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 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) 1-4, 9, 12, 18, 20, 27, 34, 36, 63, 70 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (Influence of Na-substitution on the structure and electrochemical properties of layered oxides K0.67Ni0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O-2 cathode materials) in view of Wang (“P3-type K0.33Co0.53Mn0.47O2·0.39H2O: a novel bifunctional electrode for Na-ion batteries”) (Provided in Applicant’s IDS filed on March 12th, 2025) further in view of Archer (US20200335767).
Regarding Claim 1, Liu discloses an electrode material comprising an electrochemical active material (1. Introduction discloses material is for cathode material), wherein said electrochemically active material comprises:
A layered potassium metal oxide of formula KxMO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 7, and M is selected from Co, Mn, Fe, Ni, Ti, Cr, V, Cu, Zr, Sb and a combination of at least two thereof (layered material is represented by K0.67-xNaxNi0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O2 where x can be 0, and M is Na, Ni, Co and Mn, [2.1 Samples Preparation]), or
A layered potassium metal oxide of formula NazKxMO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7, z is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.8, and M is selected from Co, Mn, Fe, Ni Ti, Cr, V, Cu, Zr, Sb, and a combination of at least two thereof (layered material is represented by K0.67-xNaxNi0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O2 where x can be 0.1 to 0.5, and M is, Ni, Co and Mn, [2.1 Samples Preparation]).
Liu does not disclose wherein the layered potassium metal oxide can be used in a sodium ion electrochemical cell.
Wang discloses an electrode material formed of potassium metal oxides and sodium potassium metal oxides can be used in potassium and sodium ion batteries (pg. 1122). Wang discloses wherein these materials provide improved cycle life of the battery (pg. 1126), which is a benefit that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand can be enjoyed by a sodium battery. Wang further discloses wherein
Therefore it is the examiner’s position that Wang teaches that sodium potassium and potassium metal oxides, such as the one disclosed by Liu, can be used interchangeable in potassium and sodium ion batteries, and both batteries would enjoy the benefit of improved life cycle.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using to modify Liu with the teachings of Wang to have wherein the layered potassium metal oxide can be used in a sodium ion electrochemical cell.
Liu does not disclose an electrochemical cell comprising a negative electrode, a positive electrode and an electrolyte, wherein the negative electrode comprises metallic lithium or metallic sodium.
Archer discloses a positive electrode that comprises potassium metal oxides ([0058], [0078]). Archer further discloses a negative electrode with lithium metal ([0085]). Archer further discloses wherein these electrode materials can be used in a sodium battery ([0077]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Liu in view of Archer to have an electrochemical cell comprising a negative electrode, a positive electrode and an electrolyte, and
Regarding Claim 2, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxMyMn1-yO2, wherein x is a number such that 0 such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7, and M is selected from Co, Fe, Ni, Ti, Cr, V, Cu, Zr, Sb, and a combination of at least least two thereof (layered material is represented by K0.67-xNaxNi0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O2 where x can be 0, and M, Ni, Co [2.1 Samples Preparation]).
Regarding Claim 3, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu does not directly disclose wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxFeyMn1-yO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7, and y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ 1.0.
Liu discloses wherein the transition metal oxides such as KxMnO2 can be used for cathode active materials as a layered potassium ([1. Introduction]), which satisfies the instant claim formula of KxFeyMn1-yO2 where y = 0, and further discloses wherein KxFe0.5Mn0.5O2 can be used for cathode active materials ([1. Introduction]), which satisfies the instant claim formula of KxFeyMn1-yO2 where y = 0.5.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Liu to have wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxFeyMn1-yO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7, and y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ 1.0.
Regarding Claim 4, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu does not directly disclose wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxMnO2, KxNiMnO2, KxFeMnO2, or KxNi0.5xMn1-0.5xO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7.
Liu discloses wherein the transition metal oxides such as KxMnO2 can be used for cathode active materials as a layered potassium ([1. Introduction]). Liu further discloses wherein the transition metal oxides such as KxFeMnO2 can be used for cathode active materials as a layered potassium ([1. Introduction]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Liu to have wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxMnO2 or KxFeMnO2.
Regarding Claim 9, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxNi-0.5xMn1-0.5x-yMyO2 (layered material is represented by K0.67-xNaxNi0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O2 where x can be 0, and M is Co, [2.1 Samples Preparation]).
Regarding Claim 12, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu teaches that layered potassium metal oxides of formula KxMnO2 are used for cathode materials, where X can be 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4 (1. Introduction).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Liu to have the layered potassium metal oxide selected from a group consisting of K0.2MnO2, K0.3MnO2, or K0.4MnO2.
Regarding Claim 18, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses wherein the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula NazKxMyMn1-yO2 or NazKxNiyMn1-yO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7 and z is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.8, y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ 1.0, and M is selected from Co, Fe, Ni, Ti, Cr, V, Cu, Zr, Sb and a combination of at least two thereof (layered material is represented by K0.67-xNaxNi0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O2 where x can be 0, and M is Co, [2.1 Samples Preparation], where x can be 0 to 0.5, where M is Cobalt and Nickel).
Regarding Claim 20 & 69, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above.
The examiner notes that Claim 1 claims either a potassium metal oxide, or a potassium metal oxide with a sodium substitution, or either an active material with chemical formula KxMO2 or an active material with chemical formula NaKxMO2, where M is a combination of at least two of Co, Mn, Fe, Ni, Ti, Cr, V, Cu, Zr, Sb. Therefore, since claim 20 & 68 is dependent off of Claim 1, and claim 1 requires either KxMO2 or NaKxMO2, and since Liu discloses a KxMO2 active material and the NaKxMO2 active material is optional, claim 20 is an optional limitation and therefore, Liu discloses the limitations of Claim 20.
Regarding Claim 27, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses wherein acetylene black is used as a conductive material in the electrode ([2.3 Electrochemical measurements]).
Regarding Claim 34, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses a fluorinated polymer as a binder material (polyvinylidene fluoride is used as binder material, [2.3]).
Regarding Claim 36, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu further discloses wherein PVDF is used as binder material ([2.3]).
Regarding Claim 63, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Archer discloses wherein the electrochemical cell is a lithium ion secondary battery ([0090]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Liu with the teachings of Archer to have wherein the at least one electrochemical cell.
Regarding Claim 70, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Archer discloses a variety of active materials that overlap the materials used in Liu in view of Komaba, including the positive electrode active material of claim 1 and the metallic lithium or metallic sodium of the negative electrode active material ([0085]). Archer discloses wherein the materials can be used to make a lithium-ion battery or a sodium-ion battery ([0058], [0077]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Liu with the teachings of Archer to have wherein said battery is a lithium-ion battery or a sodium-ion battery.
Claim(s) 10-11, 38 & 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (Influence of Na-substitution on the structure and electrochemical properties of layered oxides K0.67Ni0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O-2 cathode materials) Wang (“P3-type K0.33Co0.53Mn0.47O2·0.39H2O: a novel bifunctional electrode for Na-ion batteries”) further in view of Archer (US20200335767) further in view of Komaba (US20170294676).
Regarding Claim 10, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu does not disclose wherein the active material can be the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxNi0.5xMn1-0.5xTiyO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7 and y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ (1.0-0.5x).
Komaba discloses a positive electrode active material that can a potassium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide ([0070]). Komaba further discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be potassium-nickel-manganese composite oxide, K2/3Ni1/3Mn2/3O2 or KNi1/2Mn3/2O2 or KNi12Mn1/2O2 ([0070]), therefore teaching that potassium nickel manganese composite oxides and potassium nickel cobalt manages composite oxides are interchangeable.
Therefore, since Komaba teaches the use of potassium-nickel-manganese composite oxide that fit the formula of K2/3Ni1/3Mn2/3O2 or KNi1/2Mn3/2O2 or KNi12Mn1/2O2, it is the examiner’s position that Komaba discloses wherein the active material can be the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxNi0.5xMn1-0.5xTiyO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7 and y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ (1.0-0.5x).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify active material of Liu with the teachings of Komaba to have wherein the active material can be the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula KxNi0.5xMn1-0.5xTiyO2 wherein x is a number such that 0 < x ≤ 0.7 and y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ (1.0-0.5x).
Regarding Claim 11, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu does not disclose wherein the active material can be the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula K0.4Ni0.2Mn0.8-yTiyO2 wherein y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ 0.8.
Komaba discloses a positive electrode active material that can a potassium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide ([0070]). Komaba further discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be potassium-nickel-manganese composite oxide, K2/3Ni1/3Mn2/3O2 or KNi1/2Mn3/2O2 or KNi12Mn1/2O2 ([0070]), therefore teaching that potassium nickel manganese composite oxides and potassium nickel cobalt manages composite oxides are interchangeable.
Therefore, since Komaba teaches the use of potassium-nickel-manganese composite oxide that fit the formula of K2/3Ni1/3Mn2/3O2 or KNi1/2Mn3/2O2 or KNi12Mn1/2O2, it is the examiner’s position that Komaba discloses wherein the active material can be the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula K0.4Ni0.2Mn0.8-yTiyO2 wherein y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ 0.8, where y is equal to zero.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify active material of Liu with the teachings of Komaba to have wherein the active material can be the layered potassium metal oxide is of formula K0.4Ni0.2Mn0.8-yTiyO2 wherein y is a number such that 0 ≤ y ≤ 0.8, where y is equal to zero.
Regarding Claim 38, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above. Liu does not directly disclose the binder is a polymeric binder of polyether type, preferably wherein the polymeric binder of polyether type is branched and/or crosslinked or wherein the polymeric binder of polyether type is a polyethylene oxide (PEO)-based polymer.
Komaba discloses a positive electrode active material that can a potassium nickel cobalt manganese composite oxide ([0070]). Komaba further discloses wherein PVDF or Polyethylene oxide based polymers can be used as binder material ([0071]), therefore teaching that PVDF and polyethylene oxide are interchangeable.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the binder of Liu with the teachings of Komaba to have wherein the polymeric binder of polyether type is polyethylene oxide (PEO)-based polymer.
Regarding Claim 52, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Komaba discloses wherein the electrolyte can be a potassium salt including potassium hexaflurophosate, potassium bisfluorosulfonyl imide, potassium bis trifluromethanesulfonyl, potassium bitrifluoromethanesulfonyl imide, potassium perchlorate, or KPF6 and combinations of two or more of the listed salts ([0080]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Liu with the teachings of Komaba to have wherein the electrolyte is a potassium salt comprising potassium hexaflurophosate, potassium bisfluorosulfonyl imide, potassium bis trifluromethanesulfonyl, potassium bitrifluoromethanesulfonyl imide, potassium perchlorate, or KPF6 and combinations of two or more of the listed salts ([0080]).
Claim(s) 61 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (Influence of Na-substitution on the structure and electrochemical properties of layered oxides K0.67Ni0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O-2 cathode materials) in view of Wang (“P3-type K0.33Co0.53Mn0.47O2·0.39H2O: a novel bifunctional electrode for Na-ion batteries”) further in view of Archer (US20200335767) further in view of Yonemaru (US20220166020).
Regarding Claim 61, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Liu in view of Archer does not directly disclose the use of a glass or ceramic electrolyte, selected from a site-deficient perovskite-type electrolyte, a garnet-type electrolyte, a NASICON-type glass ceramic electrolyte, a LISICON-type electrolyte, a lithium-stabilized sodium ion (Na+) conducting aluminum oxide (Al2O3), and other similar glass or ceramic electrolyte.
Yonemaru discloses a lithium secondary battery ([0046]) which can use ceramic electrolytes ([0103]). Yonemaru teaches that these electrolyte provides improved odor and stability ([0011]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Liu in view of Archer with the teachings of Yonemaru to have a ceramic electrolyte. This modification would yield the expected result of improved odor and stability.
Claim(s) 68 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (Influence of Na-substitution on the structure and electrochemical properties of layered oxides K0.67Ni0.17Co0.17Mn0.66O-2 cathode materials) in view of Wang (“P3-type K0.33Co0.53Mn0.47O2·0.39H2O: a novel bifunctional electrode for Na-ion batteries”) further in view of Archer (US20200335767) further in view of Wu (US20220102759).
Regarding Claim 68, Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Wu discloses a potassium metal oxide cathode active material that can be KMnO2, KNiO2, KNi1/2Ti1/2O2, KNi1/2Mn1/2O2, K2/3Fe1/3Mn2/3O2, KNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2, K2/3MnO2, KMn2O4, K2/3Ni1/3Mn2/3O2 ([0069]). Therefore the KMnO2 is interchangeable with K0.4Ni0.2Mn0.8O2.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the active material of Liu with the teachings of Wu to have wherein the active material is K0.4Ni0.2Mn0.8O2.
Response to Arguments
A new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Liu in view of Wang further in view of Archer under 35 USC 103.
Applicant's Arguments and Affidavit filed December 1st 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Liu in view of Archer does not teach or suggest that the active material of Liu can be used in a sodium ion battery.
The examiner notes that the Wang reference is added to the rejection to provide this teaching, therefore rendering the arguments relating to the Liu and Archer combination moot.
Wang discloses an electrode material formed of potassium metal oxides and sodium potassium metal oxides can be used in potassium and sodium ion batteries (pg. 1122). Wang discloses wherein these materials provide improved cycle life of the battery (pg. 1126), which is a benefit that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand can be enjoyed by a sodium battery. Wang further discloses wherein
Therefore it is the examiner’s position that Wang teaches that sodium potassium and potassium metal oxides, such as the one disclosed by Liu, can be used interchangeable in potassium and sodium ion batteries, and both batteries would enjoy the benefit of improved life cycle.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using to modify Liu with the teachings of Wang to have wherein the layered potassium metal oxide can be used in a sodium ion electrochemical cell.
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 ANKITH R SRIPATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 am - 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent 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.
/ANKITH R SRIPATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights