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 received June 22, 2026:
Claims 1, 4-5 and 9-17 are pending. Claims 2-3 and 6-8 have been cancelled as per applicant’s request.
The core of the previous rejection is maintained with slight changes made in light of the amendment. All changes to the rejection are necessitated by 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, 4-5, 9-11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (“Outstanding electrochemical performances of the all-solid-state lithium battery using Ni-rich layered oxide cathode and sulfide electrolyte”, 2020) in view of Kim et al. (US 10,714,740), Yui et al. (US2019/0181432), Kaseda et al. (US 2016/0013471) and Ito et al. (US 2014/0093786).
Regarding Claim 1, Li et al. teaches a nickel-rich layered oxide for as a cathode for an all-solid state lithium battery (i.e. all-solid state secondary battery) (abstract) wherein the cathode active material comprises a core-shell structure and afterward a coating a lithium ion conductor on the surface (i.e. wherein the cathode active material comprises a core, a shell and a coating film comprising a lithium ion conductor on a surface of the shell) (section 1, para. 4) wherein the core-shell material is a lithium nickel cobalt oxide material, (i.e. wherein the core comprises a first transition metal-based active material and the shell comprises a second-transition metal-based active material) (Fig. 4c) and comprises Li10GeP-2S12 (LGPS) solid electrolyte mixed with NCM@LCO@LNO (i.e. mixed with the cathode active material) (section. 2, para. 6, lines 2-4) and the thickness of the coating layer of the lithium ion conductor (i.e. coating film) is 11.3 nm (section 3, para. 5, lines 13-15)
Li et al. does not teach the shell comprises a second transition metal-based active material is a compound represented by Formula 3 comprising about 30 mol% or more of cobalt or the core comprises a first transition-metal based active material comprising about 80 mol% or more of nickel.
However, Kim et al. teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery comprising a core layer that is represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.2, 0≤b≤0.2, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1 and thus, may be for example, Li(Ni0.8Co0.20)O2 -when x=1, a=0.2, b=0, c=0 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-36) (i.e. a core comprising a first transition metal-based active material comprising 80 mol% of nickel based on a total amount of transition metals in the first transition metal-based active material, such that the nickel in the core is about 80 mol% or more in content) and a shell layer represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.5, 0≤b≤0.6, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1, and Me is Al , and thus may be for example, Li(Ni0.49Co0.5Al0.01)O2 when x=1, a=0.5, b=0, c=0.01 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-28 & 37-43) (i.e. the shell comprises a second transition metal-based active material comprising about 30 mol% or more of cobalt based on total mol amount of transition metals in the second transition metal-based active material), wherein the second transition metal-based active material Li(Ni0.49Co0.5Al0.01)O2 is a compound represented by Formula 3 of the instant claim as M1 is aluminum, z = 0 (i.e. no M2), a=1, x=0.5, and y = 0.01.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the core-shell compound of Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the core-shell compound particles of Kim et al. as the particles would provide facilitated lithium ion storage into and release therefrom the active material particles improving capacity, output and lifespan characteristics of the battery including the active material (col., lines 58-67).
Li et al. does not explicitly teach a content of the shell based on a total weight of the core and shell is 0.5 parts by weight to 5 parts weight based to on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of the core and the shell.
However, Kaseda et al. teaches a positive electrode active material having a core-shell structure wherein the positive electrode is a lithium nickel composite oxide (Para. [0023]) comprising a shell part (Para. [0045]) wherein the shell part is 1 to 15% by weight relative to 100% by weight of the core part (Para. [0056]) (i.e. wherein a content of the shell is overlapping with 0.5 parts by weight to 5 parts weight based to on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of the core and the shell).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the weight of the shell as taught by Kaseda et al., as providing the shell part in such a weight range can improve cycle characteristics (Para. [0046]) In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Li et al. does not explicitly teach a content of a solid electrolyte is about 5 parts by weight to about 15 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode.
However, Yui et al. teaches a cathode with a sulfide solid electrolyte (Para. [0020]) wherein a cathode mixture comprises sulfide solid electrolyte in a weight ratio of 12:115 (Para. [0117]) (i.e. about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of sulfide solid electrolyte at weight ratio of about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode), as it would provide a cathode with high energy density per volume (Para. [0037]).
Li et al. further teaches coating the layered oxide surface with a lithium ion conductor of Li2O-ZrO2 could reduce the layered oxide/sulfide electrolyte interface resistance in the battery (section 1, para. 3, lines 1-4) (i.e. the lithium ion conductor is a compound represented by Formula 1 of the instant claim wherein a=1).
Li et al. does not teach the coating film is equal to or less than 0.5 parts per weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of a total of the cathode active material, the coating film is substantially uniform, nor a content of the lithium zirconate is 0.15 parts by weight to less than 0.5 parts by weight based on the total 100 parts by weight of the cathode active material.
However, Ito et al. teaches a positive (i.e. cathode) active material comprising a lithium-containing metal oxide comprising transition metals (Para. [0097], [0098]) wherein a coating film is formed on the surface of the positive electrode active material (Para. [0104]) of Li2O-ZrO2 wherein an amount of the compound is in a range of about 0.01 to about 2 mol% based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material as such a range provides improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling characteristics (Para. [0073]) wherein the coating film has lithium ion conductivity (Para. [0041]) (i.e. is a lithium ion conductor) and wherein the coating film is substantially uniform (see Fig. 2, #113).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of Li2O-ZrO2 coating film and optimize the Li2O-ZrO2 amount (equivalent to optimizing a coating film weight and a lithium zirconate weight) as Ito et al. teaches the amount of lithium zirconate based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material affects initial discharge capacity and cycling characteristics (i.e. is result-effective variable, as it is a variable which achieves a recognized result) and achieves improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling capacity (Para. [0073]). Thus, modifying the coating film amount and Li2O-ZrO2 -amount to an amount as claimed would be discovering the optimum range by routine experimentation. It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (See MPEP §2144.05).
Absent any showing of critical or unexpected results, such limitations appear to be routine optimization within the skill of the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the invention are therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding Claim 4, Li et al. as modified by Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Li et al. does not teach the core comprises a first transition-metal based active material comprising about 80 mol% or more of nickel represented by Formula 2 of the instant claim.
However, Kim et al. teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery comprising a core layer that is represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.2, 0≤b≤0.2, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0., Me is Al and thus, may be for example, Li(Ni0.8Co0.20)O2 -when x=1, a=0.2, b=0, c=0 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-36) (i.e. the first transition metal-based active material is a compound represented by Formula 2 of the instant claim as M1 is not required as y may equal 0, z = 0 (i.e. no M2), a=1, x=0.2, y = 0, and 1-x-y-z = 1 - 0.2 – 0 – 0 = 0.8).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the core compound (i.e. first transition metal-based active material) of Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the core compound particles of Kim et al. as the particles would provide facilitated lithium ion storage into and release therefrom the active material particles improving capacity, output and lifespan characteristics of the battery including the active material (col., lines 58-67).
Regarding Claim 5, Li et al. as modified by Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. et al teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 4 as explained above.
Li et al. does not teach the core comprises a first transition-metal based active material comprising about 80 mol% to about 98 mol% of nickel.
However, Kim et al. teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery comprising a core layer that is represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.2, 0≤b≤0.2, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1 and thus, may be for example, Li(Ni0.8Co0.20)O2 -when x=1, a=0.2, b=0, c=0 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-36) (i.e. a content of nickel in the compound represented by Formula 2 is 80 mol% based on a total mol amount of transition metals in Formula 2, within the claimed range of about 80 mol% to about 98 mol%).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the core-shell compound of Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the core-shell compound particles of Kim et al. as the particles would provide facilitated lithium ion storage into and release therefrom the active material particles improving capacity, output and lifespan characteristics of the battery including the active material (col., lines 58-67).
Regarding Claim 9, Li et al. as modified by Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Li et al. further teaches the all solid-state battery using a sulfide electrolyte (i.e. the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based electrolyte) (abstract).
Regarding Claim 10, Li et al. as modified by Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above.
Li et al. does not explicitly teach a sulfide-based electrolyte being one from the formulas listed in instant claim 10.
However, Ito et al. further teaches the coated positive electrode active material and solid electrolyte are mixed to prepare a positive electrode composition (Para. [0074]) and the solid electrolyte comprises Li2S-P2S5 (Para. [0117]) and Li2S-SiS2-Li3PO4 (i.e. wherein p and q of the instant claim are a positive number and M is P) (Para. [0120]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the solid electrolyte of Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the solid electrolyte as taught by Ito et al., as such solid electrolyte material has higher lithium ion conductivity than other compounds (Para. [0119]).
Regarding Claim 11, Li et al. as modified by Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in Claim 1 as explained above.
Li et al. does not explicitly teach the content of a solid electrolyte is about 5 parts by weight to about 10 parts by weight based on the total 100 parts by weight of the cathode.
However, Yui et al. teaches a cathode with a sulfide solid electrolyte (Para. [0020]) wherein a cathode mixture comprises sulfide solid electrolyte in a weight ratio of 12:115 (Para. [0117]) (i.e. about 10 parts by weight based on the total 100 parts by weight of the cathode).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of sulfide solid electrolyte at weight ratio of about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode),as it would provide a cathode with high energy density per volume (Para. [0037]).
Regarding Claim 17, Li et al. as modified by Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 4 as explained above.
Kim et al. further teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery comprising a core layer that is represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.2, 0≤b≤0.2, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0., Me is Al and thus, may be for example, Li(Ni0.8Co0.20)O2 -when x=1, a=0.2, b=0, c=0 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-36) (i.e. the first transition metal-based active material is a compound represented by Formula 2 of the instant claim as M1 is not required as y may equal 0, z = 0 (i.e. no M2), a=1, x=0.2, y = 0, and 1-x-y-z = 1 - 0.2 – 0 – 0 = 0.8).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizutani et al. (US 2019/0305368) in view of Li et al. (“Outstanding electrochemical performances of the all-solid-state lithium battery using Ni-rich layered oxide cathode and sulfide electrolyte”, 2020), Kim et al. (US 10,714,740), Yui et al. (US2019/0181432), Kaseda et al. (US 2016/0013471) and Ito et al. (US 2014/0093786).
Regarding Claim 12, Mizutani et al. teaches an all solid state battery comprising a cathode, an anode and a sulfide-based solid electrolyte layer (Para. [0024]) wherein a cathode active material is a lithium transition metal-based active material such as LiNi1/3-Co1/3Mn1/3 (Para. [0083]).
Mizutani et al. does not teach a cathode active material comprises a core, a shell and a coating film comprising a lithium ion conductor on a surface of the shell.
However, Li et al. teaches a nickel-rich layered oxide for as a cathode for an all-solid state lithium battery (i.e. all-solid state secondary battery) (abstract) wherein the cathode active material comprises a core-shell structure and afterward a coating a lithium ion conductor on the surface (i.e. wherein the cathode active material comprises a core, a shell and a coating film comprising a lithium ion conductor on a surface of the shell) (section 1, para. 4) wherein the core-shell material is a lithium nickel cobalt oxide material, (i.e. wherein the core comprises a first transition metal-based active material and the shell comprises a second-transition metal-based active material) (Fig. 4c) and comprises Li10GeP-2S12 (LGPS) solid electrolyte (section. 2, para. 6, lines 2-4) and the thickness of the coating layer of the lithium ion conductor (i.e. coating film) is 11.3 nm (section 3, para. 5, lines 13-15).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Mizutani et al. to incorporate the teaching of the cathode active material comprising the core-shell structure and lithium ion conductor on a surface of the shell as taught by Li et al., as it would provide a high performance cathode for all solid state batteries using sulfide electrolyte and outstanding cycle stability (abstract).
Mizutani et al. as modified by Li et al. does not teach the shell comprises a second transition metal-based active material is a compound represented by Formula 3 comprising about 30 mol% or more of cobalt or the core comprises a first transition-metal based active material comprising about 80 mol% or more of nickel.
However, Kim et al. teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery comprising a core layer that is represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.2, 0≤b≤0.2, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1 and thus, may be for example, Li(Ni0.8Co0.20)O2 -when x=1, a=0.2, b=0, c=0 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-36) (i.e. a core comprising a first transition metal-based active material comprising 80 mol% of nickel based on a total amount of transition metals in the first transition metal-based active material, such that the nickel in the core is about 80 mol% or more in content) and a shell layer represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.5, 0≤b≤0.6, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1, Me is aluminum, and thus may be for example, Li(Ni0.49Co0.5Al0.01)O2 when x=1, a=0.5, b=0, c=0.01 and y=0 ( (col. 4, lines 18-28 & 37-43) (i.e. the shell comprises a second transition metal-based active material comprising about 30 mol% or more of cobalt based on total mol amount of transition metals in the second transition metal-based active material), wherein the second transition metal-based active material Li(Ni0.49Co0.5Al0.01)O2 is a compound represented by Formula 3 of the instant claim as M1 is aluminum, z = 0 (i.e. no M2), a=1, x=0.5, and y = 0.01.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Mizutani et al. as modified by Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the core-shell compound particles of Kim et al. as the particles would provide facilitated lithium ion storage into and release therefrom the active material particles improving capacity, output and lifespan characteristics of the battery including the active material (col., lines 58-67).
Mizutani et al. does not teach a content of a solid electrolyte is about 5 parts by weight to about 15 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode.
However, Yui et al. teaches a cathode with a sulfide solid electrolyte (Para. [0020]) wherein a cathode mixture comprises sulfide solid electrolyte in a weight ratio of 12:115 (Para. [0117]) (i.e. about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of sulfide solid electrolyte at weight ratio of about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode), as it would provide a cathode with high energy density per volume (Para. [0037]).
Mizutani et al. does not explicitly teach a content of the shell based on a total weight of the core and shell is 0.5 parts by weight to 5 parts weight based to on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of the core and the shell.
However, Kaseda et al. teaches a positive electrode active material having a core-shell structure wherein the positive electrode is a lithium metal composite oxide (Para. [0023]) comprising a shell part (Para. [0045]) wherein the shell part is 1 to 15% by weight relative to 100% by weight of the core part (Para. [0056]) (i.e. wherein a content of the shell is overlapping with 0.5 parts by weight to 5 parts weight based to on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of the core and the shell).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Mizutani et al. to incorporate the teaching of the weight of the shell as taught by Kaseda et al., as providing the shell part in such a weight range can improve cycle characteristics (Para. [0046]) In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Li et al. further teaches coating the layered oxide surface with a lithium ion conductor of Li2O-ZrO2 could reduce the layered oxide/sulfide electrolyte interface resistance in the battery (section 1, para. 3, lines 1-4) (i.e. the lithium ion conductor is a compound represented by Formula 1 of the instant claim wherein a=1).
Li et al. does not teach the coating film is equal to or less than 0.5 parts per weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of a total of the cathode active material, the coating film is substantially uniform, nor a content of the lithium zirconate is 0.15 parts by weight to less than 0.5 parts by weight based on the total 100 parts by weight of the cathode active material.
However, Ito et al. teaches a positive (i.e. cathode) active material comprising a lithium-containing metal oxide comprising nickel, cobalt and aluminum (Para. [0097], [0098]) wherein a coating film is formed on the surface of the positive electrode active material (Para. [0104]) of Li2O-ZrO2 wherein an amount of the compound is in a range of about 0.01 to about 2 mol% based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material as such a range provides improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling characteristics (Para. [0073]) wherein the coating film has lithium ion conductivity (Para. [0041]) (i.e. is a lithium ion conductor) and wherein the coating film is substantially uniform (see Fig. 2, #113).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of Li2O-ZrO2 coating film and optimize the Li2O-ZrO2 amount (equivalent to optimizing a coating film weight and a lithium zirconate weight) as Ito et al. teaches the amount of lithium zirconate based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material affects initial discharge capacity and cycling characteristics (i.e. is result-effective variable, as it is a variable which achieves a recognized result) and achieves improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling capacity (Para. [0073]). Thus, modifying the coating film amount and Li2O-ZrO2 -amount to an amount as claimed would be discovering the optimum range by routine experimentation. It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (See MPEP §2144.05).
Absent any showing of critical or unexpected results, such limitations appear to be routine optimization within the skill of the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the invention are therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding Claim 13, Mizutani et al. as modified by Li et al., Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in Claim 12 as explained above.
Mizutani et al. further teaches the sulfide-based solid electrolyte layer comprises at least one of Lii2S—SiS2, LiI—Li2S—SiS2, LiI—Li2S—P2S5, LiI—Li2S—P2O5, LiI—Li3PO4—P2S5, LiI—Li2O—Li2S—P2S5, LiBr—LiI—Li2S—P2S5, Li2S—P2S5—GeS2, and Li2S—P2S5 (Para. [0050]).
Regarding Claim 14, Mizutani et al. as modified by Li et al., Kim et al., Yui et al., Kaseda et al. and Ito et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in Claim 12 as explained above.
Mizutani et al. further teaches the anode comprises an anode layer (Fig. 2, #13) comprising anode active material (i.e. an anode active material layer) and an anode current collector (Fig. 2, #15) wherein the anode layer is on the anode current collector, the anode layer comprises an anode active material and a binder (Para. [0042]) and the average particle diameter of the anode active material particles may be 3 micrometers or less (Para. [0046]) (within the claimed range).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (“Outstanding electrochemical performances of the all-solid-state lithium battery using Ni-rich layered oxide cathode and sulfide electrolyte”, 2020) in view of Kim et al. (US 10,714,740), Yui et al. (US 2019/0181432), Ito et al. (US 2014/0093786) and Kaseda et al. (US 2016/0013471).
Regarding Claim 16, Li et al. teaches a nickel-rich layered oxide for as a cathode for an all-solid state lithium battery (i.e. a cathode for an all-solid state secondary battery) (abstract) wherein the cathode active material comprises a core-shell structure and afterward a coating a lithium ion conductor on the surface (i.e. wherein the cathode active material comprises a core, a shell and a coating film comprising a lithium ion conductor on a surface of the shell) (section 1, para. 4) wherein the core-shell material is a lithium nickel cobalt oxide material, (i.e. wherein the core comprises a first transition metal-based active material and the shell comprises a second-transition metal-based active material) (Fig. 4c) and comprises Li10GeP-2S12 (LGPS) solid electrolyte mixed with NCM@LCO@LNO (i.e. mixed with the cathode active material) (section. 2, para. 6, lines 2-4) and the thickness of the coating layer of the lithium ion conductor (i.e. coating film) is 11.3 nm (section 3, para. 5, lines 13-15).
Li et al. does not teach the shell comprises a second transition metal-based active material is a compound represented by Formula 3 comprising about 30 mol% or more of cobalt or the core comprises a first transition-metal based active material comprising about 80 mol% or more of nickel.
However, Kim et al. teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery comprising a core layer that is represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.2, 0≤b≤0.2, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1 and thus, may be for example, Li(Ni0.8Co0.20)O2 -when x=1, a=0.2, b=0, c=0 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-36) (i.e. a core comprising a first transition metal-based active material comprising 80 mol% of nickel based on a total amount of transition metals in the first transition metal-based active material, such that the nickel in the core is about 80 mol% or more in content) and a shell layer represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0.9≤x≤1.15, 0≤a≤0.5, 0≤b≤0.6, 0≤c≤0.2, 0≤y≤0.1, Me is Al, and thus may be for example, Li(Ni0.59Co0.4Al0.01)O2 when x=1, a=0.4, b=0, c=0.01 and y=0 (col. 4, lines 18-28 & 37-43) (i.e. the shell comprises a second transition metal-based active material comprising about 30 mol% or more of cobalt based on total mol amount of transition metals in the second transition metal-based active material), wherein the second transition metal-based active material Li(Ni0.59Co0.4Al0.01)O2 is a compound represented by Formula 3 of the instant claim as M1 is aluminum, z = 0 (i.e. no M2), a=1, x=0.4, and y = 0.01.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the core-shell compound of Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the core-shell compound particles of Kim et al. as the particles would provide facilitated lithium ion storage into and release therefrom the active material particles improving capacity, output and lifespan characteristics of the battery including the active material (col., lines 58-67).
Li et al. does not explicitly teach a content of a solid electrolyte is about 5 parts by weight to about 15 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode.
However, Yui et al. teaches a cathode with a sulfide solid electrolyte (Para. [0020]) wherein a cathode mixture comprises sulfide solid electrolyte in a weight ratio of 12:115 (Para. [0117]) (i.e. about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of sulfide solid electrolyte at weight ratio of about 10 parts by weight based on a total 100 parts by weight of the cathode), as it would provide a cathode with high energy density per volume (Para. [0037]).
Li et al. further teaches coating the layered oxide surface with a lithium ion conductor of Li2O-ZrO2 could reduce the layered oxide/sulfide electrolyte interface resistance in the battery (section 1, para. 3, lines 1-4) (i.e. the lithium ion conductor is lithium zirconium oxide).
Li et al. does not teach a content of the lithium zirconium oxide is 0.15 parts by weight to less than 0.5 parts by weight based on the total 100 parts by weight of the cathode active material.
However, Ito et al. teaches a positive (i.e. cathode) active material comprising a lithium-containing metal oxide comprising transition metals (Para. [0097], [0098]) wherein a coating film is formed on the surface of the positive electrode active material (Para. [0104]) of Li2O-ZrO2 wherein an amount of the compound is in a range of about 0.01 to about 2 mol% based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material as such a range provides improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling characteristics (Para. [0073]) wherein the coating film has lithium ion conductivity (Para. [0041]) (i.e. is a lithium ion conductor) and wherein the coating film is substantially uniform (see Fig. 2, #113).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of Li2O-ZrO2 coating film and optimize the Li2O-ZrO2 amount (equivalent to optimizing a lithium zirconium oxide weight) as Ito et al. teaches the amount of lithium zirconate based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material affects initial discharge capacity and cycling characteristics (i.e. is result-effective variable, as it is a variable which achieves a recognized result) and achieves improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling capacity (Para. [0073]). Thus, modifying an Li2O-ZrO2 -amount to an amount as claimed would be discovering the optimum range by routine experimentation. It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (See MPEP §2144.05).
Absent any showing of critical or unexpected results, such limitations appear to be routine optimization within the skill of the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the invention are therefore prima facie obvious.
Li et al. does not explicitly teach a content of the shell based on a total weight of the core and shell is 0.5 parts by weight to 5 parts weight based to on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of the core and the shell.
However, Kaseda et al. teaches a positive electrode active material having a core-shell structure wherein the positive electrode is a lithium transition metal composite oxide (Para. [0023]) comprising a shell part (Para. [0045]) wherein the shell part is 1 to 15% by weight relative to 100% by weight of the core part (Para. [0056]) (i.e. wherein a content of the shell is overlapping with 0.5 parts by weight to 5 parts weight based to on 100 parts by weight of a total weight of the core and the shell).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of the weight of the shell as taught by Kaseda et al., as providing the shell part in such a weight range can improve cycle characteristics (Para. [0046]) In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the lithium nickel manganese oxide of Kim would not be represented by Formula 3 as claimed, and the cited prior art reference do not disclose Formula 3 as claimed in which M1 is aluminum.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The lithium metal oxide formula of Kim does not require manganese as Kim teaches the formula of a shell layer represented by the formula LixNi1-a-b-cCoaMnbMecO2-yXy wherein 0≤b≤0.6 and 0≤c≤0.2. As b may be 0, Mn is not required. Furthermore, Kim teaches Me may be aluminum (col. 4, lines 18-28 & 37-43). Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would at once envisage the claimed Formula 3 compound in which M1 is aluminum and manganese is not included. A reference disclosure can anticipate a claim when the reference describes the limitations but "'d[oes] not expressly spell out' the limitations as arranged or combined as in the claim, if a person of skill in the art, reading the reference, would ‘at once envisage’ the claimed arrangement or combination. See MPEP 2131.02(III).Thus, the argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues the rejection does not explain the Ito’s teaching would teach or render obvious the present claimed lithium zirconate amount limitations recited in claim 1.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection of record explains that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li et al. to incorporate the teaching of Li2O-ZrO2 coating film and optimize the Li2O-ZrO2 amount (equivalent to optimizing a coating film weight and a lithium zirconate weight) as Ito et al. teaches the amount of lithium zirconate based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material affects initial discharge capacity and cycling characteristics (i.e. is result-effective variable, as it is a variable which achieves a recognized result) and achieves improved initial discharge capacity and improved cycling capacity (Para. [0073]). Thus, modifying the coating film amount and Li2O-ZrO2 -amount to an amount as claimed would be discovering the optimum range by routine experimentation. It has been held that when the general conditions are disclosed in the art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (See MPEP §2144.05). Absent any showing of critical or unexpected results, such limitations appear to be routine optimization within the skill of the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the invention are therefore prima facie obvious. Thus, the argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the dependent claims are distinct from the prior art of record for the same reason as the independent claim.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection with respect to the independent claim has been maintained, and thus the rejections to the dependent claims are maintained as well.
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 ARMINDO CARVALHO JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-5292. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a.m.-5p.m..
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571 272-1481. 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.
/ARMINDO CARVALHO JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights