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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 2-6, filed 21 October 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-19 under Kang 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Kang (KR 101593401) in view of Cai (CN 109336192 A) and in further view of Oshita (US 20170305757 A1).
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.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (KR 101593401) in view of Cai (CN 109336192 A) in further view of Oshita (US 20170305757 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kang discloses a cathode active material for a lithium battery having a porous
structure and a method of producing the same ([0001]). Kang discloses a step of introducing
reaction solution containing the metal salt mixed aqueous solution, a complex ion forming agent, and a
crystal formation controlling agent into a reactor ([0029]). Kang discloses pores existing between
primary particles may be formed radially based on the center of the secondary particles ([0049]). Kang discloses an SEM image of a cross-section of an active material for a lithium secondary battery ([0045], Fig. 1). Kang discloses a metal composite hydroxide represented by Chemical Formula #2, Ni1-x-y-
zCoxMnyMz(OH)2+α, wherein, M is one or more Metals selected from Mg, Al, Ti, Zr, Mo, W, Y, Sr, V, Ca,
and Nb, and x is 0≤x≤0.8 (0<y1<0.3), y is 0≤y≤0.5 (0<z1<0.3), z is 0<z≤0.05 (0.01≤s1≤0.1), and 0≤α≤0.5 ([0119]-[0123]).
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of the chemical formula shown in
the table below, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges for the same parameters. Absent any
additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re
Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Claim 1
Kang Formula #2
Nix1Coy1Mnz1Als1(OH)2
Subscript Range
Ni1-x-y-zCoxMnyMz(OH)2+α
Subscript Range
Co
0 < y1 < 0.3
Co
0 ≤ x ≤ 0.8
Mn
0 < z1 < 0.3
Mn
0 ≤ y ≤ 0.5
Al
0.01 ≤ s1 ≤ 0.1
M (Mg, Al, Ti, Zr, Mo, W, Y,
Sr V, Ca, and Nb)
0 < z ≤ 0.05
Ni
0.7 ≤ x1 ≤ 0.99
Ni
1-x-y-z
However, Kang is silent upon wherein the precursor comprises crystallines in which major axes of the primary particles are arranged in a direction from a center of the secondary particle toward a surface thereof and a (001) plane of the primary particle is arranged parallel to the major axis of the primary particle.
Kang discloses that the precursor is made by preparing a metal complex compound, a metal salt compound including each metal can be dissolved in water by adjust the ratio of the metal element to prepare a metal salt mixed aqueous solution ([0079]). Kang discloses the pH of the reaction solution can be controlled by adjusting the amount of aqueous solution supplied ([0080]) and can be maintained a predetermined pH value ([0081]). Kang discloses that the metal salt compound be water-soluble ([0084]). Kang discloses “the above metal salt compound, inorganic acid salts and the like can be specifically mentioned, and specifically, nitrates, sulfates, hydrochlorides, etc. can be mentioned, but are not limited thereto. These inorganic acid salts may be used alone, or two or more types may be used in combination. According to a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the metal salt compound may include nickel sulfate, cobalt sulfate, and manganese sulfate.” ([0085]). Kang discloses the pH adjuster may “include, but are not limited to, alkaline aqueous solutions such as aqueous solutions of alkali metal hydroxides such as sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide.” ([0094]). Kang discloses that the additive elements either “can be uniformly dispersed inside the composite hydroxide particles” ([0097]) or can coat “the surface of a composite hydroxide particle with an additive element.” ([0098]). In the instance of uniform dispersion, “a compound having the additive element, preferably a compound having a water-soluble additive element, may be added to the mixed aqueous solution.” ([0097]). “Examples of compounds containing the above-mentioned additive elements include, but are not limited to, magnesium sulfate, aluminum sulfate, sodium aluminate, titanium sulfate, ammonium peroxotitanate, potassium titanium oxalate, vanadium sulfate, ammonium vanadate, chromium sulfate, potassium chromate, manganese sulfate, zirconium sulfate, zirconium nitrate, niobium oxalate, ammonium molybdate, sodium tungstate, and ammonium tungstate.” ([0096]). Kang discloses “As the above device, a reactor used for manufacturing a secondary battery cathode active material using a co-precipitation reaction can be used, and for example, a continuous reactor (CSTR, Continuous Stirring Tank Reactor) or a batch type reactor (Batch Type Tank Reactor) can be used.” ([0111]). Kang discloses “The metal complex hydroxide production reaction according to the present invention is preferably carried out by stirring the materials in the reactor at a speed of 10 to 1000 rpm, and the reaction time is preferably 3 to 24 hours, preferably 5 to 12 hours, and the materials are allowed to remain in the reactor.” ([0112]). Kang discloses in example 1 ([0142]-[0145]) “A 2.5M aqueous metal sulfate solution containing nickel sulfate, cobalt sulfate, and manganese sulfate in a molar ratio of 0.33: 0.33: 0.33, and 25% sodium hydroxide and 10% ammonia water were prepared” and sent to “A 4L continuous overflow reactor (CSTR) was filled with water and stirred at a stirring speed of 700 rpm, the internal temperature was set (30-50°C), and nitrogen gas was injected into the reactor to adjust it to an inert atmosphere.”
Applicant’s example 1 feeds aqueous solution of aluminum nitrate to the reactor which produces the instantly claimed precursor having “crystallines in which major axes of the primary particles are arranged in a direction from a center of the secondary particle toward a surface thereof and a (001) plane of the primary particle is arranged parallel to the major axis of the primary particle.” Applicant’s comparative example 1 uses aluminum sulfate instead and comparative example 2 adds the aluminum via alumina during sintering; each of the comparative examples lack benefit of the instantly claimed crystalline structure.
To summarize, Kang’s example 1 is substantially the same as Applicant’s example 1, except Kang is silent on the additive addition to the aqueous solution of the reactor. However, as disclosed, one of ordinary skill could pick the dispersed additive from the two options above ([0097]-[0098]) in Kang and therefore would then add an additive from the list disclosed in [0096], such as aluminum sulfate. Kang also discloses that other metal salts are possible (not limited to).
Cai pertains to NCM cathode precursors ([0002]) and is therefore in the same field of endeavor as Kang. Cai discloses making cathode precursor (steps 1-7, [0018]-[0025]) in a similar way as Kang and the Applicant do. Cai discloses adding aluminum metal salt to the aqueous solution (step 1) as “one or a mixture of more than one of aluminum sulfate, aluminum chloride, aluminum nitrate, aluminum acetate, or sodium aluminate.” ([0031]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the aluminum sulfate of Kang with the aluminum nitrate because the substituted components were known, their functions were known in the art, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one known component for another. Furthermore, there is evidence that the results of this substitution would have been predictable as Kang teaches that “it is desirable that the metal salt compound be water-soluble” ([0084]) and that Oshita (in the field of producing composite nickel hydroxides, Title) teaches away from aluminum sulfate, as “[W]hen another compound such as aluminum sulfate is used, aluminum hydroxide precipitates at a lower pH than nickel hydroxide or cobalt hydroxide, and is therefore likely to precipitate singly, which makes it impossible to obtain a nickel composite hydroxide having a narrow particle size distribution.” ([0086]). See MPEP 2143 I (B). Even though the prior art is silent on the crystalline properties shown by Applicant, given the prior art as a whole, one of ordinary skill in the art would have chosen a source other than aluminum sulfate for the reasons stated above in Kang and Oshita. Therefore, with the prior art combination of Kang in view of Cai and Oshita teaches substantially the same process as Applicant, the instantly claimed characteristics would necessarily be there. See MPEP 2112 I-V.
In regards to claim(s) 2-3, with the prior art combination teaching substantially the same process, the aspect ratios would necessarily be there. See MPEP 2112 I-V.
In regards to claim(s) 4, the examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of the chemical formula shown in the table above, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges for the same parameters. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
In regards to claim(s) 5-6, Kang discloses uniform distribution of Al ([0097]).
Regarding Claim 7, Kang teaches the average particle diameter of the metal composite hydroxide particles is about 2 to 21 µm ([0127]). The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range particle size 2 to 21 µm, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges of 3 µm to 20 µm of claim 7. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
In regards to claim(s) 8, Kang in view of Cai and Oshita discloses the method of adding a metal-containing solution containing ions of Ni, Co, Mn and Al to a reactor and performing a co-precipitation reaction while adding a basic aqueous solution and an ammonium solution (Example 1, Kang). However, the prior art combination discloses having all 4 cations together in one solution, and is therefore silent on having 2 separate feed lines for solution A (Ni, Co, Mn) and solution B (Al). Given that the sulfate precursors of Ni, Co and Mn are used throughout the above prior art (while other anions are presented as well, including nitrate) and that Oshita teaches away from aluminum sulfate for issues with precipitation and Kang teaches water solubility, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to keep sulfate ions of Ni, Co and Mn separate from aluminum (nitrate, or others) until placed in the reactor with the bases that start the co-precipitation reaction, especially since the prior art typically discloses multiple solutions being fed (Kang: metal solution, ammonium solution, base solution). Furthermore, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the streams separately. See MPEP 2144.04 V C.
Regarding Claim 9, Kang teaches it may be desirable to adjust the pH at the temperature of the
reaction solution to 10 to 13 (pH range of 10.5 to 12.2) by adding a pH regulator ([0103]). The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of pH of a reaction solution of 10 to 13, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges of 10.5 to 12.2 of claim 9. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding Claim 10, Kang teaches maintaining the temperature of the reaction solution of the
reaction tank at 30°C to 80°C while conducting the reaction ([0103]). The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of reaction temperature range of 30°C to 80°C, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges of 45°C to 65°C of claim 10. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
In regards to claim(s) 11, Kang in view of Cai and Oshita discloses aluminum nitrate.
Regarding Claim 12, Kang teaches the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery
according to the present invention can be obtained by optimizing precursor manufacturing processes of
the cathode active material, and by appropriately controlling the specific surface area and shape of
particles through the precursor process and the sintering process, a method for manufacturing a porous cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery having a high specific surface area can be
provided ([0067]).
Regarding Claim 13, Kang in view of Cai and Oshita teaches a cathode active material for a lithium battery having a porous structure and a method of producing the same ([0001]). Kang also teaches a step of introducing reaction solution containing the metal salt mixed aqueous solution, a complex ion forming agent, and a crystal formation controlling agent into a reactor ([0029]).
Kang also teaches a metal composite hydroxide represented by Chemical Formula #1, LipNi1-x-y-zCoxMnyMzO2. Wherein, M (M1) is one or more Metals selected from Mg, Al, Ti, Zr, Mo, W, Y,
Sr, V, Ca, and Nb, p is 0.90≤p≤1.2, x is 0≤x≤0.8, y is 0≤y≤0.5, and z is 0<z≤0.05 ([0019]-[0024]).
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of the chemical formula shown in
the table below, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges for the same parameters. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re
Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Claim 13
Kang Formula #1
Lia(NibCocMndAle)1-fM1fO2
Subscript Range
LipNi1-x-y-zCoxMnyMzO2
Subscript Range
Li
0.8 ≤ a ≤ 1.2
Li
0.90 ≤ p ≤ 1.2
Co
0 < c < 0.3
Co
0 ≤ x ≤ 0.8
Mn
0 < d < 0.3
Mn
0 ≤ y ≤ 0.5
Al
0.01 ≤ e < 0.1
M (Mg, Al, Ti, Zr, Mo, W,
Y, Sr V, Ca, and Nb)
0 < z ≤ 0.05
M1
0 ≤ f ≤ 0.1
M (Mg, Al, Ti, Zr, Mo, W,
Y, Sr, V, Ca, and Nb)
0 < z ≤ 0.05
Ni
0.7 ≤ b ≤ 0.99
Ni
1-x-y-z
In regards to comprising crystallines in which major axes of the primary particles are arranged in a direction from a center of the secondary particle toward a surface thereof and a (003) plane of the primary particle is arranged parallel to the major axis of the primary particle, the same applies as stated above for claim 1, especially since the sintering process is also substantially similar. See MPEP 2112 I-V.
In regards to claim(s) 14, with the prior art combination teaching substantially the same process, the aspect ratios would necessarily be there. See MPEP 2112 I-V.
In regards to claim(s) 15, the examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of the chemical formula shown in the table above, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges for the same parameters. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
In regards to claim(s) 16, Kang discloses uniform distribution of Al ([0097]).
Regarding Claim 17, Kang teaches the average particle diameter of the metal composite hydroxide particles is about 2 to 21 µm ([0127]). The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range particle size 2 to 21 µm, overlap or encompass the claimed ranges of 3 µm to 20 µm of claim 17. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325,1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding Claims 18 and 19, Kang teaches a porous cathode active material for a lithium battery ([0001]).
Other Applications/Patents
It is noted that Application 17773202 contains primary particle comprises crystallines in which a (001) plane is arranged in a direction of 20° to 160° with respect to a major axis direction instead of the instantly claimed parallel.
Lee (US 12170367 B2) is drawn to co-precipitation in a batch-type reactor (claim 1).
Lee (US 12100837 B2) is drawn to co-precipitation of NCM precursor with specific reaction conditions (claim 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-8760. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Srilakshmi Kumar can be reached at (571)272-7769. 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.
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752