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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 05/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 21-22, 24, 27-37, and 41-46 are currently pending. Claims 21, 27, 36-37, and 46 are amended. Support for the amended claims is found in the claims as originally filed as well as in paragraph 0180 of the examined specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 21-22, 29-36, and 42-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasato (US 20150380737 A1) in view of Maeda et al. (US 20170373300 A1), Kim et al. (US 20110240913 A1), Yamamoto et al. (US 20150060725 A1), and Yura et al. (US 20110003205 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Kawasato discloses a positive electrode active material (paragraphs 0001, 0014) for a lithium-ion battery composed of particles containing crystals of a lithium metal composite oxide (paragraph 0014), wherein the particles have a layered structure (paragraphs 0021-0022), and in powder x-ray diffraction measurement using CuKa rays, a ratio I003/I104 of an integrated intensity I104 of a diffraction peak in a range of 2θ=44.4±1° to an integrated intensity I003 of a diffraction peak in a range of 2θ=18.5±1° exceeds 1.23 (paragraphs 0031, 0014, lines 13-15, intensity ratio of 1.21-1.39, overlapping the claimed range), wherein the lithium metal composite oxide is represented by the following Composition Formula (A): Li[Lix(Ni(1-y-z-w)CoyMnzMw)1-x]O2 where, M is at least one element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cu, Ti, Mg, Al, W, B, Mo, Nb, Zn, Sn, Zr, Ga and V, -0.10≤x≤0.30, 0<y≤0.40, 0≤z≤0.40, 0≤w≤0.10, and z+w>0 are satisfied (paragraphs 0014, formula 1, paragraph 0035, Li1.01Ni0.426Co0.297Mn0.267O2 satisfies the claimed formula), wherein a tap density B of the positive electrode active material is 0.8g/cm3 or more and 1.63g/cm3 or less (paragraph 0054, 1.3 to 3g/cm3, overlapping the claimed range). If the ranges overlap, then a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP 2144.05. Kawasato further discloses that the electrolyte used may be a solid electrolyte (paragraph 0114). Kawasato does not explicitly disclose that the battery is an all-solid-state battery, wherein the positive electrode active material for a lithium-ion battery is in contact with a solid electrolyte layer, wherein a press density A of the positive electrode active material, when compressed at a pressure of 45 MPa, is 2.96 g/cm3 or more and 3.02 g/cm3 or less, wherein a ratio A/B of the press density A to the tap density B of the positive electrode active material is 1.85 or more, wherein the particles contain primary particles, secondary particles which are aggregates of the primary particles, and single particles that exist independently of the primary particles and the secondary particles, and wherein an average particle diameter of the secondary particles is 3.0 µm to 15 µm.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses that the positive electrode active material is in contact with a solid electrolyte layer (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1). The reference teaches that the all-solid-state battery ensures intrinsic safety, has a low risk of ignition, and prevents liquid leakage and corrosion (Maeda paragraph 0004). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to be all-solidstate with the positive electrode active material in contact with a solid electrolyte layer as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would improve safety and prevent liquid leakage and corrosion.
Kim discloses a positive active material comprising a lithium nickel complex oxide (Kim paragraphs 0009-0010). Kim further discloses that the active material powders have a density after pressing of 2.5 to 4.5 g/cm3 and 1.5 to 4.5g/cm3 for the purpose of providing high-efficiency discharging properties (Kim paragraph 0039). The reference teaches that the densities are achieved by compressing at an appropriate temperature and the press density may be varied based on the kind and density of the electrode plate (Kim paragraphs 0039-0040). Kim is clearly teaching that the pressure is a results-effective variable that controls the press density and is varied according to the desired densities. Kim and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the density of Kim for the purpose of improving discharge properties. Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the claimed pressure because it has been held by the courts that optimization of a results effective variable is not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Yamamoto discloses positive electrode active material particles belonging to a space group of R-3m and C2/m comprising a compound in the form of a composite oxide comprising Li, Mn, at least one element selected from Si, Zr, and Y, and Co and/or Ni (Yamamoto paragraphs 0014-0019). Yamamoto further discloses that the tap density of the particles is 0.8 to 2.4 g/cm3 and the compressed density is 2.0 to 3.1 g/cm3 (Yamamoto paragraphs 0039-0040, resulting in an A/B ratio of for example, 2 to 3.1 g/cm3 when the tap density is 1 g/cm3. The reference teaches that densities in the disclosed ranges prevent deterioration of discharge capacity and rate characteristics (Yamamoto paragraphs 0039-0040). Yamamoto further teaches that the secondary particle diameter of the positive electrode active material is preferably 2 to 16µm to prevent deterioration in stability and charge/discharge characteristics (Yamamoto paragraph 0043). Yamamoto and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose similar composite oxide positive electrode active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the densities and secondary particle diameter disclosed by Yamamoto. Doing so would prevent deterioration of discharge capacity and rate characteristics.
Yura discloses a lithium manganate positive electrode active material composed of primary particles, secondary particles formed by connections of primary particles, and single particles (Yura paragraph 0011), wherein single particles exist independent of the primary and secondary particles (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura further discloses that the amount of the single particles in the particles is 40% or more (Yura paragraph 0055), overlapping the claimed range. The reference teaches that when the amount of single particles is too low, Li ion diffusion is hindered, reducing rate characteristics (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the particles as disclosed by Yura. Doing so would prevent a reduction in rate characteristics.
Regarding claim 22, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 1. Kawasato is silent regarding the all-solid-state lithium-ion battery containing an oxide-based solid electrolyte.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses that the battery contains an oxide-based solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraphs 0044-0045). The reference teaches that the oxide-based electrolyte containing Li, La, Zr, and O has excellent sintering properties and high ion conductivity (Maeda paragraph 0045). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the oxide-based electrolyte disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would provide an electrolyte with excellent sintering properties and high ion conductivity.
Regarding claim 28, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 21. Kawasato further discloses that the particles are composed of primary particles (paragraph 0013). Kawasato is silent with respect to secondary particles which are aggregates of the primary particles, and single particles that exist independently of the primary particles and the secondary particles, and wherein the amount of the single particles in the particles is 20% or more.
Yura discloses a lithium manganate positive electrode active material composed of primary particles, secondary particles formed by connections of primary particles, and single particles (Yura paragraph 0011), wherein single particles exist independent of the primary and secondary particles (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura further discloses that the amount of the single particles in the particles is 40% or more (Yura paragraph 0055), overlapping the claimed range. The reference teaches that when the amount of single particles is too low, Li ion diffusion is hindered, reducing rate characteristics (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the particles as disclosed by Yura. Doing so would prevent a reduction in rate characteristics.
Regarding claim 29, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of 21. Kawasato further discloses an electrode comprising the positive electrode active material for an all-solid-state lithium-ion battery (paragraph 0015, lines 17-20).
Regarding claim 30, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 29. Kawasato further discloses that the electrode comprises a solid electrolyte (paragraph 0114).
Regarding claim 31, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 21. Kawasato further discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode and a negative electrode (paragraph 0015), and a current collector on which the positive electrode active material layer is laminated (paragraph 0097), and wherein the positive electrode active material layer contains the positive electrode active material for an all-solid-state lithium-ion battery (paragraph 0015, lines 17-20). Kawasato is silent regarding a solid electrolyte layer interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, wherein the solid electrolyte layer contains a second solid electrolyte, wherein the positive electrode has a positive electrode active material layer in contact with the solid electrolyte layer.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses a solid electrolyte layer interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1), wherein the solid electrolyte layer contains a second solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraph 0045, Li-La-Zr-O and LiPON), and wherein the positive electrode has a positive electrode active material layer in contact with the solid electrolyte layer (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1). The reference teaches that the solid electrolyte layer of the battery causes insulation between the positive and negative electrodes to be secured to prevent short-circuiting (Maeda paragraph 0018). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the solid electrolyte layer as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would insulate the battery and prevent short-circuiting.
Regarding claim 32, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 31. Kawasato further discloses that the positive electrode active material layer contains the positive electrode active material for an all-solid-state lithium-ion battery (paragraph 0015, lines 17-20) and a second solid electrolyte (paragraphs 0108, 0114).
Regarding claim 33, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 32. Kawasato is silent regarding the first solid electrolyte and the second solid electrolyte being the same substance.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses a solid electrolyte layer interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1), wherein the solid electrolyte layer contains a second solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraph 0045, Li-La-Zr-O and/or LiPON). Maeda discloses that the solid electrolyte may be a single substance or a combination (Maeda paragraph 0045, Li-La-Zr-O and/or LiPON, equivalent to the first and second electrolyte being the same substance if only one is selected). The reference teaches that the solid electrolyte has excellent sintering properties and a high ion conductivity (Maeda paragraph 0045). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the solid electrolyte as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would provide excellent sintering properties and a high ion conductivity.
Regarding claim 34, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 31. Kawasato is silent regarding the second solid electrolyte having an amorphous structure.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses an amorphous solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraph 0097, LiPON glass). The reference teaches that the LiPON solid electrolyte can insulate electrodes and prevent short circuiting (Maeda paragraph 0018). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the amorphous electrolyte as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would insulate electrodes and prevent short circuiting.
Regarding claim 35, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 31. Kawasato is silent regarding the second solid electrolyte being an oxide-based solid electrolyte.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses that the battery contains an oxide-based solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraphs 0044-0045). The reference teaches that the oxide-based electrolyte containing Li, La, Zr, and O has excellent sintering properties and high ion conductivity (Maeda paragraph 0045). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the oxide-based electrolyte disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would provide an electrolyte with excellent sintering properties and high ion conductivity.
Regarding claim 36, Kawasato discloses a positive electrode (paragraph 0015, lines 17- 20), and a current collector on which the positive electrode active material layer is laminated (paragraph 0097), and the positive electrode active material layer contains a positive electrode active material composed of particles containing crystals of a lithium metal composite oxide (paragraph 0014), wherein the particles have a layered (paragraphs 0021-0022), and in a powder x-ray diffraction measurement using CuKα rays, a ratio I003/I104 of an integrated intensity I003 of a diffraction peak in a range of 2θ=44.4+1° to an integrated intensity I104 of a diffraction peak in a range of 2θ=18.5+1° exceeds 1.23 (paragraphs 0031, 0014, lines 13-15, intensity ratio of 1.21-1.39, overlapping the claimed range), wherein the lithium metal composite oxide is represented by the following Composition Formula (A): Li[Lix(Ni(1-y-z-w)CoyMnzMw)1-x]O2 where, M is at least one element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cu, Ti, Mg, Al, W, B, Mo, Nb, Zn, Sn, Zr, Ga and V, -0.10≤x≤0.30, 0<y≤0.40, 0≤z≤0.40, 0≤w≤0.10, and z+w>0 are satisfied (paragraphs 0014, formula 1, paragraph 0035, Li1.01Ni0.426Co0.297Mn0.267O2 satisfies the claimed formula), wherein a tap density B of the positive electrode active material is 0.8g/cm3 or more and 1.63g/cm3 or less (paragraph 0054, 1.3 to 3g/cm3, overlapping the claimed range). If the ranges overlap, then a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP 2144.05. Kawasato further discloses that the electrolyte used may be a solid electrolyte (paragraph 0114). Kawasato does not explicitly disclose that the battery is an all-solid-state battery, wherein the positive electrode active material for a lithium-ion battery is in contact with a solid electrolyte layer, wherein a press density A of the positive electrode active material, when compressed at a pressure of 45 MPa, is 2.96 g/cm3 or more and 3.02 g/cm3 or less, wherein a ratio A/B of the press density A to the tap density B of the positive electrode active material is 1.85 or more, wherein the particles contain primary particles, secondary particles which are aggregates of the primary particles, and single particles that exist independently of the primary particles and the secondary particles, and wherein an average particle diameter of the secondary particles is 3.0 µm to 15 µm.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses that the positive electrode active material is in contact with a solid electrolyte layer (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1). The reference teaches that the all-solid-state battery ensures intrinsic safety, has a low risk of ignition, and prevents liquid leakage and corrosion (Maeda paragraph 0004). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to be all-solidstate with the positive electrode active material in contact with a solid electrolyte layer as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would improve safety and prevent liquid leakage and corrosion.
disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would improve safety and prevent liquid leakage and corrosion.
Kim discloses a positive active material comprising a lithium nickel complex oxide (Kim paragraphs 0009-0010). Kim further discloses that the active material powders have a density after pressing of 2.5 to 4.5 g/cm3 and 1.5 to 4.5g/cm3 for the purpose of providing high-efficiency discharging properties (Kim paragraph 0039). The reference teaches that the densities are achieved by compressing at an appropriate temperature and the press density may be varied based on the kind and density of the electrode plate (Kim paragraphs 0039-0040). Kim is clearly teaching that the pressure is a results-effective variable that controls the press density and is varied according to the desired densities. Kim and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the density of Kim for the purpose of improving discharge properties. Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the claimed pressure because it has been held by the courts that optimization of a results effective variable is not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Yamamoto discloses positive electrode active material particles belonging to a space group of R-3m and C2/m comprising a compound in the form of a composite oxide comprising Li, Mn, at least one element selected from Si, Zr, and Y, and Co and/or Ni (Yamamoto paragraphs 0014-0019). Yamamoto further discloses that the tap density of the particles is 0.8 to 2.4 g/cm3 and the compressed density is 2.0 to 3.1 g/cm3 (Yamamoto paragraphs 0039-0040, resulting in an A/B ratio of for example, 2 to 3.1 g/cm3 when the tap density is 1 g/cm3. The reference teaches that densities in the disclosed ranges prevent deterioration of discharge capacity and rate characteristics (Yamamoto paragraphs 0039-0040). Yamamoto further teaches that the secondary particle diameter of the positive electrode active material is preferably 2 to 16µm to prevent deterioration in stability and charge/discharge characteristics (Yamamoto paragraph 0043). Yamamoto and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose similar composite oxide positive electrode active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the densities and secondary particle diameter disclosed by Yamamoto. Doing so would prevent deterioration of discharge capacity and rate characteristics.
Yura discloses a lithium manganate positive electrode active material composed of primary particles, secondary particles formed by connections of primary particles, and single particles (Yura paragraph 0011), wherein single particles exist independent of the primary and secondary particles (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura further discloses that the amount of the single particles in the particles is 40% or more (Yura paragraph 0055), overlapping the claimed range. The reference teaches that when the amount of single particles is too low, Li ion diffusion is hindered, reducing rate characteristics (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the particles as disclosed by Yura. Doing so would prevent a reduction in rate characteristics.
Regarding claim 41, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 22. Kawasato further discloses that the particles are composed of primary particles (paragraph 0013). Kawasato is silent with respect to secondary particles which are aggregates of the primary particles, and single particles that exist independently of the primary particles and the secondary particles, and wherein the amount of the single particles in the particles is 20% or more.
Yura discloses a lithium manganate positive electrode active material composed of primary particles, secondary particles formed by connections of primary particles, and single particles (Yura paragraph 0011), wherein single particles exist independent of the primary and secondary particles (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura further discloses that the amount of the single particles in the particles is 40% or more (Yura paragraph 0055), overlapping the claimed range. The reference teaches that when the amount of single particles is too low, Li ion diffusion is hindered, reducing rate characteristics (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the particles as disclosed by Yura. Doing so would prevent a reduction in rate characteristics.
Regarding claim 42, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 22. Kawasato further discloses an electrode comprising the positive electrode active material for an all-solidstate lithium-ion battery (paragraph 0015, lines 17-20).
Regarding claim 43, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 22. Kawasato further discloses a lithium-ion battery comprising a positive electrode and a negative electrode (paragraph 0015), and a current collector on which the positive electrode active material layer is laminated (paragraph 0097), and wherein the positive electrode active material layer contains the positive electrode active material for an all-solid-state lithium-ion battery (paragraph 0015, lines 17-20). Kawasato is silent regarding a solid electrolyte layer interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode, wherein the solid electrolyte layer contains a second solid electrolyte, wherein the positive electrode has a positive electrode active material layer in contact with the solid electrolyte layer.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses a solid electrolyte layer interposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1), wherein the solid electrolyte layer contains a second solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraph 0045, Li-La-Zr-O and LiPON), and wherein the positive electrode has a positive electrode active material layer in contact with the solid electrolyte layer (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1). The reference teaches that the solid electrolyte layer of the battery causes insulation between the positive and negative electrodes to be secured to prevent short-circuiting (Maeda paragraph 0018). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the solid electrolyte layer as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would insulate the battery and prevent short-circuiting.
Regarding claim 44, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 32. Kawasato is silent regarding the second solid electrolyte having an amorphous structure.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses an amorphous solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraph 0097, LiPON glass). The reference teaches that the LiPON solid electrolyte can insulate electrodes and prevent short circuiting (Maeda paragraph 0018). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the amorphous electrolyte as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would insulate electrodes and prevent short circuiting.
Regarding claim 45, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 32. Kawasato is silent regarding the all-solid-state lithium-ion battery containing an oxide-based solid electrolyte.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses that the battery contains an oxide-based solid electrolyte (Maeda paragraphs 0044-0045). The reference teaches that the oxide-based electrolyte containing Li, La, Zr, and O has excellent sintering properties and high ion conductivity (Maeda paragraph 0045). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to include the oxide-based electrolyte disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would provide an electrolyte with excellent sintering properties and high ion conductivity.
Claims 27 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasato (US 20150380737 A1) in view of Maeda et al. (US 20170373300 A1), Kim et al. (US 20110240913 A1), Yamamoto et al. (US 20150060725 A1), and Yura et al. (US 20110003205 A1) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Nakayama et al. (US 20160380263 A1).
Regarding claims 27 and 46, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 21. Kawasato further discloses that y≤0.30 are satisfied (paragraph 0014, lines 16-21, when y=0.3 or more). Kawasato does not explicitly disclose that 1-y-z-w>0.50 and wherein z=0 and M is at least one element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cu, Ti, Mg, W, B, Mo, Nb, Zn, Sn, Zr, Ga and V.
Nakayama discloses a positive electrode active material for a lithium secondary battery, comprising a lithium-containing composite metal oxide comprising secondary particles formed by aggregation of primary particles and with an XRD intensity ratio of 1.6 to 3 (Nakayama paragraphs 0012, 0054). Nakayama further discloses that the active material has a formula of Lia(NibCocM11-b-c)O2 wherein 0.9≦a≦1.2, 0.9≦b<1.0<c≦0.1, 0.9<b+c≦1, and M1 represents at least one optional metal selected from the group consisting of Mg, Al, Ca, Sc, Ti, V. Cr, Mn, Fe, Cu, Zn, Ga, Ge, Sr, Y, Zr, Nb, Mo, Tc, Ru, Rh, Pd, Ag, Cd, In and Sn (Nakayama paragraphs 0009-0010, Table 1, meeting the claimed limitations with for example, Example 2, LiNi0.9Co0.08Mg0.02O2, 1-y-z-w=0.9, z=0, M=Mg). The reference teaches that the positive active material produces a higher power output at high current rate (Nakayama paragraph 0020). Nakayama and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose positive electrode active materials characterized by peak intensity ratios.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the formula of Nakayama. Doing so would produce a higher power output at high current rate.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasato (US 20150380737 A1) in view of Maeda et al. (US 20170373300 A1), Kim et al. (US 20110240913 A1), Yamamoto et al. (US 20150060725 A1), and Yura et al. (US 20110003205 A1) as applied to claims 21-22 above, and further in view of Tamura et al. (US 20160056458 A1).
Regarding claim 24, modified Kawasato discloses the limitations of claim 21. Kawasato is silent regarding wherein M is at least one element selected from the group consisting of Ti, Fe, V, and W.
Tamura discloses a lithium composite oxide for a cathode active material with a controlled peak intensity ratio (I003/I104) of 1.18 to 1.35 (Tamura paragraphs 0003-0006, 0060). Tamura further discloses that the lithium-containing composite oxide has a formula of Liα1Nix1Mny1Coz1Mea1, wherein Me is selected from Mg, Ca, Al, Ti, V, Cr, Nb, Mo, W, and Zr (Tamura paragraph 0025). The reference teaches that the inclusion of Me, which may include Ti, V, or W, stabilizes the crystal structure (Tamura paragraphs 0025, 0065). Tamura and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium composite oxide active materials with controlled diffraction peak intensity ratios.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filig date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the element selected from Ti, V, or W, as disclosed by Tamura for the purpose of stabilizing the crystal structure.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawasato (US 20150380737 A1) in view of Maeda et al. (US 20170373300 A1), Kim et al. (US 20110240913 A1), Yamamoto et al. (US 20150060725 A1), Yura et al. (US 20110003205 A1), and Matsumoto et al. (US 20110200869 A1).
Regarding claim 37, Kawasato discloses a method of charging a lithium-ion battery (paragraphs 0001, 0162), wherein the positive electrode contains a positive electrode active material composed of particles containing crystals of a lithium metal composite oxide (paragraph 0014), and wherein the particles have a layered structure (paragraphs 0021-0022), and in powder x-ray diffraction measurement using CuKα rays, a ratio I003/I004 of an integrated intensity I104 of a diffraction peak in a range of 2θ=44.4+1° to an integrated intensity I003 of a diffraction peak in a range of 2θ=18.5+1° exceeds 1.23 (paragraphs 0031, 0014, lines 13-15, intensity ratio of 1.21-1.39, overlapping the claimed range), wherein the lithium metal composite oxide is represented by the following Composition Formula (A): Li[Lix(Ni(1-y-z-w)CoyMnzMw)1-x]O2 where, M is at least one element selected from the group consisting of Fe, Cu, Ti, Mg, Al, W, B, Mo, Nb, Zn, Sn, Zr, Ga and V, -0.10≤x≤0.30, 0<y≤0.40, 0≤z≤0.40, 0≤w≤0.10, and z+w>0 are satisfied (paragraphs 0014, formula 1, paragraph 0035, Li1.01Ni0.426Co0.297Mn0.267O2 satisfies the claimed formula), wherein a tap density B of the positive electrode active material is 0.8g/cm3 or more and 1.63g/cm3 or less (paragraph 0054, 1.3 to 3g/cm3, overlapping the claimed range). If the ranges overlap, then a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See also MPEP 2144.05. Kawasato further discloses that the electrolyte used may be a solid electrolyte (paragraph 0114). Kawasato does not explicitly disclose that the battery is an all-solid-state battery, wherein the positive electrode active material for a lithium-ion battery is in contact with a solid electrolyte layer, wherein a press density A of the positive electrode active material, when compressed at a pressure of 45 MPa, is 2.96 g/cm3 or more and 3.02 g/cm3 or less, wherein a ratio A/B of the press density A to the tap density B of the positive electrode active material is 1.85 or more, wherein the particles contain primary particles, secondary particles which are aggregates of the primary particles, and single particles that exist independently of the primary particles and the secondary particles, and wherein an average particle diameter of the secondary particles is 3.0 µm to 15 µm. Kawasato is also silent regarding applying a negative potential to the positive electrode and a positive potential to the negative electrode by an external power supply.
Maeda discloses an all-solid-state lithium battery (Maeda abstract) comprising a lithium cobaltate active material with a similar diffraction peak intensity ratio (Maeda paragraph 0092). Maeda further discloses that the positive electrode active material is in contact with a solid electrolyte layer (Maeda paragraph 0032, figure 1). The reference teaches that the all-solid-state battery ensures intrinsic safety, has a low risk of ignition, and prevents liquid leakage and corrosion (Maeda paragraph 0004). Maeda and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose batteries with transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to be all-solidstate with the positive electrode active material in contact with a solid electrolyte layer as disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would improve safety and prevent liquid leakage and corrosion.
disclosed by Maeda. Doing so would improve safety and prevent liquid leakage and corrosion.
Kim discloses a positive active material comprising a lithium nickel complex oxide (Kim paragraphs 0009-0010). Kim further discloses that the active material powders have a density after pressing of 2.5 to 4.5 g/cm3 and 1.5 to 4.5g/cm3 for the purpose of providing high-efficiency discharging properties (Kim paragraph 0039). The reference teaches that the densities are achieved by compressing at an appropriate temperature and the press density may be varied based on the kind and density of the electrode plate (Kim paragraphs 0039-0040). Kim is clearly teaching that the pressure is a results-effective variable that controls the press density and is varied according to the desired densities. Kim and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the density of Kim for the purpose of improving discharge properties. Furthermore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the claimed pressure because it has been held by the courts that optimization of a results effective variable is not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Yamamoto discloses positive electrode active material particles belonging to a space group of R-3m and C2/m comprising a compound in the form of a composite oxide comprising Li, Mn, at least one element selected from Si, Zr, and Y, and Co and/or Ni (Yamamoto paragraphs 0014-0019). Yamamoto further discloses that the tap density of the particles is 0.8 to 2.4 g/cm3 and the compressed density is 2.0 to 3.1 g/cm3 (Yamamoto paragraphs 0039-0040, resulting in an A/B ratio of for example, 2 to 3.1 g/cm3 when the tap density is 1 g/cm3. The reference teaches that densities in the disclosed ranges prevent deterioration of discharge capacity and rate characteristics (Yamamoto paragraphs 0039-0040). Yamamoto further teaches that the secondary particle diameter of the positive electrode active material is preferably 2 to 16µm to prevent deterioration in stability and charge/discharge characteristics (Yamamoto paragraph 0043). Yamamoto and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose similar composite oxide positive electrode active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the densities and secondary particle diameter disclosed by Yamamoto. Doing so would prevent deterioration of discharge capacity and rate characteristics.
Yura discloses a lithium manganate positive electrode active material composed of primary particles, secondary particles formed by connections of primary particles, and single particles (Yura paragraph 0011), wherein single particles exist independent of the primary and secondary particles (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura further discloses that the amount of the single particles in the particles is 40% or more (Yura paragraph 0055), overlapping the claimed range. The reference teaches that when the amount of single particles is too low, Li ion diffusion is hindered, reducing rate characteristics (Yura paragraph 0055). Yura and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium transition metal oxide active materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the active material disclosed by Kawasato to include the particles as disclosed by Yura. Doing so would prevent a reduction in rate characteristics.
Matsumoto discloses a method of charging a lithium secondary battery (Matsumoto paragraph 0009) comprising: applying a negative potential to the positive electrode and a positive potential to the negative electrode by an external power supply (Matsumoto paragraph 0032). The reference teaches that by using this charging method, electrical conductivity of the negative electrode plate can be significantly increased without deteriorating properties of the lithium secondary battery. Matsumoto and Kawasato are analogous because they both disclose lithium secondary batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Kawasato to be charged using the method disclosed by Matsumoto. Doing so would increase conductivity without deteriorating battery properties.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art fails to teach the claimed press density at the claimed pressure. However, Kim teaches press densities in the same range and teaches that the pressure is a results-effective variable, rendering the claim obvious (see claim 21 rejection).
Applicant asserts that the cited references do not disclose the claimed particles structures and diameters of amended claim 21. However, Yamamoto teaches a similar range of particle diameters and Yura discloses the claimed particle structures, rendering the limitations obvious (see claim 21 rejection).
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 BENJAMIN T LUSTGRAAF whose telephone number is (571)272-0165. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 6:00 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 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.
/B.T.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights