7 M, or about 11 wt%, which falls within the range of the instant claim (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 13, Lim discloses an electrochemical device (lithium-ion battery) with a positive electrode comprising a current collector (aluminum foil) and positive electrode active material (NCM-333) layer; and an electrolyte comprising a fluorine-containing sulfonyl imide salt (LiFSI) and a fluorine containing substance (FEC) (Lim Example 8a, Table 1 and [0115]-[0118]).
The positive current collector of Lim is a fresh aluminum foil (Lim [0116]), which is assumed to have no pores. Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to select a foil with no pores, as no pores are specified or implied. X is therefore 0, so AX/B=0, which falls within the range of the instant claim.
The battery of Lim is tested by charging and discharging under specific conditions (Lim [0121]-[0122]), which would necessarily require the battery being part of an electronic device.
Regarding claim 14, LiFSI is included at 0.7 M, or about 11 wt%, which falls within the range of the instant claim (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 15, FEC is included at 2 wt%, which falls within the range of the instant claim (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Regarding claim 16, Lim uses LiFSI (Lim Table 1).
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Lim uses FEC (fluoroethylene carbonate) (Lim Example 8a, Table 1).
Claim(s) 7, 8, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Furutani et al. (US 2015/0132657 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Lim does not disclose any particular composition of the aluminum foil used as a current collector. Furutani is directed to an improved current collector for lithium-ion batteries (Furutani Abstract). Furutani teaches that an aluminum foil comprising Fe, Si, Cu, and Mn at 0.13-1.7 mass%, which falls within the range of the instant claims, has improved strength and heat resistance (Furutani Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to use the aluminum alloy of Furutani in the battery of Lim in order to improve strength and heat resistance.
Regarding claims 8 and 20, A is 11 and C is 0.13-1.7 (see the rejections of claims 2, 7 and 19 above), so 0.012 ≤ C/A ≤ 0.15, which falls within the range of the instant claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A CORNO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0745. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/J.A.C/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights