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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-18, 20, 22, 26 and 28 are canceled. Claims 19, 21, 23-25, 27, 29-42 are currently pending.
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 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.
Claims 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31-33, 35-37 & 39-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2018/0006302 A1) in view of Kawasato (US 2008/0131780 A1) and evidenced by Dai (US 2017/0263917 A1).
Regarding claims 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31-33, 35-37 & 39-42, Li teaches a lithium ion secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode and an electrolyte solution ([0217]-[0222]), wherein the positive electrode includes a positive electrode active material particle comprising lithium cobalt oxide comprising Ni, Mn, Al and Mg; wherein concentrations of both magnesium and nickel in a surface portion (i.e coating layer) of the positive electrode active material particle are higher than concentrations of magnesium and nickel in an inner portion (i.e core) of the positive electrode active material particle; wherein the number of nickel atoms is lower than 7.5% when sum of the number of nickel atoms and cobalt atoms in the active material is 100%; and wherein a XRD pattern of the positive electrode active material has at least a first diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 18° to 20° and a second diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 44.5° to 46.5° (Fig. 1; [0027]-[0037] & [0105]; Examples 1 & 3). Li is silent as to 1) in a state in which the positive electrode active material is charged at 4.7 V in a battery comprising the positive electrode active material in a positive electrode and a lithium counter electrode, a XRD pattern of the positive electrode active material having at least a first diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 19.30° ± 0.20° and a second diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 45.55° ± 0.10° (claims 21 & 25); 2) the active material comprising a pseudo-spinel crystal structure in the charged state and an O3 crystal structure in the discharged state (claims 31 & 35); 3) the surface portion of the active material comprising fluorine (claims 23, 29, 33 & 37); and 4) fluorine existing in a region in contact with the electrolyte solution (claims 39-42). Kawasato teaches a positive electrode active material particle comprising a lithium cobalt oxide including fluorine in a surface portion of the positive electrode active material ([0026]-[0029], [0055] & Example 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to provide fluorine in a surface portion of Li’s positive electrode active material because the important battery characteristics such as the safety and the cyclic charge and discharge properties can be improved by its addition in a small amount without bringing about the reduction of the battery performance as taught by Kawasato ([0055]). It is noted that when fluorine is present in the surface portion of Li’s positive electrode active material particle, the fluorine would necessarily come in contact with the electrolyte solution since the electrolyte solution comes into contact with the outer surface of the positive electrode active material particle which is disposed in a positive electrode mixture layer. Moreover, Li as modified by Kawasato discloses a positive electrode active material having substantially the same composition (i.e lithium cobalt oxide with same doping/coating elements) and structure (i.e core-shell particle including lithium cobalt oxide in the core and a shell comprising Ni, Mn, Al, Mg and F with the claimed concentration gradient of Ni and Mg) as described above. Furhermore, Li discloses a method of forming the positive electrode active material including sintering a lithium precursor and a transition metal precursor at 1020C and mixing the sintered product with coating precursors and performing heat treatment at 900C for 4 hours similarly to the method of producing the claimed positive electrode active material as described in the instant specification. Accordingly, Li’s active material as modified by Kawasato would be expected to possess the presently claimed properties including 1) a XRD pattern of the positive electrode active material having at least a first diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 19.30° ± 0.20° and a second diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 45.55° ± 0.10° in a state in which the positive electrode active material is charged at 4.7 V in a battery comprising the positive electrode active material in a positive electrode and a lithium counter electrode; and 2) a pseudo-spinel crystal structure in a charged state and an O3 crystal structure in a discharged state. “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977)”. See MPEP 2112.01 I.
Regarding claims 24, 30, 34 & 38, Li as modified by Kawasato teaches the lithium ion secondary battery of respective claims 21, 25, 31 and 35 as noted above. Kawasato further teaches the surface portion of the positive electrode active material corresponding to a region of from 0% to 20% where the surface corresponds to 0% and the center corresponds to 100% as the index to the depth direction from the particle surface to the center ([0031]-[0032]). As such, when the surface portion in Li is formed in the region described by Kawasato above (i.e 0% to 20%), the surface portion in Li would correspond to layer having a thickness of up to 2,000 nm when the positive electrode active material has an average particle size (D50) of 20 microns as taught in Li (Example 3) which encompasses the claimed depth of 10 nm.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 1 of Remarks, filed 06/05/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 19, 21, 23-25, 27, 29-42 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Li and Kawasato as presented above. In the remarks on 08/27/2025, Applicant argued that Li does not fairly teach or suggest the claimed x-ray diffraction pattern in a state where a battery including a positive electrode comprising the claimed positive electrode active material and a lithium counter electrode is charged at 4.7V. Li further discloses the inventive positive electrode active material having an a-NaFeO2 crystal structure which corresponds to a R-3m crystal structure (which is equivalent to the claimed O3 crystal structure) and used in a positive electrode along with a graphite-based negative electrode to form the battery (Examples 1 & 3; [0217]-[0221]). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art readily understands that the inventive active material of Li is provided in the positive electrode in a discharged state where lithium ions in the positive electrode shuttle to the negative electrode when the battery is being charged. Thus, the lithium ions initially in the positive electrode intercalate into the graphite in the negative electrode when the battery is charged which results in a depletion of lithium ions in the positive electrode active material. However, as noted in the above rejection, Li discloses a positive electrode active material having substantially the same composition (i.e lithium cobalt oxide with same doping/coating elements) and structure (i.e core-shell particle including lithium cobalt oxide in the core and a shell comprising Ni, Mn, Al, Mg and F with the claimed concentration gradient of Ni and Mg) as described above. Accordingly, Li’s active material as modified by Kawasato would be expected to possess the presently claimed properties including 1) a XRD pattern of the positive electrode active material having at least a first diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 19.30° ± 0.20° and a second diffraction peak at 2Ɵ of 45.55° ± 0.10° in a state in which the positive electrode active material is charged at 4.7 V in a battery comprising the positive electrode active material in a positive electrode and a lithium counter electrode; and 2) a pseudo-spinel crystal structure in a charged state and an O3 crystal structure in a discharged state. “Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977)”. See MPEP 2112.01 I. Thus, in view of the foregoing, claims 19, 21, 23-25, 27 & 29-42 stand rejected.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (EST).
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, BARBARA GILLIAM can be reached on (571)272-1330. 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.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights