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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/24/2026 has been entered.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka (US 20210344046 A1) and further in view Lee (US 20220216466 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Matsuoka teaches
a nonaqueous electrolyte (abstract, [nonaqueous electrolytic solution]) comprising
a positive electrode (para. 0048, [positive electrode]), a negative electrode (para. 0048, [negative electrode]), and a nonaqueous electrolyte (para. 0048, [nonaqueous electrolyte])
wherein the positive electrode includes
a composite oxide containing lithium (para. 0063, [lithium-containing metal oxide]) and a transition metal (para. 0063, the composite oxide may include the transition metals of Ni, Mn, Co, Fe, V, Cu, Ti, Zn, Mo, or Zr),
and a conductive agent (para. 0224, [by mixing a positive electrode active material and a conductive aid and a binder as necessary]) and
an additive covering at least a portion of a surface of the composite oxide and the composite oxide (para. 0211, [it is still more preferable that a surface of the positive electrode active material is coated with at least one oxide selected from the group consisting of … Al2O3]) (para. 0173 -0174, the electrolyte includes an additive such as triallyl phosphate) (Examiner notes that the additive is made up of both the coating layer and the phosphorous compound contained in the electrolyte).
and the additive includes a metal oxide (para. 0211, Al2O3) and a phosphate compound (para. 0174, [triallyl phosphate]), and the phosphate compound has at least one intramolecular alkenyl group (para. 0174, [triallyl phosphate]).
Matsuoka does not teach that the metal oxide cover layer having a thickness of 1 nm to 5 m.
Lee, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches that the metal oxide cover layer having a thickness of 1 nm to 5 m (para. 0051, [the thickness of the atomic layer deposition coating layer may be 0.2 to 1 nm]) (para. 0019, the atomic layer deposition coating layer may comprise … AlOx , wherein x may be … 3).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have made Matsuoka’s metal oxide cover layer having a thickness of 0.2 to 1nm, as taught by Lee. Lee teaches that when the thickness of the atomic layer deposition coating layer satisfies the above - described range, the resistance of the battery hardly increases and the atomic layer deposition coating layer may sufficiently function as a protective layer for the positive electrode active material layer (para. 0051).
Regarding claim 2, modified Matsuoka teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the alkenyl group includes at least one selected from the group consisting of a 2-propenyl group (Matsuoka, para. 0174, [triallyl phosphate]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Matsuoka teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the phosphate compound includes triallyl phosphate (Matsuoka, para. 0174, [triallyl phosphate]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Matsuoka teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the metal oxide includes at least one element selected from the group consisting of aluminum, (Matsuoka, para. 0019, the atomic layer deposition coating layer may comprise … AlOx , wherein x may be … 3).
Regarding claim 7, modified Matsuoka discloses the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the nonaqueous electrolyte contains the phosphate compound by 2 mass% or less relative to the entire nonaqueous electrolyte (Matsuoka, para. 0175, [the nonaqueous electrolyte solution according to the present embodiment contains other optional additives, the content thereof is preferably within a range of 0.01 % by weight or more and 10 % by weight or less]).
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuoka (US 20210344046 A1)and further in view Lee (US 20220216466 A1) and Hosoya (US 20050181279 A1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Matsuoka teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1, and further teaches wherein the composite oxide has a composition represented by a general formula: LiNixCoyM1-x-yO2, in the general formula, 0.3<x<1, 0< y < 0.5 and 0 < 1-x-y < 0.35 are satisfied (Matsuoka, para. 0063, [general formula 14: LipNiqCorMnsMtOu], 0< p < 1.3 , 0 < q < 1.2 , 0 ≤ s < 0.5, 0 ≤ t < 0.3, and 1.8 < u < 2.2.
Matsuoka is silent with respect to the composite oxide having a layered rock salt type crystal structure.
Hosoya teaches a lithium composite oxide having a layered rock salt type crystal structure (Hosoya, para. 0079, [a composition represented by LiNi0.4Co0.3Mn0.3O2 was identified. The powder thus obtained was confirmed to have a layered rock-salt structure]). Hosoya teaches a composition that satisfies the general formula as claimed in claim 5.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Shi’s battery to use a lithium composite oxide exhibiting a rock salt type crystal structure, as taught by Hosoya, in order to obtain a lithium composite oxide with certain physical properties which are superior to those of lithium cobalt oxides without the rock-salt structure, as taught in the summary of Hosoya’s battery, para. 0004.
Regarding claim 6, Matsuoka teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 5, and further teaches
wherein the metal oxide includes Al203 (Matsuoka, para. 0211, [it is still more preferable that a surface of the positive electrode active material is coated with at least one oxide selected from the group consisting of … Al2O3]), and
at an outermost surface of the composite oxide [the composite oxide is] covered with the additive (para. 0211, [it is still more preferable that a surface of the positive electrode active material is coated with at least one oxide selected from the group consisting of … Al2O3])
and an atomic ratio of Al derived from the metal oxide relative to Ni derived from the composite oxide: Al/Ni is 2 or less
(Examiner notes that modified Matsuoka teaches the lithium composite oxide as stated in the instant (see claim 5), teaches the metal oxide as stated in the instant (see claim 6), and teaches the thickness layer in the range stated in the instant (see claim 1). Therefore, modified Matsuoka teaches the atomic ratio of Al to Ni as claimed. Paragraph 0028 of the instant specification states “when the surface of the nickel-based composite oxide represented by a general formula (2) described later is covered with Al203, at the outermost surface of the composite oxide, the atomic ratio of Al derived from the metal oxide relative to Ni derived from the composite oxide: Al/Ni is, for example, 2 or less. In this case, at the surface of the composite oxide, a thin layer of metal oxide (e.g., thickness 1 nm or more and 3 nm or less) is presumably distributed in an island form”.)
Other Pertinent References
US 20200176807 A1
US 20230343935 A1
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VERITA E GRANNUM whose telephone number is (571)270-1150. The examiner can normally be reached 10-5 EST / 7-2 PST.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/V.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights