Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 17/729,236

POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Apr 26, 2022
Priority
Aug 03, 2018 — JP 2018-146603 +4 more
Examiner
AMPONSAH, OSEI K
Art Unit
1752
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
514 granted / 710 resolved
+7.4% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
756
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
69.5%
+29.5% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 710 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04-21-2026 has been entered. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04-21-2026 and 05-26-2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-8, 10, 12-24 and 29-31 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 11,670,770. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both directed to a positive electrode active material for a lithium ion secondary battery, wherein the positive electrode active material comprises magnesium and fluorine in a surface portion (i.e., adding magnesium fluoride and lithium fluoride) and has a layered rock-salt crystal structure. In addition, US 2016/0020458 teaches that the positive electrode can be formed by mixing a composite oxide (i.e., including cobalt and aluminum) with inorganic fluoride (LiF and MgF2) (see claim 27). Claims 1-8, 10, 12-24 and 29-31 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,272,822. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both directed to a method for manufacturing a positive electrode active material for a lithium ion secondary battery, wherein the positive electrode active material comprises magnesium and fluorine in a surface portion (i.e., adding magnesium fluoride and lithium fluoride to composite oxide) and has a layered rock-salt crystal structure. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSEI K AMPONSAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571)272-8760. 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. /OSEI K AMPONSAH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 14 earlier events
Dec 23, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 26, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 30, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 29, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 21, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749715
NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE AND SECONDARY BATTERY, BATTERY MODULE, BATTERY PACK AND ELECTRICAL DEVICE CONTAINING THE SAME
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12731811
Battery Module Including Foldable Side Plate and Method for Manufacturing Same
5y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12725834
HIGH-CONCENTRATION HIGH-ENTROPY ELECTROLYTE, METHOD FOR PREPARING THE SAME, AND BATTERY
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12725835
ELECTROLYTE SYSTEMS INCLUDING PERFORMANCE-ENHANCING ADDITIVES, AND ELECTROCHEMICAL CELLS INCLUDING THE SAME
1y 3m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12719091
METHOD OF IMPROVING FIRE-RESISTANCE OF A LITHIUM BATTERY
8y 3m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.1%)
3y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 710 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month