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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted January 30, 2026 has been received and considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment received on 12/31/2025:
Claims 1-6 and 9-20 are pending in the current application. Claim 1 is amended, Claims 7-8 remain canceled, and Claims 14-20 remain withdrawn.
The cores of the previous prior art-based rejections have been overcome in light of the amendment. All changes made to the rejection are necessitated by the amendment.
Claim Interpretation
All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments are based on the claims as amended. The amended claims have been addressed in the new rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. US-20190355983-A1 (hereinafter “Zhang”) in view of Xiao et al. US-20150180023-A1 (hereinafter “Xiao”) and Li et al. WO-2019204659-A1 (US-20210202940-A1 used as translation and cited in PTO-892) (hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhang discloses a cathode active material for a secondary battery (see abstract), comprising:
a lithium metal oxide particle having a secondary particle structure in which a plurality of primary particles are aggregated in Figs. 1-3 (see paragraphs [0007], [0011], [0019], and [0109]);
a first coating portion formed on at least a portion of a surface of the lithium metal oxide particle, the first coating portion comprising a first metal including aluminum, titanium and zirconium, and not comprising boron in Figs. 1-3 (see Fig. 3 below) (see paragraphs [0011], [0017]-[0019], [0024], and [0109]); and
PNG
media_image1.png
373
455
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. Fig. 3 of Zhang
a second coating portion (second coating existing as a dense and continuous layer) formed on at least a portion of an interface between the primary particles (second coating layer can be formed on the surfaces of primary particles in the outermost layer of the matrix in the form of secondary particles as well as the surfaces of at least a portion of internal primary particles) in Figs. 1-2 (see paragraphs [0017]-[0019] and [0108]-[0109]).
Zhang is silent on the second coating portion comprising a second metal including aluminum.
However, in the same field of endeavor of coatings on active materials (electroactive materials) (see abstract), Xiao discloses an active material comprising lithium metal oxide particles with a first coating that may include titanium, aluminum, and zirconium oxides and combinations thereof applied to one or more surface regions of the active material and a second coating including aluminum (AlF3) disposed over the first coating layer (see abstract and paragraphs [0004], [0042]-[0043], [0053]-[0055] and [0059] and Claims 1-2 and 4).
Xiao additionally discloses this multifunctional hybrid protective coating system for electrode materials can suppress undesirable side reactions, minimize the formation of solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) on the electrode surface and/or minimize or suppress gas generation for use in electrochemical devices (see paragraphs [0001], [0042], [0054]-[0056], and [0058]). As such, a skilled artisan would be motivated to include aluminum in the second coating layer of Zhang, as Xiao discloses it may be used over a first coating layer comprising titanium, aluminum, and zirconium (which are compounds disclosed by Zhang for the first coating layer) to achieve the aforementioned benefits. Furthermore, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cathode active material of Zhang by including a second coating portion including aluminum, as disclosed by Xiao, in order to form a multifunctional hybrid protective coating system to suppress undesirable side reactions, minimize the formation of solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) on the electrode surface and/or minimize or suppress gas generation for use in electrochemical devices.
Zhang and Xiao are silent on wherein the first coating portion covers 30% to 90% of a total area of an outer surface of the lithium metal oxide particle.
However, in the same field of endeavor of coatings on active materials (see abstract), Li discloses a lithium metal oxide particle having a secondary particle structure in which a plurality of primary particles are aggregated (cathode material 202 secondary particles may be formed from the cathode material 202 primary particles) and a first coating portion formed on at least a portion of a surface of the lithium metal oxide particle, the first coating portion comprising a first metal including aluminum, titanium and zirconium in Figs. 4A-4D (see paragraphs [0028], [0046], [0050], [0066]-[0067], [0078], and [0120] and Claim 1).
Li further discloses the cathode material may be substantially covered leaving only a small portion, less than 50% and as little as 1% or 0%, uncovered and exposed, depending on desired levels of power, voltage, and discharge rate of the cathode material 202 while providing a sufficient amount of shielding to reduce undesired side-reactions between the electrolyte and the cathode material in Figs. 2A-2C (see paragraphs [0048]-[0049] and [0122]). A skilled artisan would recognize that this would result in the first coating portion covering 50%-100% of the lithium metal oxide particle, which substantially overlaps and therefore renders obvious the claimed range of the first coating portion covering 30% to 90% of a total area of an outer surface of the lithium metal oxide particle.
Li additionally discloses leaving a portion of the cathode material 202 exposed may achieve several benefits, such as increased charge/discharge rates, decreased manufacturing costs, and faster recharge as compared to a completely, or substantially completely, covered/coated cathode material (see paragraph [0049]). So, a skilled artisan would be motivated leave a portion uncoated to achieve these benefits.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cathode active material of Zhang and Xiao wherein the first coating portion covers 30% to 90% of a total area of an outer surface of the lithium metal oxide particle in order to achieve increased charge/discharge rates, decreased manufacturing costs, and faster recharge.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zhang further discloses the second coating portion is continuously formed as an outermost layer in Figs. 1-2 (see paragraphs [0017]-[0019] and [0108]-[0109]). A skilled artisan would understand that since the first coating layer is formed on the lithium metal oxide, and the second coating layer is then applied continuously on that surface as the outermost layer, the second coating portion would be formed on at least a portion of a surface of the first coating portion.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above). Zhang further discloses the second coating portion is also formed on at least a portion of the surface of the lithium metal oxide particle on which the first coating portion is not formed (second coating layer can be formed on the surfaces of at least a portion of internal primary particles) in Figs. 1-2 (see paragraphs [0017]-[0019], and [0108]-[0109]). A skilled artisan would understand that since the first coating portion is formed as discrete islands (i.e., not completely covering the cathode active material) and the second coating layer is applied continuously to the surface of the lithium metal oxide and first coating portion in Figs. 1-3 (see paragraphs [0014] and [0018]), the second coating portion is formed on at least a portion of the surface of the lithium metal oxide particle on which the first coating portion is not formed.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 3 (see rejection of claim 3 above). Zhang further discloses the first coating layer is present in the form of discrete islands with protrusions and the second coating layer is coated on the first coating layer in the form of a continuous layer in Figs. 1-3 (see paragraphs [0014], [0017]-[0019], and [0034]). This is a comparable structure to the island-sea shape disclosed in the instant application, where the island shape is a protrusion shape of the first coating and the sea shape is formed from the second coating in a continuous phase (see paragraphs [0073] and [0092] of the published instant application).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Zhang is silent on, in an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy spectrum measured for a cross-section of the cathode active material, a peak intensity of the second metal from the interface of the primary particles is greater than an average value of peak intensities of the second metal from an inside of the primary particles.
However, it will be shown that the teachings of Zhang would inherently have, in an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy spectrum measured for a cross-section of the cathode active material, a peak intensity of the second metal from the interface of the primary particles is greater than an average value of peak intensities of the second metal from an inside of the primary particles.
A skilled artisan would understand that a peak intensity of the second metal from the interface of the primary particles being greater than an average value of peak intensities of the second metal from an inside of the primary particles means there is a higher concentration of the second metal at the interface of the primary particles than a concentration of the second metal from an inside of the primary particles.
Zhang discloses the first coating layer is formed as discrete islands on the lithium metal oxide (i.e., not completely covering the lithium metal oxide but still covering a portion of it) and the second coating layer can be formed on the surfaces of at least a portion of internal primary particles in Fig. 3 (see paragraphs [0014], [0017]-[0019], and [0108]-[0109]). As such, the first coating layer allows areas where the second coating layer can contact the cathode active material (i.e., the second metal contacting an interface of the primary particles).
Zhang further discloses the second coating layer coats the surfaces of the primary particles (see paragraph [0017]), so the second metal from the second portion would not be inside of the primary particles. As a result, the concentration of the second metal from the interface of the primary particles is greater than the concentration of the second metal from an inside of the primary particles.
Therefore, the cathode active material disclosed by Zhang inherently, in an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy spectrum measured for a cross-section of the cathode active material, has a peak intensity of the second metal from the interface of the primary particles is greater than an average value of peak intensities of the second metal from an inside of the primary particles.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zhang further discloses the lithium metal oxide particle comprises nickel, and a content of nickel in the lithium metal oxide particle may be 95% based on a total number of moles of all elements excluding lithium and oxygen (from compound LiNi0.95Co0.02Mn0.03O2) (see Embodiment 18 of Table 1 and paragraphs [0004], [0014], and [0074]). This value falls within and therefore anticipates the claimed range of the content of nickel in the lithium metal oxide particle being 88 mol% or more based on a total number of moles of all elements excluding lithium and oxygen.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Zhang further discloses a lithium secondary battery, comprising: a cathode (positive electrode plate) comprising the cathode active material for a secondary battery of the aforementioned claim 1; and an anode (negative electrode plate) facing the cathode (the positive electrode plate, the separator and the negative electrode plate were stacked in an order i.e., anode is facing the cathode) (see paragraphs [0007], [0041], and [0084]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Xiao and Li as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Binghong Han et al., Understanding the Role of Temperature and Cathode Composition on Interface and Bulk: Optimizing Aluminum Oxide Coatings for Li-ion Cathodes, 2017, ACS Publications, Pages 8-10 (hereinafter “Han”).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Zhang, Xiao, and Li are silent on the second coating portion comprising at least one of the second metal having an amorphous structure and an oxide of the second metal having an amorphous structure.
However, in the same field of endeavor of cathode active materials with coating portions for secondary batteries (see pgs. 1-2, Abstract), Han discloses using an amorphous (loose amorphous) aluminum oxide coating (Al2O3) on a cathode active material (see page 1, Abstract and pages 9-10).
Additionally, Han discloses using this amorphous aluminum oxide coating properly coats the cathode active material and improves the cycling performance of a battery (see pg.1, Abstract and pages-16-19, Section IV).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cathode active material disclosed by Zhang, Xiao, and Li wherein the second coating layer comprises amorphous aluminum oxide, as disclosed by Han, in order to improve the cycling performance of the battery.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Xiao and Li as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Chenqiang Du et al., Surface modification of a LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 cathode with lithium boron oxide glass for lithium-ion batteries, 2015, RSC Advances, Pages 57293-57299 (hereinafter “Du”).
Regarding Claims 10-12, modified Zhang discloses the cathode active material of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Zhang, Xiao, and Li are silent on the cathode active material further comprising a third coating portion formed on at least a portion of the second coating portion, the third coating portion comprising a metalloid, wherein the metalloid includes boron and the third coating portion comprises at least one of the metalloid having an amorphous structure and an oxide of the metalloid having an amorphous structure.
However, in the same field of endeavor of cathode active materials with coating portions for secondary batteries, Du discloses a lithium metal oxide (LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4) coated with a layer of amorphous lithium boron oxide glass (see pg. 57293, Abstract). A skilled artisan would recognize boron is a metalloid.
Additionally, Du discloses the amorphous lithium boron oxide glass coating can protect the cathode material from corrosion by the electrolyte and prevent reactions between the electrolyte and cathode materials, leading to improved electrochemical properties of the battery (see pg. 57298, section 4).
A skilled artisan would recognize this would be advantageous to use as an outer coating on the cathode active material disclosed by Zhang since the electrolyte would be in contact with the outermost portion and the lithium boron oxide glass coating can protect the cathode material from the electrolyte. Additionally, since this is an outer coating incorporated into the previously discussed structure of modified Zhang (see rejection of claim 1 above), it would be formed on a least a portion of the second coating portion of Zhang.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cathode active material disclosed by Zhang, Xiao, and Li by including a third coating portion formed on at least a portion of the second coating portion, the third coating portion comprising a metalloid wherein the metalloid includes boron, as disclosed by Du, in order to protect the cathode material from corrosion by the electrolyte and prevent reactions between the electrolyte and cathode materials, leading to improved electrochemical properties of the battery.
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 SYDNEY L KLINE whose telephone number is (703)756-1729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
/S.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights