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
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 8/4/2026. Claims 1, 3-15, 17 are pending. Claims 5-15 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention, in accordance with 37 CFR 1.142(b). Claims 1 and 4 have been amended. Applicant’s arguments have been considered. Claims 1, 3, 4, 17 are finally rejected for reasons stated herein below.
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 1, 3, 4, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu (CN 109103438) in view of Lee (US 2013/0189583), as evidenced by Wang (US 2003/0157014).
Regarding claims 1, 17, Hu discloses a multi-component composite anode material, comprising a core and a shell covering surface of the core, wherein the core comprises graphite and a composite component embedded in the graphite, and the composite component comprises nano-silicon, and lithium titanate; and the shell comprises a second non-graphitic carbon material. The second non-graphitic carbon material is a pyrolytic carbon layer. See Abstract.
Hu discloses the second non-graphitic carbon material is a pyrolytic carbon made from pitch (page 4 of translation). It is noted that a pyrolytic carbon made from pitch is soft carbon. See Wang [0002]
Regarding claims 1, 17, Hu discloses second non-graphitic carbon material is soft carbon, but does not disclose the composite component comprises a first non-graphitic carbon material, the first non-graphitic carbon material is at least one of hard carbon, soft carbon, activated carbon and amorphous carbon. Regarding claim 4, Hu does not disclose in the multi-component composite anode material, the nano-silicon has a mass fraction of 5%-50%, the graphite has a mass fraction of 5%-70%, the lithium titanate has a mass fraction of 15%-60%, and the first non-graphitic carbon material and the second non-graphitic carbon material have a total mass fraction of 5%-30%; and/or
the first non-graphitic carbon material and the second non-graphitic carbon material are a same material; and/or
the first non-graphitic carbon material is amorphous carbon.
Lee teaches a nanoparticle coated with a carbon material. Hence, the conductivity of the anode active material is improved [0034]. The nanoparticle is silicon [0027]. Regarding claims 1, 4, the first non-graphitic carbon material is amorphous carbon [0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to coat the nanosilicon of Hu with amorphous carbon material, as taught by Lee, for the benefit of increasing the conductivity of Hu’s nanosilicon.
Regarding claim 1, 17, Hu discloses the lithium titanate, but does not disclose the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, and the nano-silicon is dispersed in the pores of the lithium titanate, and the first non- graphitic carbon material is filled in gaps between the nano-silicon and the lithium titanate, Lee teaches lithium titanate has a porous network structure, and the nano-silicon and the first non-graphitic carbon material are both located in pores of the lithium titanate [0023, 0027, 0034]. Lee teaches that silicon undergoes volumetric expansion during charge and discharge [0006]. Lee teaches a lithium titanate constituting a matrix has a high operating voltage of approximately 1.5 V with respect to lithium metal and a high thermal stability, and thus suppresses side reactions between metal nanoparticles and an electrolyte, whereby a lithium battery may have improved lifetime characteristic and thermal stability [0024]. The matrix particles may have a spinel structure. Due to the spinel structure of the matrix particles, a change in volume between lattices is suppressed during charging and discharging of the battery, and thus, a lithium battery including the composite anode active material may exhibit improved lifetime characteristics [0030].
Regarding claim 1, the lithium titanate has a pore size ranging from 30 nm to 200 nm, Lee teaches a method of preparing a composite anode active material includes mixing nanoparticles, a titanium-containing precursor, and a solvent to prepare a mixed solution; mixing the mixed solution and water to induce a reaction therebetween to obtain nanoparticles coated with a titanium compound; mixing the coated nanoparticles and a lithium-containing precursor and drying the mixture to prepare a dried mixture; and sintering the dried mixture to prepare lithium titanate matrix particles [0014]. As described above, the lithium titanate matrix is formed by mixing titanium-coated silicon nanoparticles with lithium source. Lee’s lithium titanate is formed as a matrix structure that is formed as a coating on the nanosilicon particles. Hence, Lee’s pore size is the same size as the particle size of the nanosilicon particles. Lee teaches that the nanosilicon particle diameter is between 10 nm to 100 nm.
Regarding claim 3, Lee teaches an overall multi-component composite anode material has a median particle size ranging from 0.4 um to 45 um [0030]; and/or
the nano-silicon has a median particle size ranging from 1 nm to 150 nm [0026].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to use a lithium titanate matrix with carbon-coated nanosilicon particles embedded therein, as taught by Lee, for the nanosilicon and lithium titanate of Hu for the benefit of suppressing a change in volume of silicon during charge and discharge.
Regarding claim 17, Hu modified by Lee teaches a lithium-ion battery, comprising a lithium-ion battery anode material, the lithium-ion battery anode material comprises a multi-component composite anode material, the multi-component composite anode material as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Arguments dated 8/4/2026 are addressed below:
Applicant asserts that claim 1 of the present invention explicitly recites a "core- shell" structure, wherein the core consists of graphite as a matrix with composite components embedded therein; whereas although Hu has a "core-shell structure," its inner core is directly constituted by nanosilicon, lithium titanate, and graphite freely distributed, without reflecting the hierarchical relationship of "graphite as a matrix with a composite component embedded therein." Lee completely lacks the concept of a "core-shell" structure, merely describing a dispersion relationship between matrix particles and nanoparticles. Page 8 of Arguments.
In response, the argument is not commensurate in scope with the claims. The claims do not recite a graphite “matrix”.
Applicant argues that Lee described that, the matrix particles have a spinel structure, which is a dense crystalline structure, fundamentally different from a porous network structure. (According to Lee's paragraph [0014], " a method of preparing a composite anode active material includes mixing nanoparticles, a titanium containing precursor, and a solvent to prepare a mixed solution; mixing the mixed solution and water to induce a reaction therebetween to obtain nanoparticles coated with a titanium compound; " and according to Lee's paragraph [0030] " Due to the spinel structure of the matrix particles, a change in volume between lattices is suppressed during charging and discharging of the battery,...", it can be concluded that Lee's lithium titanate is a dense crystalline structure (i.e., spinel structure) coated on the nanoparticles, which can also be corroborated by Figure 1 of Lee, and is different from the porous network structure of lithium titanate as claimed in the present invention.)
In response, the instant Specification states:
[0148] In the above-mentioned further preferred embodiment, the nano-silicon particles, lithium titanate and amorphous carbon are successfully embedded in the graphite material by combining mechanical grinding, mechanical fusion and carbon-coating technology, in which the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, the nano-silicon particles are dispersed in its pores, while the amorphous carbon matrix fills in the gaps between the nano-silicon and lithium titanate. (emphasis added)
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s pores are not void spaces, but are actually filled with silicon particles and amorphous carbon.
Lee teaches a method of preparing a composite anode active material includes mixing nanoparticles, a titanium-containing precursor, and a solvent to prepare a mixed solution; mixing the mixed solution and water to induce a reaction therebetween to obtain nanoparticles coated with a titanium compound; mixing the coated nanoparticles and a lithium-containing precursor and drying the mixture to prepare a dried mixture; and sintering the dried mixture to prepare lithium titanate matrix particles [0014]. As described above, the lithium titanate matrix is formed by mixing titanium-coated silicon nanoparticles with lithium source. Lee’s lithium titanate is formed as a matrix structure that is formed as a coating on the nanosilicon particles. Hence, Lee’s pore size is the same size as the particle size of the nanosilicon particles. Lee teaches that the nanosilicon particle diameter is between 10 nm to 100 nm.
Applicant argues Lee states in paragraph [0023]: "The composite anode active material includes matrix particles including lithium titanate; and at least one nanoparticle dispersed in the matrix particles."
Moreover, Lee explicitly states in paragraph [0030]: "The matrix particles may have a major axis length of 10 µm or less. For example, the major axis length of the matrix particles may range from about 100 nm to about 10 µm. The matrix particles may have a spinel structure. Due to the spinel structure of the matrix particles,.."
Crucially, "spinel structure" is a crystallographic arrangement of atoms, not a macroscopic porous structure. As confirmed by materials science literature:
A spinel structure (e.g., Li4T15O12) is a dense, crystalline lattice with no
inherent porosity.
A "porous network structure" refers to a macroscopic framework with
interconnected voids or channels, distinct from atomic-scale crystal
structures.
Lee's Figure 1, reproduced above, visually confirms this:
The matrix particles (12) are shown as continuous solid entities with no
visible pores or voids.
Nanoparticles (11) are embedded within the solid matrix, not distributed in
pores. Page 11 of Arguments.
In response, the Examiner notes that the presence of Lee’s lithium titanate crystal structure does not preclude the lithium titanate particles from having pores. Crystal structure refers to a microscopic characteristic, and pores refer to a macroscopic characteristic, and are hence, two separate entities.
Further, contrary to Applicant’s assertion of Lee’s figure 1, the Examiner notes that Lee’s figure 1 supports that silicon nanoparticles are embedded in the pores of lithium titanate.
The Examiner reiterates that the instant Specification states:
[0148] In the above-mentioned further preferred embodiment, the nano-silicon particles, lithium titanate and amorphous carbon are successfully embedded in the graphite material by combining mechanical grinding, mechanical fusion and carbon-coating technology, in which the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, the nano-silicon particles are dispersed in its pores, while the amorphous carbon matrix fills in the gaps between the nano-silicon and lithium titanate. (emphasis added)
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s pores are not void spaces, but are actually filled with silicon particles and amorphous carbon.
Second, there is a misinterpretation of "the nano-silicon is dispersed in the pores of the lithium titanate"
Lee states in paragraph [0023]: "The composite anode active material includes matrix particles including lithium titanate; and at least one nanoparticle dispersed in the matrix particles."
Lee describes "nanoparticles dispersed in matrix particles, "not" dispersed in pores of lithium titanate".
"Dispersed in the matrix particles" means the nanoparticles are encapsulated inside a solid matrix, whereas "located in pores of the lithium titanate" requires that the lithium titanate itself has a porous structure. These two concepts are fundamentally different:
Regarding "dispersed in matrix particles," the matrix is a solid entity, and the nanoparticles are embedded therein, like small particles in glass beads.
Regarding, "located in pores," the matrix must have a pore channel structure, and the nanoparticles fill the pore channels.
Since Lee's matrix is a dense spinel structure with no pore channels, "nanoparticles dispersed in matrix particles" cannot be equated with "located in pores of lithium titanate".
A correct understanding is that the phrase "nanosilicon dispersed in the pores of lithium titanate" in the claimed invention specifically refers to the structure where nanosilicon embeds into the pore channels after lithium titanate forms a porous skeleton, and carbon material fills the gaps. This structure requires that lithium titanate itself has controllable pores, and the pore size matches the nanosilicon size. None of the prior art documents disclosed such a structure, let alone teach how to achieve it. Accordingly, even if the references were combined, that which is claimed would not result. Page 11-12 of Arguments.
In response, the Examiner notes that the presence of Lee’s lithium titanate crystal structure does not preclude the lithium titanate particles from having pores. Crystal structure refers to a microscopic characteristic, and pores refer to a macroscopic characteristic, and are hence, two separate entities.
Further, contrary to Applicant’s assertion of Lee’s figure 1, the Examiner notes that Lee’s figure 1 supports that silicon nanoparticles are embedded in the pores of lithium titanate.
Although Applicant argues that "Dispersed in the matrix particles" means the nanoparticles are encapsulated inside a solid matrix, whereas "located in pores of the lithium titanate" requires that the lithium titanate itself has a porous structure, and that these two concepts are fundamentally different, the Examiner notes that the claim limitation "the nano-silicon is dispersed in the pores of the lithium titanate" cannot be limited to Applicant’s narrow definition. The Examiner reiterates that the instant Specification states:
[0148] In the above-mentioned further preferred embodiment, the nano-silicon particles, lithium titanate and amorphous carbon are successfully embedded in the graphite material by combining mechanical grinding, mechanical fusion and carbon-coating technology, in which the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, the nano-silicon particles are dispersed in its pores, while the amorphous carbon matrix fills in the gaps between the nano-silicon and lithium titanate. (emphasis added)
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s pores are not void spaces, but are actually filled with silicon particles and amorphous carbon.
The instant Specification has not provided its own definition of “matrix” or “pores”, and hence the limitation “the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, and the nano-silicon is dispersed in the pores of the lithium titanate” is met by Lee’s lithium titanate matrix embedded with nanosilicon particles.
The Examiner notes that the claims do not require pore channels, nor controllable pores. Hence, the claim limitation of “matrix” and “pores” have been met.
Applicant asserts there is a special structure of "dispersed in pores of lithium titanate" in the claimed invention. Also, paragraph [0015] of the present application clearly states: "In the composite component, the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, nanosilicon is dispersed in the pores of the lithium titanate, and the first non-graphitic carbon material fills the gaps between the nanosilicon and the lithium titanate."
This structure requires that lithium titanate first forms a porous skeleton, then nanosilicon enters the pores, and carbon material fills the gaps. This is a "skeleton-filling" structure, and is completely different from Lee's "nanoparticles embedded in a solid matrix" structure. Embodiment 1 and paragraphs [0025]-[0030] of the application detail the formation mechanism of this structure: hydrolyzing a titanium source on the surface of nanosilicon to form TiO2, then reacting with a lithium source to generate lithium titanate with a porous structure, allowing nanosilicon to embed in the pores. Page 12 of Arguments.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that the claims are not limited to Applicant’s narrow interpretation of Applicant’s claim language. See Examiner’s arguments above.
Applicant asserts there is a misinterpretation of "the lithium titanate has a pore size ranging from 30 nm to 200 nm" in Lee's document. The Office Action states: " Lee's pore size is the same size as the particle size of the nanosilicon particles. Lee teaches that the nanosilicon particle diameter is between 10 nm to 100 nm."
This is erroneous for two reasons. First, Lee never uses the term "pore size" or defines pore size. Lee at paragraph [0026] describes nanoparticle diameters: "The nanoparticles may have an average diameter of less than 300 nm... from about 1 to about 300 nm." This refers exclusively to the size of the silicon nanoparticles themselves, not any "pores" in lithium titanate. Second, Lee's process does not generate a porous structure. Lee's method (see, e.g., claim 12) involves mixing nanoparticles + titanium precursor + solvent, then a water reaction, then lithium
precursor addition, and then sintering. This produces solid matrix particles (e.g., spherical, rod-shaped), not a porous framework.
Therefore, the concept of "pore size" is entirely absent from Lee's document. The contention that Lee discloses "pore size of lithium titanate ranging from 30 nm to 200 nm" is factually incorrect. Pge 13 of Arguments.
In response, the Examiner reiterates that the instant Specification states:
[0148] In the above-mentioned further preferred embodiment, the nano-silicon particles, lithium titanate and amorphous carbon are successfully embedded in the graphite material by combining mechanical grinding, mechanical fusion and carbon-coating technology, in which the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, the nano-silicon particles are dispersed in its pores, while the amorphous carbon matrix fills in the gaps between the nano-silicon and lithium titanate. (emphasis added)
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s pores are not void spaces, but are actually filled with silicon particles and amorphous carbon that fills the gaps.
Hence, Applicant’s pore size is the size of carbon-coated nanosilicon particles.
Applicant asserts there is a misinterpretation of the "First Non-Graphitic Carbon Material." Lee teaches a nanoparticle coated with a carbon material. Hence, the conductivity of the anode active material is improved [0034]. The nanoparticle is silicon [0027]. Regarding claim 4, the first non-graphitic carbon material is amorphous carbon [0035]."
But Lee's carbon material is "coated on the surface of nanoparticles or matrix," not "filled in gaps." Lee discloses in paragraph [0034] that: "The composite anode active material may further include a carbonaceous material. The carbonaceous material may be partially or entirely formed on a surface of the nanoparticle. The carbonaceous material may also be partially or entirely formed on surfaces of the matrix particles."
This indicates that the carbon material exists as a surface coating, rather than being filled in the "gaps" between nanosilicon and lithium titanate.
In the present application, the "first non-graphitic carbon material" specifically refers to filling the interior gaps between "nanosilicon and lithium titanate" ([0009]: "the first non-graphitic carbon material is filled in the gaps"), which is an internal filling structure, fundamentally different from a surface coating.
The function of the carbon material in the claimed invention differs from that of Lee. As described in the application at paragraph [0008]: "The first non-graphitic carbon material fills the gaps to form a conductive network and improve ion and electron transport rates." This structure requires the carbon material to be uniformly distributed in the interfacial gaps between nanosilicon and lithium titanate to form a three-dimensional conductive network.
Lee's carbon material is merely a surface coating and cannot achieve the function of "gap filling." In the preparation method of Lee, the carbon material is mixed with nanoparticles or the matrix and then coated as a whole, without the structure of "gap filling."
It may be surmised that the examination opinion confuses the application location of "carbon material." The Office Action equates the "carbonaceous material" in Lee with the "first non-graphitic carbon material" of the claims present invention, but these two are completely different in structure and function. In Lee, the carbon material as a surface coating to improve conductivity. In the claims, carbon material as an internal filler to fill the gaps between nanosilicon and lithium titanate, while suppressing expansion and forming a conductive network. Page 14 of Arguments.
In response, the Examiner notes that the claims do not require “the carbon material to be uniformly distributed in the interfacial gaps between nanosilicon and lithium titanate to form a three-dimensional conductive network.”
The Examiner reiterates that the instant Specification states:
[0148] In the above-mentioned further preferred embodiment, the nano-silicon particles, lithium titanate and amorphous carbon are successfully embedded in the graphite material by combining mechanical grinding, mechanical fusion and carbon-coating technology, in which the lithium titanate has a porous network structure, the nano-silicon particles are dispersed in its pores, while the amorphous carbon matrix fills in the gaps between the nano-silicon and lithium titanate. (emphasis added)
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s pores are not void spaces, but are actually filled with silicon particles and amorphous carbon that fills the gaps.
Lee teaches a method of preparing a composite anode active material includes mixing nanoparticles, a titanium-containing precursor, and a solvent to prepare a mixed solution; mixing the mixed solution and water to induce a reaction therebetween to obtain nanoparticles coated with a titanium compound; mixing the coated nanoparticles and a lithium-containing precursor and drying the mixture to prepare a dried mixture; and sintering the dried mixture to prepare lithium titanate matrix particles [0014]. As described above, the lithium titanate matrix is formed by mixing titanium-coated silicon nanoparticles with lithium source. Lee’s lithium titanate is formed as a matrix structure that is formed as a coating on the nanosilicon particles. Hence, Lee’s pore size is the same size as the particle size of the nanosilicon particles, the carbon-coating would be filled between the lithium titanate and the nanosilicon particles.
Applicant argues compared with the related art, the present disclosure has beneficial effects: For instance, the multi-component composite anode material provided by the present disclosure successfully combines the advantages of the nano-silicon, lithium titanate and the embedding structure. There is a synergistic effect among the various components. The graphite substrate material plays a role of inhibiting the volumetric expansion of the embedded material and stabilizing the structure of the material. Nano-silicon improves the specific capacity of the material. Lithium titanate having a porous network structure can serve as a skeleton support to buffer the volumetric expansion of silicon and further stabilizes the structure of the material, preventing the agglomeration of nano-silicon particles during the process of charging and discharging. The amorphous carbon matrix forms a conductive network among the graphitic layers, which can improve not only the bonding strength between the graphitic layers, but also the ion and electron transmission rate of the material. The carbon coating layer on the surface only effectively prevents the electrolyte from penetrating into the core to reduce the formation of SEI film, but also inhibits the volumetric expansion of the core material. Page 16 of Arguments.
In response, the Examiner notes that the synergistic effect among the various components of composite component are met by Hu modified by Lee.
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 CYNTHIA KYUNG SOO WALLS whose telephone number is (571)272-8699. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F until 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Leong can be reached at 571-270-1292. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CYNTHIA K WALLS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
