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 .
Claim Status
Claims 19 and 27-29 have been withdrawn.
Claims 17 and 31 have been amended; support for the amendment can be found in pg. 4, ln. 39- pg. 5, ln. 1 and p. 6, ln. 14-16.
Claims 1-16 and 18 have been cancelled.
Claims 17, 20-26 and 30-33 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Ooshima does not disclose “a pressure sensitive casing that ensures permanent interfacial contact”, quantify or address internal pressure resistance, a global pressure-retentive function, interface pressure, or the prevention of contact loss (pg. 6, para. 3).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. pressure sensitive casing, interfacial contact, internal pressure resistance, a global pressure-retentive function, interface pressure, or the prevention of contact loss; pg. 6, para. 3-4) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues that Ooshima fails to disclose “wherein the casing is provided with means for maintaining a predetermined exterior form of the casing, said predetermined exterior form allowing to ensure a permanent contact between the battery parts when the battery is in use and when a pressure exercised from inside the casing is generated during said use” (pg. 6, para. 6).
These arguments are not found persuasive because Ooshima discloses a rigid (Col. 3; ln. 46-49) casing (Fig. 2; 2) configured to withstand the pressure (pressure exerted by the “swelling or expansion of the battery element”; col. 3, ln. 11-15) exercised from inside (Fig. 2; battery element 3 is inside the casing) the casing (2) and wherein the casing (2) is provided with means (Fig. 2; element 10) for maintaining a predetermined exterior form (Col. 3; ln. 46-49) of the casing (2), said predetermined exterior form allowing to ensure a permanent contact (Col. 3; ln. 11-15) between the battery parts (3) when the battery is in use (Col. 3; ln. 10) and when a pressure (“swollen or expanded”; Col. 3; ln. 9-10) exercised from inside the casing (2) is generated during said use.
Applicant argues that Toyoma promotes reducing LiOH, not operating at the relatively high absolute LiOH values instantly claimed (pg. 7, para. 2).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. absolute LiOH concentration; pg. 7, para. 2) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims.
Further, Toyoma teaches a range of 0.40 and 0.75 wt % LiOH ([0014] teaches a range of 0.06% to 1.2% LiOH) and motivates one of ordinary skill in the art to use a concentration within that range in order to secure a secondary battery with low resistance, high capacity, and high charge-discharge cyclability ([0011]).
Applicant argues that the claimed range of LiOH concentration is a functionally significant and unexpected range in combination with the claimed casing (pg. 7, para. 4, pg. 8, para. 2).
This argument is not persuasive because the evidence of such results (table 3 and 4) is not commensurate in scope with the instant claims.
The examiner notes that the rigid casing noted by applicant as contributing to the criticality of the invention has not been defined in claim 1 beyond requiring “a rigid casing configured to withstand the pressure exercised from inside the casing” and “means for maintaining a predetermined exterior form of the casing, said predetermined exterior form allowing to ensure a permanent contact between the battery parts when the battery is in use and when a pressure exercised from inside the casing is generated during said use”. The examples in tables 3 and 4 for allegedly demonstrating improved performance, possess one of two cell types, either a clamping cell or a cylindrical cell. It is not clear from the data provided in the specification that any other cell configuration outside of a clamping cell or cylindrical cell would produce superior results.
Whether the unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, the "objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support. (MPEP 716.02(d)).
The examiner notes that the presently claimed “means for maintaining a predetermined exterior form of the casing” encompasses an exceedingly broad range of casings for which there is no evidence of improved results. For example, a casing exerting 1,000,000 kPa or 0.001 kPa of pressure onto the battery parts could satisfy the instantly claimed requirement. It is not clear from the data provided by applicant that such a range of pressures would produce the improved results applicant points to.
Further, it is the examiner’s position that the alleged unexpected results are results expected by the prior art. Toyoma teaches that a cylindrical battery (Fig. 1) employing a positive electrode active material with a formula (abstract) overlapping the instantly claimed formula produces high charge-discharge stability ([0011]). Similarly, Kageura teaches that a cylindrical battery (Fig. 1) with a positive electrode active material with a formula (abstract) overlapping the instantly claimed formula, exhibits higher cycle performance and charge capacity when the crystallite size of the material is within the instantly claimed range ([0062]). This suggests that employing the combination of features presently claimed by applicant would result in superior cycle characteristics of a battery. "Expected beneficial results are evidence of obviousness of a claimed invention, just as unexpected results are evidence of unobviousness thereof." (MPEP 716.02). Thus, applicant’s arguments are not found persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kageura does not address LiOH behavior, casing mechanics, absolute LiOH content, gas generation-related failure modes, and any casing required to maintain interfacial contact under pressure (pg. 7, para. 5).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. LiOH behavior, casing mechanics, absolute LiOH content, gas generation-related failure modes, and any casing required to maintain interfacial contact under pressure) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims.
Applicant argues that none of the cited references suggest that operating with a relatively high absolute LiOH content in a low-crystallinity high-Ni material can be made stable by using a rigid casing designed to maintain permanent interfacial contact under significant internal pressure (pg. 7, para. 6).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e. “made stable”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17, 20-26 and 30-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the pressure" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 20-26 and 30-33 are rejected based on dependence on claim 17.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “a pressure” in line 9. It is unclear if this recitation refers back to the previously recited “the pressure” of line 2 or to another pressure. Therefore, the claim is rendered indefinite. For examination, the recitation of line 9 is interpreted according to the former interpretation. Claims 20-26 and 30-33 are rejected based on dependence on claim 17.
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
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) 17, 20-26 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ooshima (US 6,767,667 B1) in view of Toyoma (US 2016/0099460 A1) and Kageura (US 20170358798 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Ooshima discloses a secondary Li-ion battery (Fig. 1; element 1) comprising a rigid casing (“steel”; Col. 3; ln. 60) configured to (Col. 5; ln. 4-8) withstand the pressure exercised from inside the casing (2), the casing (2) comprising as battery parts (Fig. 1; element 3):
- a positive electrode (Col. 2; ln. 54-55) comprising a powderous positive electrode active material (Col. 4; ln. 9-10),
- a negative electrode (Col. 2; ln. 55),
- a separator (Col. 2; ln. 56), and
- an electrolyte (Col. 4; ln. 26-27),
wherein the casing is provided with means (Fig. 2; element 10) for maintaining a predetermined exterior form (Col. 3; ln. 46-49) of the casing (2), said predetermined exterior form allowing to ensure a permanent contact (Col. 3; ln. 11-15) between the battery parts (3) when the battery is in use (Col. 3; ln. 10) and when a pressure (“swollen or expanded”; Col. 3; ln. 9-10) exercised from inside the casing (2) is generated during said use.
Ooshima fails to disclose wherein the positive electrode active material has a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg, and A being a dopant with b≤0.10, and wherein −0.03≤a≤0.03, 0.80≤×≤0.95, 0.05≤y≤0.20, z≤0.10, with x+y+z=1, and wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size less than or equal to 43 nm as determined by the Scherrer equation based on the peak of the (104) plane obtained from the X-ray diffraction pattern using a Cu Ka radiation source, and wherein the positive electrode active material further comprises between 0.40 and 0.75 wt% LiOH.
Toyoma discloses a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material, wherein the positive electrode active material has a general formula (“Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2 ”; [0012]) within a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg ([0012]), and A being a dopant (“Ti, Mn, Zr, Mo, and Nb”; [0012]) with b≤0.10 ([0012]), and wherein −0.03≤a≤0.03 (where the instant a corresponds to x of Toyoma, wherein x= −0.12≦x≦0.2 [0012]), 0.80≤x≤0.95 (where the instant x*(1-a) corresponds to y of Toyoma, wherein 0.7≦y≦0.9 per [0012]), 0.05≤y≤0.20 (where the instant y*(1-a) corresponds to z of Toyoma, wherein 0.05≦z≦0.3 per [0012]), z≤0.10 (where the instant z*(1-a) corresponds to 1-x-y-z of Toyoma per [0012]), with x+y+z=1 ([0012]), and wherein the positive electrode active material further comprises between 0.40 and 0.75 wt % LiOH ([0014] teaches a range of 0.06% to 1.2% LiOH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Ooshima by substituting the positive electrode active material taught by Toyoma for the positive active material of Ooshima, such that Ooshima in view of Toyoma had a positive electrode active material with a formula within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg, and A being a dopant with b≤0.10, and wherein −0.03≥a≥0.03, 0.80≤x≤0.95, 0.05≤y≤0.20, z≤0.10, with x+y+z=1 and wherein the positive electrode active material further comprises between 0.40 and 0.75 wt % LiOH, in order to secure a secondary battery with low resistance, high capacity, and high charge-discharge cyclability as taught by Toyoma ([0011]).
Ooshima in view of Toyoma still fails to disclose wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size of ≤ 43 nm as determined by the Scherrer equation based on the peak of the (104) plane obtained from the X-ray diffraction pattern using a Cu Ka radiation source.
Kageura teaches a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material ([0010]) with a general formula (“Li[Lix(NiaCobMncMd)1-x]O2”; [0012]) overlapping a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg, and A being a dopant with b≤0.10, and wherein −0.03≥a≥0.03, 0.80≤x≤0.95, 0.05≤y≤0.20, z≤0.10, with x+y+z=1, wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size ≤43 nm ([0062] teaches a range of 20 nm to 60 nm with a particular preference for 30 nm to 45 nm) as determined by the Scherrer equation based on the peak of the (104) plane obtained from the X-ray diffraction pattern using a Cu Kα radiation source ([0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Ooshima in view of Toyoma by employing a crystallite size greater than or equal to 30 nm and less than or equal to 43 nm as taught by Kageura in order to obtain a battery with higher cycle performance as taught by Kageura ([0021]).
Regarding claim 20, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura discloses wherein wherein −0.03≥a≥0.03 (see claim 1 above. Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura does not specifically disclose wherein a is between 0.005 and -0.010.
Toyoma discloses a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material, wherein the positive electrode active material has a general formula (“Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2 ”; [0012]) within a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein a is between 0.005 and -0.010 (where the instant a corresponds to x of Toyoma, wherein x= −0.12≦x≦0.2 [0012]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura by substituting the positive electrode active material taught by Toyoma for the positive active material of Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura, such that it possessed a positive electrode active material with a formula within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein a is between 0.005 and -0.010, in order to secure a secondary battery with low resistance, high capacity, and high charge-discharge cyclability as taught by Toyoma ([0011]).
Regarding claim 21, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura discloses wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size between 30 and 43 nm (Kageura [0062]).
Regarding claim 22, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura discloses wherein z≤0.1 (Toyoma [0012]; see claim 1 above).
Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura does not specifically disclose wherein 0≤z≤0.03.
Toyoma discloses a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material, wherein the positive electrode active material has a general formula (“Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2 ”; [0012]) within a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein 0≤z≤0.03 (where the instant z*(1-a) corresponds to 1-x-y-z of Toyoma per [0012]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura by substituting the positive electrode active material taught by Toyoma for the positive active material of Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura, such that it had a positive electrode active material with a formula within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein 0≤z≤0.03 as taught by Toyoma, in order to secure a secondary battery with low resistance, high capacity, and high charge-discharge cyclability as taught by Toyoma ([0011]).
Regarding claim 23, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura discloses wherein A (Toyoma “M” of the formula in [0012]) is one or more of Ti, B or Nb (Toyoma [0023]; Abstract).
Regarding claim 24, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura discloses wherein the positive electrode active material (Toyoma [0012]) has a formula (Toyoma “Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2”; [0012]) within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyAlz)1−aO2, wherein −0.03≤a≤0.03, 0.80≤x≤0.95 0.05≤y≤0.20, and z≤0.1, with x+y+z=1 (see claim 17 above).
Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura fails to specifically disclose wherein x≤0.90, 0.10≤y, and either z=0 or 0.02≤z≤0.05.
Toyoma discloses a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material, wherein the positive electrode active material has a general formula (“Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2 ”; [0012]) within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyAlz)1−aO2, wherein x≤0.90, 0.05≤y, and either z=0 or 0.02≤z≤0.05.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura by substituting the positive electrode active material of Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura for the positive electrode active material of Toyoma such that the active material had a formula within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyAlz)1−aO2, wherein x≤0.90, 0.05≤y, and either z=0 or 0.02≤z≤0.05, as taught by Toyoma, in order to secure a secondary battery with low resistance, high capacity, and high charge-discharge cyclability as taught by Toyoma ([0011]).
Regarding claim 25, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura fails to disclose wherein the powderous positive electrode active material has a particle size distribution with a D50 between 10 to 15 μm.
Kageura discloses a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material ([0010]) wherein the positive electrode active material has a particle size distribution with a D50 between 10 to 15 μm ([0065] teaches a range of between 6 and 20 microns; [0067] teaches that that range is the D50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura such that the active material had a particle size with a D50 between 10 to 15 μm as taught by Kageura in order to obtain a battery with higher cycle performance as taught by Kageura ([0021])
Regarding claim 26, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura discloses wherein the battery is a hard-case prismatic lithium-ion cell (Fig. 1; Col. 1, ln. 10), whereby the battery may be incorporated in a pack of multiple batteries (the battery of Fig. 1; Col. 1, ln. 10 is capable of incorporation in a pack of multiple batteries).
A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. The examiner notes that the recitation “whereby the battery may be incorporated in a pack of multiple batteries” is a functional recitation that does not differentiate the claimed invention from Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura because Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura teaches the structure of the claimed invention and is capable of being incorporated in a pack of multiple batteries.
Regarding claim 33, Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura disclose a positive electrode active material with a formula (see Toyoma and claim 17 above) within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg, and A being a dopant with b≤0.10, and wherein −0.03≥a≥0.03, 0.80≤x≤0.95, 0.05≤y≤0.20, z≤0.10, with x+y+z=1 and wherein the crystallite size of the positive electrode active material is greater than or equal to 30 nm and less than or equal to 43 nm (see claim 17 above).
Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura does not specifically disclose x≤0.90, 0.1≤y, z=0 or 0.01≤z≤0.05.
Toyoma discloses a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material, wherein the positive electrode active material has a general formula (“Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2 ”; [0012]) within a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg ([0012]), and A being a dopant (“Ti, Mn, Zr, Mo, and Nb”; [0012]) with b≤0.10 ([0012]), and wherein x≤0.9 (where the instant x*(1-a) corresponds to y of Toyoma, wherein 0.7≦y≦0.9 per [0012]), 0.10≤y≤0.20 (where the instant y*(1-a) corresponds to z of Toyoma, wherein 0.05≦z≦0.3 per [0012]), z=0 or 0.01≤z≤0.05 (where the instant z*(1-a) corresponds to 1-x-y-z of Toyoma per [0012]), with x+y+z=1 ([0012]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kaguera by substituting the positive electrode active material taught by Toyoma for the positive active material of Ooshima in view of Toyoma and Kageura, such that modified Ooshima had a positive electrode active material with a formula within the general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein x≤0.90, 0.1≤y, z=0 or 0.01≤z≤0.05 as taught by Toyoma, in order to secure a secondary battery with low resistance, high capacity, and high charge-discharge cyclability as taught by Toyoma ([0011]).
Claim(s) 30 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyoma (US 2016/0099460 A1) in view of Ooshima (US 6,767,667 B1) and Kageura (US 20170358798 A1).
Regarding claim 30, Toyoma teaches a battery pack (“driving power supplies”; [0073]) of an electric vehicle ([0073]) or a hybrid electric vehicle ([0073]) comprising a secondary Li-ion battery ([0073]) comprising a rigid casing (Fig. 1; 4) comprising as battery parts:
a positive electrode (Fig. 1; 1) comprising a powderous ([0050]) positive electrode active material ([0050]),
a negative electrode (Fig. 1; 2),
a separator (Fig. 1; 3), and
an electrolyte ([0064]),
wherein the positive electrode active material ([0050]) has a general formula (“Li1+xNiyCOzM1−x−y−zO2 ”; [0012]) within a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg ([0012]), and A being a dopant (“Ti, Mn, Zr, Mo, and Nb”; [0012]) with b≤0.10 ([0012]), and wherein −0.03≤a≤0.03 (where the instant a corresponds to x of Toyoma, wherein x= −0.12≦x≦0.2 [0012]), 0.80≤x≤0.95 (where the instant x*(1-a) corresponds to y of Toyoma, wherein 0.7≦y≦0.9 per [0012]), 0.05≤y≤0.20 (where the instant y*(1-a) corresponds to z of Toyoma, wherein 0.05≦z≦0.3 per [0012]), z≤0.10 (where the instant z*(1-a) corresponds to 1-x-y-z of Toyoma per [0012]), with x+y+z=1 ([0012]), and wherein the positive electrode active material further comprises between 0.40 and 0.75 wt % LiOH ([0014] teaches a range of 0.06% to 1.2% LiOH).
Toyoma fails to explicitly disclose configured to withstand the pressure exercised from inside the casing, the casing is provided with means for maintaining a predetermined exterior form of the casing, said predetermined exterior form allowing to ensure a permanent contact between the battery parts when the battery is in use and when a pressure exercised from inside the casing is generated during said use, and wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size ≤43 nm as determined by the Scherrer equation based on the peak of the (104) plane obtained from the X-ray diffraction pattern using a Cu Kα radiation source.
Ooshima discloses a secondary Li-ion battery (Fig. 1; element 1) comprising a rigid casing (“steel”; Col. 3; ln. 60) configured to (Col. 5; ln. 4-8) withstand the pressure exercised from inside the casing (2), the casing (2) comprising as battery parts (Fig. 1; element 3):
- a positive electrode (Col. 2; ln. 54-55) comprising a powderous positive electrode active material (Col. 4; ln. 9-10),
- a negative electrode (Col. 2; ln. 55),
- a separator (Col. 2; ln. 56), and
- an electrolyte (Col. 4; ln. 26-27),
wherein the casing is provided with means (Fig. 2; element 10) for maintaining a predetermined exterior form (Col. 3; ln. 46-49) of the casing (2), said predetermined exterior form allowing to ensure a permanent contact (Col. 3; ln. 11-15) between the battery parts (3) when the battery is in use (Col. 3; ln. 10) and when a pressure (“swollen or expanded”; Col. 3; ln. 9-10) exercised from inside the casing (2) is generated during said use.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Toyoma’s battery pack by substituting Ooshima’s casing and means for Toyoma’s casing in order to suppress deformation of the battery as taught by Ooshima (col. 2, ln. 30-42).
Toyoma in view of Ooshima still fails to disclose wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size of ≤ 43 nm as determined by the Scherrer equation based on the peak of the (104) plane obtained from the X-ray diffraction pattern using a Cu Ka radiation source.
Kageura teaches a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material ([0010]) with a general formula (“Li[Lix(NiaCobMncMd)1-x]O2”; [0012]) overlapping a general formula Li1+a(NixCoyMz)1−aO2, wherein M=M′1−bAb, M′ being either one or both of Al and Mg, and A being a dopant with b≤0.10, and wherein −0.03≥a≥0.03, 0.80≤x≤0.95, 0.05≤y≤0.20, z≤0.10, with x+y+z=1, wherein the positive electrode active material has a crystallite size ≤43 nm ([0062] teaches a range of 20 nm to 60 nm with a particular preference for 30 nm to 45 nm) as determined by the Scherrer equation based on the peak of the (104) plane obtained from the X-ray diffraction pattern using a Cu Kα radiation source ([0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Toyoma in view of Ooshima by employing a crystallite size between 30 nm and 43 nm as taught by Kageura in order to obtain a battery with higher cycle performance as taught by Kageura ([0021]).
Regarding claim 31, Toyoma in view of Ooshima and Kageura discloses wherein the battery is configured to be cycled between at least 2.50V and at most 4.50 V ([0085] teaches 3 V to 4.3 V) at a charging/discharging rate of at least 0.8 C/0.8 C ([0085] teaches 1C).
Claim(s) 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toyoma (US 2016/0099460 A1) in view of Ooshima (US 6,767,667 B1) and Kageura (US 20170358798 A1) as applied to claim 31 above and further in view of Maeda (US 20170025710 A1).
Regarding claim 32, Toyoma in view of Ooshima and Kageura fails to disclose wherein the battery has an 80% retention capacity after at least 1000 cycles at a 1C charge/1C discharge rate.
Maeda discloses a secondary Li-ion battery ([0089]), wherein the battery has an 80% retention capacity ([0017]) after at least 1000 cycles ([0117]) at a 1C charge/1C discharge rate ([0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery of Toyoma in view of Ooshima and Kageura to have an 80% retention capacity after at least 1000 cycles at a 1C charge/1C discharge rate as taught by Maeda in order to achieve a high capacity retention rate as taught by Maeda ([0117]).
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 GRACE A KENLAW whose telephone number is (571)272-1253. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-6:00 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, Tiffany Legette-Thompson can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/G.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723