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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
8. Claim(s) 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US20230402597).
Regarding Claim 16, Kim discloses a positive electrode of a rechargeable lithium-ion battery comprising at least one lithium-ion battery cell, ([008], [009]), each lithium-ion battery cell including:
A current collector ([0075]), and
An electrochemical active layer disposed over the current collector ([0075]), the electrochemically active layer comprising a hybrid positive electrode active material comprising:
A first positive electrode active powder (second positive electrode material acts as first positive electrode active powder, [0050]); and
A second positive electrode active powder (first positive electrode material acts as second positive electrode material, [0047]), each particle of the second positive electrode active powder contacting a plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder ([0049], [0051]), wherein an average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is smaller than an average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder ([0047-0049]).
A negative electrode including a negative active material ([0083]); and
An electrolyte contacting the positive electrode and the negative electrode (electrolyte, [0080]).
Kim does not directly disclose wherein the first positive electrode active powder includes LaLiTiO3 particles and the second positive electrode active power includes lithium titanate oxide (LTO) particles.
However Kim discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be La, Li, Ti lithium metal oxide, second positive electrode material can be a lithium titanate oxide ([0036-0042], [0048]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the first positive electrode active powder includes LaLiTiO3 particles and the second positive electrode active power includes lithium titanate oxide (LTO) particles.
Regarding Claim 13 & 17, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from 10 nm to 1 um and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 ums.
Kim discloses wherein the first electrode positive active material can be in a range of 1 um to 8um ([0050]), which is overlapped by the instant claim range of 10 nm to 1 um. Kim further discloses wherein the second electrode positive material can be 10 um to 20 um, ([0047]), which overlaps the instant claim range.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from 10 nm to 1 um and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 ums.
Regarding Claim 3, 14 & 18, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder supports the plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder.
The examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, “of the second positive electrode active powder supports the plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder” can be interpreted to mean that the first and second particles are configured where the first particles are contacting the second particles to create the positive electrode active material layer.
Kim discloses wherein the two kinds of active material having different particle diameters are filled between each other to achieve the effect of improving energy density ([0049]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder supports the plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder.
Regarding Claim 4, 15 & 19, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder has a sufficient pore size to allow particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder.
Kim discloses wherein the positive active materials having a relatively small particle diameter are filled between the positive electrode active materials with a relatively larger particle diameter ([0049]). Kim teaches that the positive electrode expands and contracts ([0066]).
Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that since the first positive electrode active powders are filled in between the second positive electrode active powders that the first active materials fill the voids formed between the second active material powders. Furthermore, since the positive electrode active material expands, the first active materials would be embedded into the second active material powders when the second active material powders expand.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder has a sufficient pore size to allow particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US20230402597) in view of in view of Horikawa (US20210005887).
Regarding Claim 20, Kim discloses the imitations as set forth above.
Kim discloses wherein the first positive electrode active powder is composed of a high-power lithium de-intercalating/intercalating active material (positive electrode active material can be a lithium composite transition metal oxide, [0037-0041]) while the second positive electrode active powder is composed of a high energy active material (positive electrode active material can be a lithium composite transition metal oxide, that includes manganate, [0037-0041]).
Kim further does not directly disclose wherein the first positive electrode active material powder is composed of a high-power lithium manganate and electrochemically active material including nickel in an amount greater than 60 weight.
Kim discloses wherein the atomic ratio of nickel among the metals other than lithium in the transition metal oxide positive electrode active material can be 80% to 95% ([0041]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the second positive electrode active powder is composed of an electrochemically active material including nickel in an amount greater than 60 weight percent of the total weight of the second positive electrode active material.
Kim does not directly disclose wherein the second electrode active powder is composed of a perovskite material.
Horikawa teaches that lithium transition metal oxide can be interchanged with perovskite structures as positive electrode active materials ([0029]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim with the teachings of Horikawa to have wherein the second electrode active powder is composed of a perovskite material.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-10 & 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US20230402597) in view of Nanno (US20100040949).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a hybrid positive electrode material (positive electrode with first and second positive active material, [0048]) comprising:
A first positive electrode active powder (second positive electrode material acts as first positive electrode active powder, [0050]); and
A second positive electrode active powder (first positive electrode material acts as second positive electrode material, [0047]), each particle of the second positive electrode active powder contacting a plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder ([0049], [0051]), wherein an average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is smaller than an average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder ([0047-0049]).
Kim does not directly disclose wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from about 10 nm to about 0.808 micron and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 microns.
Nanno discloses a positive electrode active material with a large particle diameter and a small particle diameter ([0020]). Nanno further discloses wherein the large particle diameter can range from 1 to 20 um ([0020]), and the small particle diameter can range from 5 nm to 100 nm ([0020]).], which overlaps the instant claim range of wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from about 10 nm to about 0.808 micron and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 microns. Nanno further discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be a lithium transition metal oxide and wherein the large average particle size and small average particle size can be different materials ([0055]). Nanno teaches that this structure provides reduced friction between the active material particles ([007]).
Similarly, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties.").
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim with the teachings of Nanno to have wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from about 10 nm to about 0.808 micron and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 microns. This modification would yield the expected result of improved reduced friction between the active material particles.
Regarding Claim 5, Kim in view of Nanno discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses wherein the first positive electrode active material powder is intermixed with the second positive electrode active powder (positive active materials are filled between each other, [0049]).
Regarding Claim 7, Kim in view of Nanno discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses wherein the first positive electrode active powder is composed of a high-power lithium de-intercalating/intercalating active material while the second positive electrode active powder is composed of a high energy active material (positive electrode active material can be a lithium composite transition metal oxide, [0037-0041]).
Regarding Claim 8, Kim in view of Nanno discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim further discloses wherein the first electrode active powder is composed of a component selected from the group consisting of lithium manganate, doped lithium manganate, or nickel cobalt manganese ([0010], [0031], [0038]).
Regarding Claim 9, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein the second positive electrode active powder is composed of an electrochemically active material including nickel in an amount greater than 60 weight percent of the total weight of the second positive electrode active material.
Kim discloses wherein the atomic ratio of nickel among the metals other than lithium in the transition metal oxide positive electrode active material can be 80% to 95% ([0041]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the second positive electrode active powder is composed of an electrochemically active material including nickel in an amount greater than 60 weight percent of the total weight of the second positive electrode active material.
Regarding Claim 10, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein the second positive electrode powder includes a component selected from the group consisting of NCM, NCA, NCMA, and combinations thereof.
Kim discloses wherein the positive electrode active material is a lithium transition metal oxide wherein the metals used include nickel, cobalt, and manganese ([0030]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the second positive electrode powder includes a component selected from the group consisting of NCM, NCA, NCMA, and combinations thereof.
Regarding Claim 12, Kim discloses a positive electrode of a rechargeable lithium-ion battery ([008], [009]) comprising:
A current collector ([0075]), and
An electrochemical active layer disposed over the current collector ([0075]), the electrochemically active layer comprising a hybrid positive electrode active material comprising:
A first positive electrode active powder (second positive electrode material acts as first positive electrode active powder, [0050]); and
A second positive electrode active powder (first positive electrode material acts as second positive electrode material, [0047]), each particle of the second positive electrode active powder contacting a plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder ([0049], [0051]), wherein an average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is smaller than an average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder ([0047-0049]).
Kim does not directly disclose wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active material powder has a sufficient pore size to allow the particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder.
The examiner notes that claim 12 is directed to a positive electrode for a rechargeable battery which is a product, and the claim language “sufficient pore size to allow the particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder” is a product by process claim.
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted) (Claim was directed to a novolac color developer.
Nanno discloses a positive electrode active material with a large particle diameter and a small particle diameter ([0020]). Nanno further discloses wherein the large particle diameter can range from 1 to 20 um ([0020]), and the small particle diameter can range from 5 nm to 100 nm ([0020])], which overlaps the ranges provided in the instant specifications. Nanno further discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be a lithium transition metal oxide and wherein the large average particle size and small average particle size can be different materials ([0055]). Nanno further discloses wherein the volume of the particles is optimized so that the small particles can embed into the large particles ([0050]). Nanno teaches that this structure provides reduced friction between the active material particles ([007]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim with the teachings of Nanno to have wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active material powder has a sufficient pore size to allow the particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder. This modification would yield the expected result of improved reduced friction between the active material particles.
Regarding Claim 13, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from 10 nm to 1 um and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 ums.
Kim discloses wherein the first electrode positive active material can be in a range of 1 um to 8um ([0050]), which is overlapped by the instant claim range of 10 nm to 1 um. Kim further discloses wherein the second electrode positive material can be 10 um to 20 um, ([0047]), which overlaps the instant claim range.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the average particle size of the first positive electrode active powder is from 10 nm to 1 um and the average particle size of the second positive electrode active powder has an average particle size from about 1 to 20 ums.
Regarding Claim 3 & 14, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder supports the plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder.
The examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, “of the second positive electrode active powder supports the plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder” can be interpreted to mean that the first and second particles are configured where the first particles are contacting the second particles to create the positive electrode active material layer.
Kim discloses wherein the two kinds of active material having different particle diameters are filled between each other to achieve the effect of improving energy density ([0049]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder supports the plurality of particles of the first positive electrode active powder.
Regarding Claim 4 & 15, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not directly disclose wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder has a sufficient pore size to allow particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder.
Kim discloses wherein the positive active materials having a relatively small particle diameter are filled between the positive electrode active materials with a relatively larger particle diameter ([0049]). Kim teaches that the positive electrode expands and contracts ([0066]).
Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that since the first positive electrode active powders are filled in between the second positive electrode active powders that the first active materials fill the voids formed between the second active material powders. Furthermore, since the positive electrode active material expands, the first active materials would be embedded into the second active material powders when the second active material powders expand.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein each particle of the second positive electrode active powder has a sufficient pore size to allow particles of the first positive electrode active powder to embed therein upon swelling of the particles in the second positive electrode active powder.
Claim(s) 6 & 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US20230402597) in view of in view of Nanno (US20100040949) further in view of Horikawa (US20210005887).
Regarding Claim 6, Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kim does not disclose wherein a shell composed of the first positive electrode active powder is disposed over a core composed of the second positive electrode active powder.
Horikawa discloses a positive electrode active material formed from a core material ([0027], Fig. 1, positive electrode active material-12), with a coating material on the shell of the core material (coating material-16, [0027], Fig. 1). Horikawa discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be a lithium transition metal oxide ([0029]), and where the coating material can be a nickel oxide material ([0041-0042]). Horikawa teaches that this structure provides an electrode with improved low temperature output characteristics ([0014]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim with the teachings of Horikawa to have wherein a shell composed of the first positive electrode active powder is disposed over a core composed of the second positive electrode active powder. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved low temperature output characteristics
Regarding Claim 11 & 20, Kim discloses the imitations as set forth above.
Kim discloses wherein the first positive electrode active powder is composed of a high-power lithium de-intercalating/intercalating active material (positive electrode active material can be a lithium composite transition metal oxide, [0037-0041]) while the second positive electrode active powder is composed of a high energy active material (positive electrode active material can be a lithium composite transition metal oxide, that includes manganate, [0037-0041]).
Kim further does not directly disclose wherein the first positive electrode active material powder is composed of a high-power lithium manganate and electrochemically active material including nickel in an amount greater than 60 weight.
Kim discloses wherein the atomic ratio of nickel among the metals other than lithium in the transition metal oxide positive electrode active material can be 80% to 95% ([0041]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the second positive electrode active powder is composed of an electrochemically active material including nickel in an amount greater than 60 weight percent of the total weight of the second positive electrode active material.
Kim does not directly disclose wherein the second electrode active powder is composed of a perovskite material.
Horikawa teaches that lithium transition metal oxide can be interchanged with perovskite structures as positive electrode active materials ([0029]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim with the teachings of Horikawa to have wherein the second electrode active powder is composed of a perovskite material.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment, see Claims, filed August 29th, 2025, with respect to Claims 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112 Rejection of Claim 11 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments, see Claims, filed August 29th, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 & 12 under 35 USC 102 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 Kim in view of Nanno under 35 USC 103.
Applicant's arguments filed August 29th, 2025 regarding claim 16 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Kim does not disclose the limitation of the hybrid positive electrode with LaLiTiO3 and LTO. Applicant argues that Kim does not provide suggest a material pairing.
Kim does not directly disclose wherein the first positive electrode active powder includes LaLiTiO3 particles and the second positive electrode active power includes lithium titanate oxide (LTO) particles.
The examiner notes that the claim language only requires “wherein the first positive electrode active powder includes LaLiTiO3 particles and the second positive electrode active powder includes lithium titanate oxide (LTO) particles.”
However Kim discloses wherein the positive electrode active material can be La, Li, Ti lithium metal oxide and a second positive electrode material can be a lithium titanate oxide ([0036-0042], [0048]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kim to have wherein the first positive electrode active powder includes LaLiTiO3 particles and the second positive electrode active power includes lithium titanate oxide (LTO) particles.
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 ANKITH R SRIPATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 am - 5:00pm.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
/ANKITH R SRIPATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728