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 .
Status of Application
Applicant’s amendments and remarks filed 4/30/2026 have been acknowledged. Claims 27-50 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 27 is objected to because the word “an” after “said” in line 12 should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 27-29, 31, 33-39, 42, 43, 48, and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 105753072 to Chu et al. (machine translation previously provided), in view of Xiao et al.
Regarding claim 27, Chu et al. teaches a method of forming a lithium ion cathode material comprising: adding citric acid (a multi-carboxylic acid), manganese powder (at least one elemental metal), lithium source, and a nickel source in an aqueous mixed solution, drying to remove water resulting in a dried oxide precursor, and heating said oxide precursor to form said lithium ion cathode material ([0010-17]; Example 2). Given the same reactants, said elemental metal is expectedly oxidized to form an oxidized metal thereby forming a multi-carboxylic acid salt of said nickel and a multi-carboxylic acid salt of said oxidized metal in water, the resulting dried oxide precursor comprising said multi-carboxylic acid salt of said nickel and said multi-carboxylic acid salt of said oxidized metal.
Chu et al. teaches that the nickel source is, for example, nickel nitrate ([0024]), but does not expressly teach reacting elemental nickel with nitric acid as the sole acid to form a nickel nitrate aqueous solution as the nickel source.
Xiao et al. also relates to nickel nitrate and teaches a preparative method for preparing a nickel nitrate solution from the reaction of nickel or nickel (II) oxide with nitric acid (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed invention, because one skilled in the art would have used a known method as suggested by Xiao et al. to produce a nickel nitrate solution and apply it as the nickel source in the method of Chu et al. and obtained expected results.
Regarding claim 28, the elemental nickel is considered to have no more than 0.05 wt% sulfur as sulfur is not used in the process suggested by Xiao et al. (abstract).
Regarding claim 29, Chu et al. teaches Mn as the at least one elemental metal ([0018]; [0019]).
Regarding claim 31, Chu et al. teaches citric acid ([0013]; [0023]).
Regarding claims 33 and 35-38, Chu et al. teaches Example 2 that makes LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 ([0056]; [0057]), which meets the formulas in claims 33 and 36, where the x and y are not zero per claim 35 and fall in the ranges of claims 37 and 38.
Regarding claim 34, the material of Example 2 is in a spinel crystalline form ([0005]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 39, Chu et al. teaches Example 2 that makes LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 ([0056]; [0057]), where a molar ratio of Mn to Ni is no more than 3.
Regarding claims 42 and 43, since the dopant in the Formula I can be 0, the instant claims are proviso upon parent claim 33 and are considered met.
Regarding claim 48, Chu et al. teaches that the heat treatment under the air atmosphere ([0029]).
Regarding claim 49, Chu et al. envisions a battery comprising the lithium metal oxide made of the method of claim 27 ([0002]).
Claims 30, 44-47, and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu et al. and Xiao et al. as applied to claim 29 above, in view of US 11,316,157 to Huang.
Regarding claims 30 and 50, Chu et al. does not expressly teach at least two metals selected from the group consisting of Mn and Co per claim 30 or that the lithium source is lithium carbonate per claim 50.
Huang also relates to a method of forming a lithium ion cathode material and teaches that the method comprises: adding Ni powder, Co powder, Mn powder, citric acid (a multi-carboxylic acid), and nitric acid (HNO3) in an aqueous solution and adding Li2CO3 to form a oxide precursor followed by drying and heating said oxide precursor to form said lithium ion cathode material (abstract; from column 2, line 40 to column 3, line 6; column 9, lines 30-49; from column 12, line 26 to column 13, line 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included Co as an elemental metal and used lithium carbonate as the lithium compound in the method of Chu et al., motivated by the fact that Huang demonstrates using a mixture of elemental metals to produce a corresponding composite cathode material (column 7, line 5 to column 9, line 24) and lithium carbonate as a known alternative source of lithium for the product (column 2, lines 45-46). The skilled artisan would have obtained expected results applying known materials.
Regarding claims 44-47, Chu et al. teaches Example 2 that makes LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 ([0056]; [0057]), but does not expressly teach the claimed Formula II.
Huang also relates to a method of forming a lithium ion cathode material and teaches that the method produces manganese-containing cathode materials such as NMC (LiNi1-x-yMnxCoyO2), LM (LixMn2O4) and LNM (LixNi1-yMnyO2) (abstract; column 2, lines 35-42; column 4, lines 7-12; column 5, lines 49-57; claims 3, 12, and 13). Huang teaches LixNi1-y-zMnyCozO2, where x is in the range from 0.80 to 1.3, y is in the range from 0.01 to 0.5, and z is in the range from 0.01 to 0.5) (abstract; column 2, lines 35-42; column 11, lines 9-16). For example, NMC622 (LiNi0.6Mn0.2Co0.2O2) (column 12, lines 3-4) meets the claimed Formula II where a in the claim is 0.6, b is 0.2, c is 0.2, d is 0, and a+b+c+d=1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed inventions, because Huang teaches that the reactions of elemental metals with a multi-carboxylic acid produces more than one type of composite oxides (column 2, lines 35-42; column 4, lines 7-12; column 5, lines 49-57; claims 3, 12, and 13) and further demonstrates that the metals and their molar ratios can be selected and adjusted to yield the desired product (abstract; column 2, lines 35-42; column 4, lines 7-12; column 5, lines 49-57; column 11, lines 9-16).
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu et al. and Xiao et al. as applied to claim 31 above, in view of CN 1567620 to Wang et al. (machine translation provided for citation).
Regarding claim 32, Chu et al. does not expressly teach that the multi-carboxylic acid is oxalic acid.
Wang et al. also relates to a method of forming a lithium ion cathode material and teaches that the method comprises reacting a metal compound including nickel nitrate with a complexing agent such as oxalic acid or citric acid (multi-carboxylic acid) and calcining the resulting compound to form the lithium ion cathode material (abstract; claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used oxalic acid in the method of Chu et al., motivated by the fact that Chu et al. and Wang et al. demonstrate that oxalic acid and citric acid are known carboxylic acids that transform metals and metal compounds into oxide precursors (Chu [0023], Wang abstract; claim 1). The skilled artisan would have obtained expected results using a known acid in a similar reaction.
Claims 40 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu et al. and Xiao et al. as applied to claim 39 above, in view of CN 103682308 to Liu et al. (machine translation provided for citation).
Regarding claims 40 and 41, Chu et al. teaches Example 2 that makes LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 ([0056]; [0057]), but does not expressly teach that the lithium ion cathode material has a molar ratio of Mn to Ni of at least 2.33 to less than 3 or at least 2.64 to less than 3.
Liu et al. also relates to a method of forming a lithium ion cathode material and teaches that the method comprises reacting metal compounds containing Li, Mn, Ni, and Ca and citric acid (a multi-carboxylic acid) to form an oxide precursor and heating said oxide precursor to form the lithium ion cathode material, wherein the cathode material comprises LiNi0.5Mn1.5-xCaxO4, wherein x is 0<x≤0.06 (abstract; [0013]; claim 1). A molar ratio of Mn to Ni falls within the claimed ranges.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed molar ratio of Mn to Ni, motivated by the fact that Liu et al. teaches that the metal element Ca is doped into the spinel LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 to replace the positions of some Mn atoms, resulting in shorter annealing time and improved cycle performance of the material ([0010]; [0037]) and so the skilled artisan would have adjusted the molar ratio of Mn to Ni according to the content of the dopant.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 27-50 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant amended claim 27 to overcome the primary reference to Huang. In response, the Examiner has applied a new ground of rejection over Chu and Xiao, where the former teaches a reaction mixture containing a multi-carboxylic acid, an elemental metal such as manganese, and metal compounds including a lithium source and a nickel source to produce a composite cathode material, and the latter supplements by providing a known reaction to produce the nickel source or a nickel nitrate aqueous from elemental nickel and nitric acid as the sole acid. The combination of references renders the claimed method obvious.
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 HENG M CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5859. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 5:30 pm on Monday, 9 am - 3 pm on Tuesday, and 9 am to 1 pm on Wednesday and Thursday.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/Heng M. Chan/Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights