Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/433,663

POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERY, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERY, AND LITHIUM ION SECONDARY BATTERY

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Aug 25, 2021
Examiner
FREEMAN, EMILY ELIZABETH
Art Unit
1724
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sumitomo Metal Mining Co., Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
99 granted / 134 resolved
+8.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
188
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 134 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . This office action is in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 02/24/2026. Claim 1 is currently amended. Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are pending review in this action. The previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to Claim 1, however the previously cited prior art has been upheld as reading on the amended claims. Updated rejections necessitated by the Applicants amendments are detailed below. 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 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryoshi et al. (US 2018/0053933 A1) further in view of Yamaji et al. (US 2017/0012288 A1). The examiner notes that although Ryoshi et al. (US 2018/0053933 A1) shares common inventors with the instant application, it qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as it was published on 02/22/2018 which is before the effective filing date of the instant application (02/26/2019). Regarding Claim 1: Ryoshi discloses a positive electrode active material (cathode active material) for a lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) containing a lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) [0035]. Ryoshi further discloses that the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) may be expressed by the formula Li1+uNi1-x-yCoxMyO2 wherein -0.05≤u≤0.50, 0≤x≤0.35, 0≤y≤0.35, and M may be one or more selected from a list which includes Mn, V, Mg, Al, Ti, Mo, Nb, Zr, and W [0035]. Ryoshi further discloses that the positive electrode active material (cathode active material) has a volume-average particle size (MV) between 8 µm and 50 µm, and an index [(d90-d10)/mean volume particle diameter] of spread of a particle size distribution of less than 0.5 [0034]. Ryoshi teaches that the cycling characteristic of the battery is related to the particle size distribution of the positive electrode active material (cathode active material) such that when the positive electrode active material (cathode active material) has a wide particle size distribution the capacity of the battery decreases, and furthermore as the battery packing density increases, the battery capacity increases [0008]. The skilled artisan would appreciate that there are multiple embodiments of the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) of Ryoshi which meet all of the compositional limitations of instant Claim 1. For example, according to the above formula the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) of Ryoshi may be LiNi0.6Co0.2Ti0.2O2. As such, the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) comprises lithium (Li), nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), and titanium (Ti) as element M. The above formula has a mass ratio Li:Ni:Co:M of 1.0:0.6:0.2:0.2, which falls within the claimed mass composition requirements for Li, Ni, Co, and M. Ryoshi is deficient in disclosing 1) that the element M is at least one element selected from Ca, Si, and Fe; and 2) that the index of the spread of a particle size distribution is between 0.88 and 1.25, and the thickness of a NiO layer is 200 nm or less. Yamaji discloses a positive electrode active material (cathode active material) for a lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) containing a lithium metal composite oxide (lithium composite oxide) [0028]. Yamaji further discloses that the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium composite oxide) may be expressed by the formula Li1+uNixMnyMtO2 wherein -0.05≤u≤0.50, 0.05≤x≤0.95, 0.05≤y≤0.95, 0≤t≤0.20, x+y+t=1, and M may be one or more selected from a list which includes Co, Ti, V, Cr, Zr, Nb, Mo, Ta, and W [0028]. Yamaji further discloses that the positive electrode active material (cathode active material) has an average particle size of between 7 µm and 25 µm and an index [(d90-d10)/mean volume particle diameter] of spread of a particle size distribution between 0.80 and 1.20 [0029, 0065]. Yamaji teaches that when the particle size becomes too uniform the tap density can be negatively impacted, but when the particle size distribution is below 1.2 the safety and cycling characteristics of the battery may be maintained [0067]. Yamaji further teaches that it is known in the art that in a positive electrode active material (cathode active material) which is a lithium-nickel-cobalt composite oxide and includes a metal element “Me”, the metal element “Me” may be at least one selected from Al, Mn, Ti, Mg, and Ca [0009]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize Ca as element M in the lithium metal composite oxide of Ryoshi, as it is known in the art that Ca is a recognized alternative to Ti, Mn, Mg, and Al, for use as a metal element in a lithium composite oxide comprising lithium, nickel, and cobalt, as taught by Yamaji. The substitution of known equivalent structures involves only ordinary skill in the art. In re Fout 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); In re Susi 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971); In re Siebentritt 152 USPQ 618 (CCPA 1967); In re Ruff 118 USPQ 343 (CCPA 1958). When a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result. Upon the above modification, the limitation of Claim 1 requiring that the element M is at least one element selected from Ca, Si, and Fe, is met. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case obviousness exists (MPEP §2144.05 I). Therefore, it would be further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the particle size distribution of the positive electrode active material of Ryoshi to have an index [(d90-d10)/mean volume particle diameter] of spread of a particle size distribution between 0.80 and 1.20, as such a range is known in the art to be a suitable particle size distribution for a lithium metal composite oxide in a non-aqueous lithium ion secondary battery, as taught by Yamaji. Furthermore, the skilled artisan would be motivated to make such a modification as Yamaji teaches such a range of the particle size distribution allows the safety and cycling characteristics of the battery to be maintained without negatively impacting tap density, which Ryoshi teaches to be a main concern when selecting a particle size distribution. Upon the above modification, although Ryoshi is silent to a NiO layer thickness, the skilled artisan would appreciate that as the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) of modified Ryoshi possesses the claimed composition and particle size distribution, it would be expected that when the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) of Ryoshi is observed by Scanning Transmission Electron Microscope-Energy dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy during charging at 4.3 V (vs. Li+/Li), the thickness of a NiO layer would be expected to fall within the claimed range of 200 nm or less, as the instant specification teaches that the thickness of the NiO layer corresponds with the amount of oxygen released from the positive electrode active material during charging, and that the amount of oxygen released during charging is controlled by the particle characteristics (i.e., composition and particle size distribution) [0020, 0034]. Specifically, the instant application teaches that the lithium metal composite oxide was incorporated into a 2032-type coin battery and subjected to charging at 4.3 V, which resulted in the formation of the NiO layer with a thickness of 35 nm [0126-0127]. The coin-type battery of the instant application comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, a separator, and an electrolyte [0125-0126]. The instant application teaches that the positive electrode may consist of 52.5 mg of the lithium metal composite oxide, 15 mg of acetylene black, and 7.5 mg of a PTEE binder, mixed together, pressed at 100 MPa to a thickness of 100 µm, and dried under vacuum at 120°C for 12 hours [0125]. The instant application teaches that lithium metal may be used as a negative electrode, a polyethylene porous membrane having a thickness of 25 µm may be used as separator, and the electrolyte may be a 1M solution of LiClO4 in an equal volume mixture of ethylene carbonate and diethyl carbonate [0126]. Ryoshi teaches that the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) as described above is incorporated into a 2032-type coin battery and subjected to charging at 4.3 V [0185]. The coin-type battery of Ryoshi comprising a cathode, an anode, a separator, and an electrolyte [0178-0180, 0182]. Ryoshi further teaches that the cathode comprises 52.5 mg of lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide/cathode active material), 15 mg of acetylene black, and 7.5 mg of a PTEE binder, mixed together, pressed at 100 MPa to a thickness of 100 µm, and dried under vacuum at 120°C for 12 hours [0182]. Ryoshi further teaches that a polyethylene porous membrane having a thickness of 25 µm may be used as separator, and the electrolyte may be a 1M solution of LiClO4 in an equal volume mixture of ethylene carbonate and diethyl carbonate [0183]. Ryoshi further discloses that the coin-type battery comprises an anode, which may be a lithium metal anode [0124, 0183]. Thus, although Ryoshi is silent to a NiO layer thickness, because modified Ryoshi teaches an lithium metal composite oxide having both the claimed composition and particle size, as well as teaches that the lithium metal composite oxide is incorporated into a nearly identical battery, the skilled artisan would expect that when the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium composite oxide) of Ryoshi is observed by Scanning Transmission Electron Microscope-Energy dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy during charging at 4.3 V (vs. Li+/Li), the thickness of a NiO layer would be expected to fall within the claimed range of 200 nm or less. As such, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met. Regarding Claim 2 (Dependent Upon Claim 1): Ryoshi as modified by Yamaji discloses the positive electrode active material of Claim 1 as set forth above. Ryoshi further discloses that element M is uniformly mixed during production, thus the skilled artisan would appreciate that the element M is uniformly distributed inside secondary particles of the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) [0093]. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met. Regarding Claim 4 (Dependent Upon Claim 1): Ryoshi as modified by Yamaji discloses the positive electrode active material of Claim 1 as set forth above. Ryoshi further discloses a lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) having a positive electrode (cathode) containing the positive electrode active material (cathode active material) for the lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) of Claim 1 [0114]. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met. Regarding Claim 5 (Dependent Upon Claim 2): Ryoshi as modified by Yamaji discloses the positive electrode active material of Claim 2 as set forth above. Ryoshi further discloses a lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) having a positive electrode (cathode) containing the positive electrode active material (cathode active material) for the lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) of Claim 2 [0114]. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 02/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that Ryoshi et al. (US 2018/0053933 A1) fails to teach that element M is at least one element selected from Ca, Si, and Fe, and thus fails to read on the claimed lithium metal composite. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Ryoshi discloses a positive electrode active material (cathode active material) for a lithium ion secondary battery (non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery) containing a lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) [0035]. Ryoshi further discloses that the lithium metal composite oxide (lithium nickel composite oxide) may be expressed by the formula Li1+uNi1-x-yCoxMyO2 wherein -0.05≤u≤0.50, 0≤x≤0.35, 0≤y≤0.35, and M may be one or more selected from a list which includes Mn, V, Mg, Al, Ti, Mo, Nb, Zr, and W [0035]. Yamaji teaches that it is known in the art that in a positive electrode active material (cathode active material) which is a lithium-nickel-cobalt composite oxide and includes a metal element “Me”, the metal element “Me” may be at least one selected from Al, Mn, Ti, Mg, and Ca [0009]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize Ca as element M in the lithium metal composite oxide of Ryoshi, as it is known in the art that Ca is a recognized alternative to Ti, Al, Mn, and Mg, for use as a metal element in a lithium composite oxide, as taught by Yamaji. The substitution of known equivalent structures involves only ordinary skill in the art. In re Fout 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); In re Susi 169 USPQ 423 (CCPA 1971); In re Siebentritt 152 USPQ 618 (CCPA 1967); In re Ruff 118 USPQ 343 (CCPA 1958). When a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result. Thus, upon the above modification, the limitation of Claim 1 which requires that element M is at least one element selected from Ca, Si, and Fe, is met. The remaining claim limitations are addressed above in the rejection of Claim 1. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM. 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached on (571)-270-5256. 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. /E.E.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /MIRIAM STAGG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 25, 2021
Application Filed
Aug 10, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 14, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 30, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 28, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 03, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 13, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 24, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597676
BATTERY CELL, METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR MANUFACTURING BATTERY CELL, BATTERY, AND ELECTRICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592455
High-Voltage Battery Module Including Outer Bridge Bus Bar
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586774
POROUS ELECTRODES FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12573637
NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567645
BATTERY, ELECTRICAL DEVICE, AND METHOD AND DEVICE FOR MANUFACTURING BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+13.5%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 134 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month