www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/329, 145
`
`05/25/2021
`
`NORIHITO FUJINOKI
`
`083710-3370
`
`2129
`
`Rimon PC - Pansonic Corporation
`8300 Greensboro Dr.
`Suite 500
`McLean, VA 22102
`
`HAMMOND,KRISHNA R
`
`1728
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/28/2023
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`USPTOmail@rimonlaw.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-14 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CL] Claim(s)__is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)( The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 05/25/2021 is/are: a)[¥) accepted or b)(.) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)(¥) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)Y) All
`1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. |
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`*“ See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20231204
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/320, 145
`FUJINOKI etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`KRISHNA R HAMMOND
`1728
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 05/25/2021.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)() This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013,
`
`is being examined
`
`underthefirst inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis forall
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`A patent fora claimed invention may notbe obtained, notwithstanding thatthe claimed
`invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the
`claimed invention and the prior artare suchthat the claimed invention as a whole would have
`been obvious beforethe effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having
`ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall notbe
`negated by the manner in whichthe invention was made.
`
`The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized asfollows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between theprior art and the claims atissue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
`
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`Claim(s) 1, 3-8, and 11 - 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
`
`unpatentable over Iwasaki, et. al. (JP2017220339A).
`
`Regarding Claim 1, lwasaki teaches a solid electrolyte (“solid electrolyte layer’)
`
`consisting essentially of: Li, M, and X, wherein M includes at least one element selected
`
`from the group consisting of Gd, Tb, and Sm ([0013] “the solid electrolyte contained in
`
`the solid electrolyte layer is not particularly limited .
`
`.
`
`. [for example it may be] [(M1/2Lit /
`
`2) 1-zNz] TiOs (Mis Sm, N is Sr, Ba, 0 = x [sic: this appears to be a misprint and should
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 3
`
`be z] =0.5) .. . Further, a lithium compound selected alone or in combination from the
`
`group consisting of LiF, LiCl, LiBr, Lil, Li3PO4, Li4dSiO04 and Li4GeS4 can be used as a
`
`mixture” and X is at least one element selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and
`
`I. lwasaki at [0013]. Specifically, if z is set to 0 and LiCl is used in combination with the
`
`formula above, then Sm (1/2) Li (1/2) TiOs and LiCl, LiBr, and Lil would meet the claim
`
`terms when combined. /d. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation,
`
`two
`
`compounds meeting the requirementsstill meets “consisting essentially of,” but lwasaki
`
`does not teach these elements are found in a single compound, evenif they maybein
`
`the same solution / layer. However, the scenario in which these elements are in a single
`
`composition is covered by the following combination, to better address the dependent
`
`claims including a single compound having a specific formula, andin the interest of
`
`compound prosecution.
`
`Oneof ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to combine the two
`
`compounds Sm (1/2) Li (1/2) TiO3 and LiBr for use in the solid electrolyte because “can be
`
`used as mixture,” denotes that these recited elements may be used in combination such
`
`that the solid electrolyte may be said to be consisting essentially of: Li, M, and X,
`
`wherein M includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of Gd, Tb,
`
`and Sm, andXis at least one element selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and
`
`|. As such, Claim 1
`
`is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1
`
`is obvious over
`
`modified Iwasaki. Modified lwasaki teaches the solid electrolyte according to Claim 1,
`
`wherein X is at least two selected from the group consisting of Cl, Br, and |. lwasaki at
`
`[0013]. (“Further, a lithium compound selected alone or in combination from the group
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 4
`
`consisting of LiF, LiCl, LiBr, Lil, LI83PO4, Li4dSiO04 and Li4dGeS4 can be used as a
`
`mixture.”). As such, Claim 3 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1
`
`is obvious over
`
`modified Iwasaki. For clarity, the required composition formula (1) is reproduced below:
`
`Lis-35M1+5C IxBrylz,
`
`wherethe following mathematical formulae are satisfied:
`
`-1<6<1
`
`X+yY+zZ=6
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may beutilized through mixing. lwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, Iwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optinum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(Il). Because modified Iwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters. Further, the molar concentration is a
`
`result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results], the molar
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 5
`
`conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion
`
`conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039]. As such, Claim 4 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, Iwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art,
`
`it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(II). Because modified lwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 4, wherein a mathematical formula 0 < x <6 is satisfied. Further, the molar
`
`concentration is a result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results],
`
`the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion
`
`conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 5 is obvious over lwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 6
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, Iwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the priorart, it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optinum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(II). Because modified lwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 4, wherein a mathematical formula 0 < z <6 is satisfied. Further, the molar
`
`concentration is a result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results],
`
`the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion
`
`conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 6 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 7, Claim 7 relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may beutilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, Iwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 7
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art,
`
`it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optinum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(Il). Because modified Iwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 4, wherein a mathematical formula 0 < y+z < 6 is satisfied. Further, the molar
`
`concentration is a result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results],
`
`the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion
`
`conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 7 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 8, Claim 8 relies upon Claim 7. Claim 7 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 7, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, lwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art,
`
`it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(II). Because modified lwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 8
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 7, wherein a mathematical formula x = 0 is satisfied. Further, the molar
`
`concentration is a result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results],
`
`the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion
`
`conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 8 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 11, Claim 11 relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, Iwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the
`
`patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence
`
`indicating such concentration or temperatureis critical. MPEP 2144.05(II). “[VW]here the
`
`general conditions of aclaim are disclosed in the prior art, itis not inventive to discover
`
`the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” /d. Because modified
`
`Iwasaki teaches the constituent elements combined asa solid electrolyte material
`
`without the required molar concentration, one of ordinary skill in the art would findit
`
`obvious to modify lwasaki through routine optimization to arrive at the claimed
`
`parameters of the solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, wherein M includes Sm, and
`
`mathematical formulae 0 < x < 6, 0 <y <6, and 0 <x < 6 aresatisfied. Further, the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 9
`
`molar concentration is a result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation
`
`results], the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance
`
`and ion conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 11 is obvious over lwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 12, Claim 12relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. lwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d. However,
`
`despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer, Iwasaki does
`
`not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art,
`
`it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optinum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(Il). Because modified Iwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 4, wherein a mathematical formula -0.5 < 6 < 0.5 is satisfied. Further, the molar
`
`concentration is a result-effective variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results],
`
`the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion
`
`conductivity.
`
`/d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 12 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 10
`
`Regarding Claim 13, Claim 13 relies upon Claim 12. Claim 12 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 12, meaning
`
`that it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasakiat
`
`[0013]. Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d.
`
`However, despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte layer,
`
`lwasaki does not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`Generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the
`
`patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence
`
`indicating such concentration or temperatureis critical. MPEP 2144.05(II). “[VW]here the
`
`general conditions of aclaim are disclosed in the prior art, itis not inventive to discover
`
`the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” /d. Because modified
`
`Iwasaki teaches the constituent elements combined asa solid electrolyte material
`
`without the required molar concentration, one of ordinary skill in the art would findit
`
`obvious to modify lwasaki through routine optimization to arrive at the claimed
`
`parameters of the solid electrolyte according to Claim 12, wherein a mathematical
`
`formula -0.1 < 6 < 0.25 is satisfied. Further, the molar concentration is a result-effective
`
`variable because as discussed in [Evaluation results], the molar conductivity would be
`
`obvious to vary in order to optimize resistance and ion conductivity. /d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 13 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Regarding Claim 14, Claim 14 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1
`
`is taught by modified
`
`Iwasaki.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 11
`
`lwasaki teaches a battery (“solid battery”) comprising: a positive electrode
`
`(“positive electrode layer’); a negative electrode (“negative electrode layer’); and an
`
`electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (“a
`
`solid electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode layer and the negative
`
`electrode layer’), wherein at least one selected from the group consisting of the positive
`
`electrode, the negative electrode, and the electrolyte layer contains the solid electrolyte
`
`according to Claim 1. lwasaki at [005, 13] ([0013] “the solid electrolyte contained in the
`
`solid electrolyte layer is not particularly limited .
`
`.
`
`. [for example it may be] [(M1/2Lit /2) 1-
`
`zNz] TiOs (M is Sm, N is Sr, Ba, 0 = x [sic: this appears to be a misprint and should be Z|]
`
`= 0.5)... Further, a lithium compoundselected alone or in combination from the group
`
`consisting of LiF, LiCl, LiBr, Lil, LI83PO4, Li4dSiO04 and Li4dGeS4 can be used as a
`
`mixture.”)
`
`As such, Claim 14 is obvious over Iwasaki.
`
`Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki,
`
`in view of Akihiro, et. al. (CN108701860A).
`
`Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 relies upon Claim 1. Claim 1
`
`is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`lwasaki teaches the solid electrolyte according to Claim 1, but does not teach the
`
`use of Yttrium (Y).
`
`Akihiro teaches a solid electrolyte material of composition formula (2) at LisYXe,
`
`where X is Br or Cl, and teaches that the solid electrolytic material has high lithium-ion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 12
`
`conductivity. Akihiro at [0034]. Akihiro teaches this material has its halides within the
`
`same arrangement asin LiSErBr6.
`
`/d.
`
`Oneof ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to incorporate Yttrium of
`
`Akihiro into the solid electrolytic material comprising Li, a transition metal, and a halide
`
`of modified lwasaki, because Akihiro teaches a benefit to lithium-ion conductivity inits
`
`configuration, and they would expect similar behavior given structure is the same as a
`
`Lithium (3) — transition metal — halide (6) arrangement. As such, Claim 2 is obvious over
`
`Iwasaki, in view of Akihiro.
`
`Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over lwasaki, in
`
`view of Saimen, et. al. (US 20130230778 A1).
`
`Regarding Claim 9, Claim 9 relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d.
`
`Saimen teaches a solid electrolyte composed oflithium-ion conductive inorganic
`
`electrolyte particles formed from a composite metal oxide, wherein the metal oxides are
`
`represented by the chemical formula Li7-yLa3-xAxZr2-yMO12, wherein 0 <x <3, Os y
`
`<3, Ais one metal selected from the group consisting of Y, Nd, Sm and Gd, and M is
`
`one metal selected from Nb or Ta. Saimen at [0039, 42]. Further, Saimen teaches this
`
`solid electrolyte has a large potential window, exhibit excellent electrochemicalstability,
`
`and improves capacity of the battery. /a. at [0042 — 43]. Saimen through this formula
`
`teaches a metal oxide having the formula Li7Gd3ZrO12. /d. Finally, Saimen suggests
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 13
`
`that, because Sm and Gd are interchangeable within this formula, that Gd and Sm
`
`(whenutilized within a lithium-ion conductive inorganic solid electrolyte) provide similar
`
`beneficial effects.
`
`As such, oneof ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the lithium
`
`halide solid electrolyte material of modified lwasaki to include Gd instead of Sm, asin
`
`Saimen, because Saimen suggests Gd as a constituent transition metal would provide a
`
`similar beneficial effect.
`
`However, despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte
`
`layer, modified lwasaki does not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optinum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(II). Because modified lwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 4, wherein M includes Gd, and mathematical formulae z = 0 and 2 < x <4 are
`
`satisfied. Further, the molar concentration is a result-effective variable because as
`
`discussed in [Evaluation results], the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in
`
`order to optimize resistance and ion conductivity. lwasaki. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 9 is obvious over Iwasaki, in view of Saimen.
`
`Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki, in
`
`view of Saimen, further in view of Xing, et. al. (US 20180277830 A1).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 14
`
`Regarding Claim 10, Claim 10 relies upon Claim 4. Claim 4 is taught by the
`
`modified Iwasaki.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d.
`
`Modified Iwasaki teachesthe solid electrolyte according to Claim 4, meaning that
`
`it teaches Li, M (Sm), and LiBr which may be utilized through mixing. Iwasaki at [0013].
`
`Iwasaki further teaches Lil and LiCl may beutilized in the mixing process.
`
`/d.
`
`Saimen teaches a solid electrolyte composed oflithium-ion conductive inorganic
`
`electrolyte particles formed from a composite metal oxide, wherein the metal oxides are
`
`represented by the chemical formula Li7-yLa3-xAxZr2-yMO12, wherein 0< x $3, Os ys3,
`
`A is one metal selected from the group consisting of Y, Nd, Sm and Gd, and M is one
`
`metal selected from Nb or Ta. Saimen at [0039, 42]. Further, Saimen teaches this solid
`
`electrolyte has a large potential window, exhibit excellent electrochemical stability, and
`
`improves capacity of the battery.
`
`/a. at [0042 — 43]. Saimen through this formula
`
`teaches a metal oxide having the formula Li7Gd3ZrO12. /d. Finally, Saimen suggests
`
`that, because Sm and Gd are interchangeable within this formula, that Gd and Sm
`
`(whenutilized within a lithium-ion conductive inorganic solid electrolyte) provide similar
`
`beneficial effects.
`
`Xing similarly teaches the use of a Garnetsolid electrolyte, which may contain Li
`
`and Sm, or in place of Sm, Tb, Er, or Gd. Xing at [0107]. As previously discussed,
`
`Saimen suggests that Sm and Gd provide similar beneficial effects; here, Garnet ion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 15
`
`conductors generally appear to provide similar beneficial effects when they comprise
`
`Sm, Tb, or Gd. /a.
`
`As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify the lithium
`
`halide solid electrolyte material of modified Iwasaki to include Tb instead of Sm, asin
`
`Xin, because Xing suggests Tb as aconstituent transition metal would provide a
`
`beneficial effect further evidenced by the effects shownutilizing Gd within Saimen.
`
`However, despite teaching the constituent elements within the solid electrolyte
`
`layer, lwasaki does not explicitly teach a molar ratio which meets this formula.
`
`“[Wi]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not
`
`inventive to discover the optinum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.”
`
`MPEP 2144.05(II). Because modified lwasaki teaches the constituent elements
`
`combined asa solid electrolyte material without the required molar concentration, one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to modify Iwasaki through routine
`
`optimization to arrive at the claimed parameters of the solid electrolyte according to
`
`Claim 4, wherein a M includes Tb, and mathematical formulae z = 0 and x < y are
`
`satisfied. Further, the molar concentration is a result-effective variable because as
`
`discussed in [Evaluation results], the molar conductivity would be obvious to vary in
`
`order to optimize resistance and ion conductivity. /d. at [0039].
`
`As such, Claim 10 is obvious over lwasaki,
`
`in view of Saimen, and further in view
`
`of Xing.
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 16
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to KRISHNA RAJAN HAMMOND whosetelephone
`
`number is (571)272-9997. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 6:30 PM M-F.
`
`Examinerinterviews 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 AutomatedInterview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Avwww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Matthew Martin can be reached on (571) 270-7871. 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 Centeris
`
`available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center,
`
`visit: httos://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https:/Avww.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-
`
`center for more information about Patent Center and
`
`https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information aboutfiling 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.
`
`/K.R.H./
`Examiner, Art Unit 1728
`
`/MATTHEW T MARTIN/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/329,145
`Art Unit: 1728
`
`Page 17
`
`