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 Status
This Office action is in response to the amendments filed on 4/9/2026.
Claims 1 and 9-12 have been amended.
Claim 2 has been cancelled.
Claims 1 and 3-12 are currently pending.
Response to Amendment
In light of the amendment to claim 8, the rejection to the claims under §112(a) is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The examiner acknowledges the applicant narrowing the claimed range used in arguments 5 and 6. However, without a showing of some specific criticality it would still be obvious over the prior art.
With regard to the applicant’s argument of improperly mapping the claims with respect to SASAKI in argument 1 and the allegation that Sasaki Fails to Disclose or Suggest a Dual Solid-Electrolyte Positive Electrode in argument 2, the applicant makes arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking the references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Argument 4 alleges that SASAKI does not provide a motivation to combine. SASAKI is the primary reference for the 103 rejection so that a motivation or reason to combine is not needed from SASAKI for a prima facia case of obviousness.
The allegation that NOGAMI teaches away from a combination of solid electrolytes in the positive active material in argument 3, is a mischaracterization of NOGAMI [col 8 lines 41-60]. NOGAMI is recommending the use of the same (two or more as, disclosed by SASAKI) electrolytes that are in the active materiel layer (1) also be found in the electrolyte layer (2a) and does not teach away from the use of two electrolytes in the active material layer itself.
As for argument 5 that the claimed ratio is not taught or suggested by the prior art, the office disagrees. As explained in detail in the rejection below SASAKI does not directly disclose a proportion x of a volume of the second solid electrolyte to a sum of a volume of the first solid electrolyte and the volume of the second solid electrolyte satisfies 35.2 ≤ x ≤ 76.5 in percentage. SASAKI [0198] discloses 80g of the first solid electrolyte and 80g of the second solid electrolyte. While the inventive example does not use a sulfide SASAKI [0137] envisions its use. It is reasonable to assume that the similar densities would have the volume fall within the wide range claimed where x is between 35.2 to 76.5.
Examiner is not clear as to what the applicant is arguing at the top of page 5 of the remarks where the applicant states “The Office Action appears to equate Sasaki's "cathode active material" described in paragraph [0135] with the claimed first solid electrolyte. However, this interpretation is not reasonable.” The applicant is not claiming a solid electrolyte, the applicant is claiming as per claim 1 of the instant application “A positive electrode material comprising…” When referencing the instant specification, the disclosure is directed towards a positive electrode material that comprises a first and second solid electrolyte particle incorporated into the positive electrode along with the positive electrode active material. This is also what SASAKI discloses in the reference.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites the limitation “are each in the shape of a particle”, the specification defines the shape of a particle as “In the present disclosure, the term "the shape of a particle" includes the shapes of a needle, a flake, a sphere, and an elliptical sphere.” In essence the specification is defining the shape of a particle to be any shape. This definition adds no defining limitation to the claim making it unclear and open to interpretation. For examination purposes the claim will be interpreted as “the first solid electrolyte and the second solid electrolyte can have any shape.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 3-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2019146217 provided in the IDS dated 10/16/2024 with US 20200350624 A1, SASAKI et al. used as an English translation in view of US 10038192 B2, NOGAMI et al.
Regarding claim 1. SASAKI discloses a positive electrode [0008] material, which is referred to as a cathode comprising:
a positive electrode active material [0134] disclosed as a cathode active material configured to occlude and release metal ions;
a first solid electrolyte [0036] a halide solid electrolyte for its high conductivity and [0134] where the cathode 201 includes a cathode active material and an electrolyte material.
SASAKI does not explicitly disclose mixing two electrolyte particles in the positive active material layer even though they disclose both halides and sulfides can be used
NOGAMI [title] discloses a Solid-state Battery where
NOGAMI [col 8 lines 41-60] disclose a solid electrolyte including a sulfide solid electrolyte, wherein the “sulfide solid electrolytes are preferable. In particular, it is preferable that the same sulfide solid electrolyte be contained in the positive-electrode layer 1 and the first solid electrolyte layer 2a. This is because, if layers containing solid electrolytes with different compositions are in contact with each other, it is highly possible that constituent elements of the solid electrolytes diffuse in the respective layers, which may result in a decrease in lithium ion conductivity. Since the sulfide solid electrolyte is comparatively soft, it can form a good interface even with a transition metal oxide positive-electrode active material that is hard.”
[0135] the first solid electrolyte and the second solid electrolyte are configured to conduct the metal ions
the first solid electrolyte and the second solid electrolyte are each in the shape of a particle [0144].
SASAKI does not directly disclose a proportion x of a volume of the second solid electrolyte to a sum of a volume of the first solid electrolyte and the volume of the second solid electrolyte satisfies 35.2 ≤ x ≤ 76.5 in percentage.
SASAKI [0198] discloses 80g of the first solid electrolyte and 80g of the second solid electrolyte. While the inventive example does not use a sulfide SASAKI [0137] envisions its use. It is reasonable to assume that the similar densities would have the volume fall within the wide range claimed where x is between 35.2 to 76.5.
When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § § 2112- 2112.02.
SASAKI does not explicitly disclose the properties as claimed in the instant application, however because of the fact that the range of quantities to make the samples are similar it would be reasonable to conclude that the properties of the cell would also be the same.
SASAKI discloses the positive electrode active material [0134], the first solid electrolyte [0135] (such as a transition metal sulfide), and the second solid electrolyte [0139-0140] are mixed with each other in the positive electrode material [0140] “a lithium salt, one lithium salt selected therefrom may be used alone. Alternatively, a mixture of two or more lithium salts (both sulfur and halide containing) selected therefrom may be used as the lithium salt”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added the sulfide electrolyte particle disclosed by NOGAMI in the cathode active material layer disclosed by SASAKI in order to soften the interface of the cathode and electrolyte thereby forming a good interface.
Regarding claim 3. The positive electrode material according to claim 1, wherein the halide solid electrolyte is represented by the following composition formula (1):
LiαMβXγ...Formula (1), [0031]
where symbols α, β, and γ are each a value greater than 0, a symbol M includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a metal element other than Li and a metalloid element [0033], and a symbol X includes at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br, and I. [0034]
Regarding claim 4. The positive electrode material according to claim 3, wherein the symbol M includes yttrium [0040].
Regarding claim 5. The positive electrode material according to claim 3, wherein the symbols α, β, and γ satisfy 2.5 ≤ α ≤ 3, 1 ≤ β ≤ 1.1, and γ = 6. [0043]
For example [0197] Li2.7Y1.1Cl6 meets the limitation of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6. The positive electrode material according to claim 1, wherein the positive electrode active material includes a lithium-containing transition metal composite oxide [0135].
Regarding claim 7. The positive electrode material according to claim 1, wherein the positive electrode active material includes lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide. [0135] teaches Li(NiCoMn)O2 meeting the limitation of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8. SASAKI discloses a battery [title], comprising:
a positive electrode [0008] including the positive electrode material according to claim 1 which SASAKI calls a cathode;
a negative electrode [0009] which SASAKI calls an anode; and
an electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode [0010].
Regarding claim 9. The battery according to claim 8, wherein the electrolyte layer includes the same material as a material of the second solid electrolyte [0036] “By using the halide solid electrolyte for both the first electrolyte layer 101 and the second electrolyte layer 102”.
Regarding claim 10. The battery according to claim 8, wherein the electrolyte layer includes a halide solid electrolyte different from the halide solid electrolyte included in the second solid electrolyte. SASAKI discloses in table 1 inventive example 1 where the first solid electrolyte is Li2.7Y1.1Cl6 and the second solid electrolyte is Li-3YBr-2Cl2I2 where the second solid electrolyte contains iodine where the first one does not.
Regarding claims 11 and 12. SASAKI [0137] discloses the battery according to claim 8, wherein the electrolyte layer (100) includes a sulfide solid electrolyte that is in direct contact with the positive electrode, called a cathode (201) and the negative electrode, called an anode (202) as shown in figure 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LAWRENCE LA RAIA III whose telephone number is (703)756-5441. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur 6:00am-4:00pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached on (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.
/L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights