Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/651,060

PRECURSOR SOLUTION, PRECURSOR POWDER, ELECTRODE MANUFACTURING METHOD, AND ELECTRODE

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 14, 2022
Examiner
DIGGS, TANISHA
Art Unit
1761
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Seiko Epson Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

55%
Career Allow Rate
391 granted / 716 resolved
Without
With
+57.5%
Interview Lift
avg trend
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
39 pending
755
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 action is responsive to the amendment filed on July 28, 2025. Claims 1-14 are pending. Claims 7-14 are withdrawn. Claims 1-3 are currently amended. Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lim et al is withdrawn in view of Applicants amendment. The rejection of claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al in view of Yokoyama is withdrawn in view of Applicants amendment. 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. Claim 2 is 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 2 recites “corresponds to a reference” and “0.90 times of the reference and less than or equal to 1.20 times of the reference”; this is unclear and renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the “reference” is. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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, 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamamoto et al (US Patent Application 2019/0084887). Regarding claims 1, 3-6, Yamamoto et al teaches a precursor solution comprising butanol, lithium nitrate and antimony tri-n-butoxide (Paragraph 116). Yamamoto et al teaches the features of the instant claims; hence, Yamamoto et al anticipates the claims. Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ozawa et al (Preparation of LiSbO3 Thin Films from Metal Alkoxides). Regarding claims 1-4, Ozawa et al teaches producing LiSbO3 by mixing lithium propoxide, antimony propoxide, propanol and acetyl acetone to form a precursor solution (Experimental; Fig. 1). Ozawa et al teaches the limitations of the instant claims; hence, Ozawa et al anticipates the claims. 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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al (Preparation of LiSbO3 Thin Films from Metal Alkoxides) as applied to claims 1-4 above, and in further view of Yokoyama (US Patent Application 2020/0127326 (already of record)). Regarding claims 5-6, Ozawa et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Ozawa et al teaches the features above. However, Ozawa et al fails to specifically disclose lithium nitrate and butanol. In the same field of endeavor, Yokoyama teaches a battery wherein a precursor solution is formed by dissolving metal salts or alkoxides with a solvent, including ethanol, butanol and propanol with a lithium compound including lithium propoxide and lithium nitrate (Paragraphs 55-64). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted lithium nitrate in butanol in the solution of Ozawa et al in view of Yokoyama in order to form the LiSbO3 compound. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See MPEP 2144.07. Likewise, simple substitution of one known lithium salt and alcohol solvent for another lithium salt and alcohol solvent would have only been obvious to the ordinary artisan. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. 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 TANISHA DIGGS whose telephone number is (571)270-7730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday and Friday, 9:00AM-5:30PM. 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571) 272-2817. 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. /TANISHA DIGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 August 8, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 14, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jul 28, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Apr 07, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12595374
THERMAL SPRAY MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590236
THERMALLY CONDUCTIVE SILICONE HEAT DISSIPATION MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590034
METHODS OF FORMING A TEMPERATURE-STABLE, LOW-DIELECTRIC CONSTANT MATERIAL WITH AN ULTRA-LOW LOSS TANGENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12564749
LONG-TERM RETARDANT AND FIRE-SUPPRESSING GEL COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12565429
ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE ABSORBING PARTICLES, ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE ABSORBING PARTICLE DISPERSION LIQUID, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE ABSORBING PARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+57.5%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 716 resolved cases by this examiner