DETAILED ACTION
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 1, 3-5, 7 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PERALTA (US 20160164088 A1) in view of LI et al. (Improving rate performances of Li-rich layered oxide by the co-doping of Sn and K ions, J. of Materiomics 5 (2019), 149-155).
Regarding claim 1, PERALTA discloses a positive electrode active material for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery ([0001]), the positive electrode active material including a lithium-transition metal composite compound,
wherein the lithium-transition metal composite compound is represented by a general formula LixMnyNizMeαOaFb wherein 1≤x≤1.2, 0.4≤y≤0.8, 0≤z≤0.4, x+y+z=2, 0<α≤ 0.05, 1.8≤a≤2.035, 2.01≤a+b≤2.2 (Formula 1 [0012] which is notably over-lithiated and free of cobalt; as well as Example 1 [0098] with Mn0.6 and Ni0.2; PERALTA utilizes a standard O2 based formula, however all values may be adjusted such that 2.01≤a+b≤2.2),
and Me is substantially composed of (the phrase “substantially composed of” indicates “elements other than A may be included within a range of not adversely affecting the objective of the present disclosure” per instant [0023]) at least two elements selected from a group consisting of K, Sr, Ba, Bi, Ca, La, Pr, Y, Dy, Sn, and Zn, (“M is selected from among Al, Fe, Ti, Cr, V, Cu, Mg, Zn, Na, K, Ca and Sc” [0040]; wherein “selected from among” is being interpreted as selection of one or more elements),
PERALTA discloses the use of dopants; however, PERALTA does not teach Me includes at least one of Y or Sn.
LI is directed to a “Li-rich layered oxide” (Abstract) like PERALTA. LI teaches “Li-rich layered oxides are still suffering from poor rate performances, caused by low conductivity (both for electrons and ions) and a prerequisite of activation for Li2MnO3 component … doping is an effective way to address the above challenges” (pg. 149, col. 1, para. 1). LI details the known use of Sn doping for transition metals as “a dopant or for surface modification” (col. 2 para. 2) as well as inclusion of K as well to create “Sn and K co-doped cathode materials” (pg. 150, col. 1, para. 1). Notably when looking at the figures and tables of LI, the “doping amount of K was kept at 1% (molar ratio) for all samples” (pg. 150, col. 1, para. 4) and “Sn doping amount of 0, 0.5, 1, 3, and 5 wt%” (pg. 150, col. 1, para. 4). LI teaches when the K doping is 1%, the “optimal Sn doping is at about 3%” (pg. 154, col. 1, para. 1). LI teaches “better rate performance by co-doping” due to “an enlarged crystal lattices and a smooth way for Li+ migration” (pg. 154, col. 1, para. 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the lithium oxide of PERALTA to include Sn as a co-dopant as taught by LI for better rate performance via enlarged crystal lattices.
Therefore, modified PERALTA discloses Me includes at least one of Y or Sn (as taught by LI)
Regarding claim 3, modified PERALTA discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and PERALTA further discloses the Me includes at least one element selected from Sr and Ca (“Ca” [0040]).
Regarding claim 5, modified PERALTA discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and PERALTA further discloses the Me includes at least an alkaline earth metal element (“Mg … Ca” [0040]).
Regarding claim 7, modified PERALTA discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and PERALTA further discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising: a positive electrode including the positive electrode active material for the non- aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1; a negative electrode; and a non-aqueous electrolyte (details toward the lithium battery in [0077] as well as the electrolyte in [0082]).
Regarding claim 11, modified PERALTA discloses all the claim limitations as set forth above and PERALTA further discloses b=0 (the formulas of PERALTA do not require fluorine).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 12 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Further searching failed to identify any additional prior art that would render the limitations of Claims 4 and 12 either anticipated or obvious.
Therefore, the allowable feature of Claims 4 and 12 is Me is formed substantially and solely from at least three elements selected from Sr, Ca, Y, and Sn, in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
The closest prior art is represented by GAO (US 6361756 B1) as well as TAKAMORI (US 20120015231 A1) as well PERALTA (US 20160164088 A1) as well as LI et al. (Improving rate performances of Li-rich layered oxide by the co-doping of Sn and K ions, J. of Materiomics 5 (2019), 149-155).
GAO teaches three dopants, however GAO fails to teach the three dopants may be formed substantially and solely from at least three elements selected from Sr, Ca, Y, and Sn.
TAKAMORI teaches two or more dopants, however TAKAMORI teaches one of the dopants is Fe and fails to teach the three dopants may be formed substantially and solely from at least three elements selected from Sr, Ca, Y, and Sn.
Similarly, PERALTA and LI fail to teach three dopants formed substantially and solely from at least three elements selected from Sr, Ca, Y, and Sn.
For this reason, the claims as written read free of the closest available prior art, placing the application in condition for allowance.
Response to Arguments
Regarding art-based rejections, applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any interpretation applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 TRAVIS L MARTIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7am-4pm CT.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached on (303)297-4684. 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.
/T.L.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights