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 responsive to amendments and remarks filed on 09/25/2025.
Claims 1, 2 and 4 have been amended.
Claims 1-5 are currently pending.
Response to Amendment
In light of the amendment the objection to the name of the title is withdrawn.
In light of the amendment the rejection to claims 1-5 under 35 USC §112(b) is withdrawn, a new grounds of rejection under 112(b) is detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter due to the confusing language. Claim 1 reads “the lithium-transition metal composite oxide being composed of at least either of particles each comprising one primary particle and secondary particles each formed by aggregation of 2 or more and 10 or less primary particles.” It is unclear if the limitation necessitates the presence of secondary particles. For examination purposes this limitation will be interpreted to have at least two primary particles in a secondary particle.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180026267 A1, KIM et al.
Regarding claim 1. KIM discloses a positive electrode active material [abstract] for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, composed of at least either of particles and secondary particles each including 10 or less primary particles [figure 1C] which is depicted below,
The presence of secondary particles anticipates and necessitates the presence of two or more primary particles meeting the limitations of the claim
KIM [0059] discloses
Lia(Ni1-x-y-zCoxMnyMz)O2 Formula 1
[0060] In Formula 1, M may be an element selected from boron (B), magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), strontium (Sr), barium (Ba), titanium (Ti), vanadium (V), chromium (Cr), iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zirconium (Zr), and aluminum (Al), and
[0061] a, x, y, and z may satisfy the following relations:
KIM [0062] discloses 0.95 ≦ a ≦ 1.3, satisfying the limitation “the lithium-transition metal composite oxide is 80% or more” in amended claim 1.
x ≦ (1−x−y−z), y ≦ (1−x−y−z), z ≦ (1−x−y−z), 0 < x < 1, 0 ≦ y < 1, and 0 ≦ z < 1 [0063] As such, in the nickel-based active material of Formula 1, an amount of nickel (Ni) is greater than that of cobalt (Co) and manganese (Mn)
wherein a particle cross section of the single particles and the primary particles has a polygon shape including a side having a length of 1.5 µm or longer [0099], and at least three interior angles of the polygon are 45° to 160° (as shown in figure 3E below).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The elements used in the salts in the instant ranges are well known in the art. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used this stoichiometric range in the instant claim.
PNG
media_image1.png
858
485
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
476
481
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2. KIM discloses the positive electrode active material for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein a Li-site occupancy of the lithium-transition metal composite oxide is 98% or more
KIM [0059-0062] discloses Lia where 0.95 ≥ a ≥ 1.3. and the instant specification discloses Lia where 0.9 ≥ a ≥ 1.2 it is reasonable to assume that the physical property for the Li-site is the same.
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 3. KIM discloses the positive electrode active material for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1.
KIM does not specifically disclose 20% or more of sides of the primary particle are present on a surface of the secondary particle.
KIM [0141] teaches “Ammonia water was added to a reactor, and raw materials for a nickel-based active material were mixed together to prepare a mixture of the raw materials of the nickel-based active material.” [0143] “The reaction was carried out with continuous stirring for about 20 hours.” [0147] for example 4 Ni0.85Co0.1Al0.05(OH)2 which reads on the instant application example 2.
KIM [0149-0150] a first heat treatment was performed on the mixture at a temperature of about 800° C. for about 6 hours in air followed by a second heat treatment was performed on the secondary particle A at a temperature of about 850° C. for about 6 hours in air.
The instant application [0038] calls for the active material to first be calcinated between 720 °C to 1000 °C and the second calcination between 600 °C and 800 °C.
Since similar temperatures are used for manufacturing, it is expected that 20% or more of sides of the primary particle are present on a surface of the secondary particle.
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 4. The positive electrode active material for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein an average porosity of the particles is 3% or less [0071] (0.1%-2% and 1%-8%).
In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 5. KIM discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery [0113], comprising:
a positive electrode having:
a positive electrode core [0038]: and
a positive electrode mixture layer [0115] provided on a surface of the positive electrode core and including the positive electrode active material according to claim 1:
a negative electrode [0114]: and
a non-aqueous electrolyte [0113],
a BET specific surface area of the positive electrode mixture layer before charging and discharging is 2.6 m2/g or less, the instant case in table 2 0.38 m2/g.
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 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 at (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.
LAWRENCE LA RAIA III
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/Maria Laios/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights