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 § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nie et al. (US 2022/0109146)
With respect to claim 1, Nie et al. discloses an energy storage device comprising:
a first electrode and a second electrode, wherein one of the first electrode and the second electrode is a Si-based electrode [0040-0041; Abstract];
a separator between the first electrode and the second electrode [Abstract]; and
an electrolyte composition, wherein said electrolyte composition enhances thermal stability (reduces thermal propagation) [0045-0047]; and
wherein said electrolyte composition comprises one or more solvents [Abstract], one or more lithium-containing salts [0022; 0060], and one or more optional additives [Abstract]; and
wherein said solvent comprises one or more phosphorous-based compounds [Abstract; 0063; 0074].
With respect to claim 2, Nie et al. discloses wherein said one or more phosphorous-based compound is of the structure [0080-0090]:
PNG
media_image1.png
312
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3, Nie et al. discloses wherein said one or more phosphorous-based compound is a phosphazene compound of structure [087-0090]:
PNG
media_image1.png
312
658
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 4, Nie et al. discloses wherein a co-solvent in an electrolyte may include a fluorinated phosphorous-contain compound, tris(1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propyl) phosphite, tris(1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropan-2-yl) phosphite (THFPP) and tris(1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propyl) phosphate [said one or more phosphorous-based compound] is present in a concentration of 15-90 vol%. [0063; 0070-0072]
With respect to claim 5, Nie et al. discloses wherein said electrolyte composition further comprises carbonate-based solvent system. [0064-0078]
With respect to claim 6, Nie et al. discloses wherein said carbonate-based solvent system comprises one or more of Ethylene Carbonate (EC), Fluoroethylene Carbonate (FEC), Propylene Carbonate (PC), Dimethyl Carbonate (DMC), Ethyl Methyl Carbonate (EMC), and Diethyl Carbonate (DEC). [0065-0066]
With respect to claim 7, Nie et al. discloses wherein said one or more lithium- containing salts are selected from the group consisting of lithium bis(fluorosulfonyl)imide (LiFSI), lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6), lithium tetrafluoroborate (LiBF4), bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI), lithium nitrate (LiNO3), lithium perchlorate (LiClO4), Lithium difluoro(oxalato)borate (LiDFOB) and Lithium bis(oxalato)borate (LiBOB). [0090]
With respect to claim 8, Nie et al. discloses wherein the amounts of said one or more lithium-containing salts comprise a majority of either LiPF6 or LiBF4 or a combination of the two. [Table 5]
With respect to claim 9, Nie et al. discloses wherein the combined molarity of LiPF6 or LiBF4 or a combination of the two ranges from about 0.8-2M. [Table 5]
With respect to claim 10, Nie et al. discloses further comprising other salts making up <0.5M (Electrolyte 18). [Table 5]
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant Argues
Nie does not disclose or suggest:
A solvent comprising one or more phosphorous-based compounds as required.
Electrolyte compositions configured to reduce thermal propagation.
Phosphazene-based solvent systems.
A phosphorous solvent present at 15-90 vol%.
The specific salt concentration framework recited in claims 7-10 in combination
with phosphorous solvents.
Nie focuses on fluorinated esters, fluorinated carbonates, aromatic compounds, and multi-additive electrolyte systems. Nie does not teach phosphorous-based solvents as the primary solvent system, phosphazene compounds, or organophosphate solvent systems at 15-90 vol%. Nie's fluorinated ester is not equivalent to a "phosphorous-based compound" as claimed. These are chemically distinct solvent classes.
Claim 1 requires "wherein said electrolyte composition reduces thermal propagation." The specification demonstrates TR reduction through phosphorous solvents in FIG. 4A vs FIG. 4B (TR suppression), FIG. 5 (pressure reduction), and FIG. 6A/6B (propagation resistance performance).
Nie focuses on cycle life, impedance, high-temperature storage performance, silicon SEI stability. Nie does not disclose suppression of thermal propagation between cells. Nie's improved cycling is not equivalent to a reduced propagation as required. Thermal propagation is a pack-level safety mechanism, not merely electrolyte stability. Thus, anticipation fails.
Examiner respectfully disagrees
Nie discloses wherein said solvent comprises one or more phosphorous-based compounds [Abstract; 0063; 0074]. The claims states “wherein said solvent comprises one or more phosphorous-based compounds” Given that Nie discloses a solvent that comprises one or more phosphorous-based compounds, the claimed limitation is disclosed in Nie. Claim 1 does not state phosphorous-based solvents as the primary solvent system.
Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. In reVan Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
Applicant Argues
Nie does not teach phosphorous-based solvents as the primary solvent system, phosphazene compounds, or organophosphate solvent systems at 15-90 vol%
Examiner respectfully disagrees
Nie et al. discloses wherein a co-solvent in an electrolyte may include a fluorinated phosphorous-contain compound, tris(1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propyl) phosphite, tris(1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropan-2-yl) phosphite (THFPP) and tris(1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propyl) phosphate [said one or more phosphorous-based compound] is present in a concentration of 15-90 vol%. [0063; 0070-0072]
Nie discloses a cosolvent including a fluorinated phosphorous-contain compound [0075-0076; 0063] Nie also discloses wherein the cosolvent is present in a concentration of 15-90 vol% [0070]
Claim 1 does not state phosphorous-based solvents as the primary solvent system.
Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. In reVan Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993)
Therefore Nie discloses the claimed limitations.
Applicant Argues
Nie does not disclose suppression of thermal propagation between cells. Nie's improved cycling is not equivalent to a reduced propagation as required. Thermal propagation is a pack-level safety mechanism, not merely electrolyte stability. Thus, anticipation fails.
Examiner respectfully disagrees
Nie discloses an electrolyte composition, wherein said electrolyte composition enhances thermal stability (reduces thermal propagation) [0045-0047];
Nie discloses in [0047] the use of co-solvents and/or functional additives allows for reduction of the concentration of solvents such as FEC while providing improved function and/or stability of electrodes. Due to their unique chemical structures and functional groups, fluorinated esters/carbonates/aromatic compounds and/or multiple additive combinations as described herein as electrolyte compositions may bring the following benefits:
stabilize solid/electrolyte interface film to reduce electrolyte reactions (oxidation on the NCM, NCA, or LCO cathode and reduction on the Si anode), prevent Si anode volume expansion, and protect transition metal ion dissolution from NCM or NCA cathode and stabilize the subsequent structure changes; and avoid the exothermic reaction between the released oxygen for LCO and organic electrolyte and enhance the thermal stability of LCO cathode; and
(ii) reduce the flammability and enhance the thermal stability of organic electrolytes and increase the safety of electrolyte solutions. Due to their versatility in reaction chemistry and overall stability in electrochemical environments, incorporation of the described electrolyte additives into electrolyte compositions may improve the SEI formed by FEC and other fluorinated solvents (in part by reducing the overall concentration of FEC required) and may help improve both overall electrochemical performance and safety of Si anode-based Li-ion batteries.
Therefore it would be anticipated that the electrolyte composition in Nie would reduce thermal propagation given that the electrolyte reduces the flammability and enhances the thermal stability of organic electrolytes and increases the safety of electrolyte solutions, avoid the exothermic reaction between the released oxygen for LCO and organic electrolyte and enhance the thermal stability of LCO cathode
It would be anticipated that the electrolyte reduces thermal propagation given that the electrolyte prevents overheating of the battery.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9AM-7PM.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at 571-270-1292. 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.
/KIRAN QURAISHI AKHTAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751