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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 5-7, filed March 9, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Morinaka et al. (US 2017/0222264 A1), Kawashima et al. (JP 2013152825 A), and Ooyama et al. (US 2012/0189891 A1).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: formula I (Lix(M2zMn2-x-z)O4-δ) does not allow for a spinel material, since x ranges from 1 to 1.2, allowing for at most 1 Mn atom. The correct formula should either have Li1+x (where x is 0 to 0.2) or Mn3-x-z. Appropriate correction is required.
For the purpose of examination, the limitation will be read as Lix(M2zMn3-x-z)O4-δ.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: formula I (Lix(M1yM2zMn2-x-y-z)O4-δ; [0022]-[0023]) does not allow for a spinel material, since x ranges from 1 to 1.2, allowing for at most 1 Mn atom. The correct formula should either have Li1+x (where x is 0 to 0.2) or Mn3-x-y-z.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morinaka et al. (US 2017/0222264 A1) in view of Kawashima et al. (JP 2013152825 A; citations refer to attached English translation).
Regarding claim 1, Morinaka discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, negative electrode, and non-aqueous electrolyte; wherein the positive electrode includes a positive electrode active layer comprising LiMn2O4 (Morinaka Table 6 and [0089], examples 4-6 to 4-10), which is a spinel-type Li composite oxide consistent with Formula I for x=1 and z=0; the negative electrode includes a negative electrode active material layer comprising graphite (Morinaka Table 6); and the non-aqueous electrolyte comprises LiPF6 (Morinaka [0066]-[0067]), which is a fluorine-containing lithium salt.
Morinaka does not teach the use of phosphonic acid in the positive electrode active material layer. Kawashima is directed to a method of preventing electrolyte decomposition in lithium-ion batteries (Kawashima [0007]). Kawashima teaches that adding 0.1 wt% phosphonic acid to a LiMn2O4 active material layer suppresses gas formation and prevents increases in resistance after high-temperature storage (Kawashima [0027] and [0223]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to add 0.1 wt% phosphonic acid, which falls within the range of the instant claim, to the LiMn2O4 active material layer of Morinaka to suppress gas formation and prevent increases in resistance after high-temperature storage.
Regarding claim 2, the battery of modified Morinaka includes 0.1 wt% phosphonic acid (see above), which falls within the range of the instant claim.
Regarding claim 3, the battery of modified Morinaka includes lithium difluoro (bis(oxalato))phosphate (Morinaka [0066]), which is an oxalate complex lithium salt.
Regarding claim 7, the lithium composite oxide of modified Morinaka is LiMn2O4 (Morinaka Table 6 and [0089], examples 4-6 to 4-10).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morinaka in view of Kawashima as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ooyama et al. (US 2012/0189891 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Morinaka does not teach that the positive electrode active material layer includes trilithium phosphate. Ooyama is directed to a method for reducing gas generation in lithium-ion batteries (Ooyama [0030]). Ooyama teaches that phosphonic acid and trilithium phosphate are both acceptable additives to the positive electrode active material to prevent gas generation (Ooyama [0138]). Phosphonic acid and trilithium phosphate are therefore recognized equivalents for the same purpose. "It is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by the prior art to be useful for the same purpose, in order to form a third composition to be used for the very same purpose.... [T]he idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art." In re Kerkhoven, 626 F.2d 846, 850, 205 USPQ 1069, 1072 (CCPA 1980). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to select any combination of effective additives, including adding trilithium phosphate to the phosphonic acid of modified Morinaka.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nicolau et al. ("Controlling Interfacial Properties of Lithium-Ion Battery Cathodes with Alkylphosphonate Self-Assembled Monolayers", Advance Material Interfaces 5(10), 1701292, May 2018) is directed to a method of improving LMO cathodes by treating with alkylphosphonic acids (Abstract).
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 JAMES A CORNO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0745. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/J.A.C/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights