Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/907,998

SILICON-BASED ACTIVE MATERIAL PARTICLES, SILICON-BASED ACTIVE MATERIAL PRECURSOR PARTICLES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 30, 2022
Examiner
LA RAIA III, LAWRENCE
Art Unit
1727
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Osaka Titanium Technologies Co. Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
20 granted / 27 resolved
+9.1% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
70
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 27 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 RCE filed on 11/6/2025. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-4 have been cancelled. Claim 6 is newly added. Claims 1, and 5-6 are currently pending. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/6/2025 has been entered. Response to Amendment In light of the amendment the rejection to claim 3 is withdrawn. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 5 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. 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 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20010012503 A1, FUKUOKA et al. Regarding claim 1, FUKUOKA [0004] discloses a silicone-based active material particles FUKUOKA does not disclose multiple layers are within the silicon-based active material particles forming a layer structure within the silicon-based active material particles, and a thickness of each layer of the multiple layers is 0.2 um or less. FUKUOKA does not explicitly disclose the properties as claimed in the instant application, however because FUKUOKA discloses that the silicon dioxide particles are produced at close to 1000 °C (900 °C for the instant specification and 1100 °C in FUKUOKA [0005]) and both FUKUOKA and the instant application utilize a cooled substrate where the cooled material is deposited and scraped off of the substrate it would be reasonable to conclude that the properties of both silicon dioxide particles would also be the same. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the method disclosed by FUKUOKA in order to get the claimed silicone-based active material particles in the instant claim. 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. Regarding claim 6. FUKUOKA [0009] discloses the silicon-based active material particles according to claim 1, wherein the silicon-based active material particles consist of a metal element-containing silicon-based active material. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20010012503 A1, FUKUOKA et al. in view of US 20070259113 A1, KIZAKI et al. Regarding claim 5. FUKUOKA discloses the silicon-based active material particles according to claim 1. FUKUOKA does not disclose a negative electrode of a lithium-ion secondary battery, comprising the silicon-based active material particles according to claim 1. KIZAKI [title] discloses a Silicon Monoxide Vapor Deposition Material, Silicon Powder for Silicon Monoxide Raw Material, And Method for Producing Silicon Monoxide where it is disclosed that KIZAKI [0018] discloses “the silicon monoxide and silicon monoxide vapor deposition material of the present invention can also be applied to the lithium battery electrode material (for example, negative electrode of secondary battery).” It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used the silicon material disclosed by FUKUOKA for the purpose of using the silicon material described by KIZAKI as an active material in a battery electrode, which by the filing date was already well known in the art as evidenced by KIZAKI. Conclusion 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 /Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 30, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 30, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 20, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Oct 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12512469
POSITIVE ELECTRODE, LITHIUM BATTERY INCLUDING POSITIVE ELECTRODE, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING POSITIVE ELECTRODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12500260
PRESSING JIG WITH A GRADIENT HARDNESS PRESSING PAD FOR A BATTERY CELL AND A DEGASSING METHOD OF BATTERY CELL USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Patent 12476278
ALL SOLID STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12469877
ALL SOLID STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 11, 2025
Patent 12451557
Gas Removing Device and Method for Removing Gas From a Pouch Type Case of a Secondary Battery
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.7%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 27 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month