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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/15/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants argue the Son reference does not teach the amended limitations “the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material comprising lithium, cobalt, nickel and manganese” and “the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal” and cite only to paragraphs [0102] and [0124]. However, the reference as a whole must be considered and Son does teach both of these limitations, see new grounds of rejection below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/15/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2019/0229380, hereinafter SON.
Regarding claim 1, SON teaches a secondary battery (abstract) comprising: a positive electrode (Fig 1, 3); an electrolyte (paragraphs [0025] and [0088]-[0098]); and a negative electrode (Fig 1, 1), wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material comprising lithium, cobalt, nickel and manganese (paragraph [0050] positive electrode active material is lithium-nickel-manganese-cobalt oxide), wherein the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal (paragraph [0056], lithium layer 15 is lithium metal and paragraph [0106], lithium foil), wherein the electrolyte comprises: an acyclic ester (paragraphs [0092] and [0111], e.g. DEC); and a fluorinated carbonic ester (paragraphs [0092], [0096] and [0111], e.g FEC) at 5 vol.% or higher and 95 vol.% or lower (paragraph [0111] e.g. FEC:DEC=3:7 (volume ratio)).
In the alternative, a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand the electrolyte solution as disclosed in the examples is compatible with the different types of positive electrode and negative electrode active materials as disclosed by SON (discussed above), especially since SON discloses using the same electrolyte solution in all of the examples and would have the predictable result of providing a secondary battery with improved reduction of irreversible capacity (paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 2, SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the fluorinated carbonic ester is fluorinated ethylene carbonate (paragraphs [0092], [0096] and [0111], FEC).
Regarding claim 3, SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the acyclic ester is diethyl carbonate (paragraphs [0092] and [0111], e.g. DEC).
Regarding claim 4, SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the electrolyte comprises a lithium ion solvated by the fluorinated carbonic ester (paragraphs [0070], [0092], [0096] and [0111], e.g. non-aqueous electrolyte solution (1M LiPF6, FEC:DEC=3:7 (volume ratio)).
Regarding claim 5, SON teaches a secondary battery (abstract) comprising: a positive electrode (Fig 1, 3); an electrolyte (paragraph [0025] and [0088]-[0098]); and a negative electrode (Fig 1, 1), wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material comprising lithium, cobalt, nickel and manganese (paragraph [0050] positive electrode active material is lithium-nickel-manganese-cobalt oxide), wherein the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal (paragraph [0056], lithium layer 15 is lithium metal and paragraph [0106], lithium foil),, wherein the electrolyte comprises: an acyclic ester (paragraphs [0092] and [0111], e.g. DEC); and cyclic carbonate (paragraphs [0092], [0096] and [0111], e.g FEC) with an electron-withdrawing group at 5 vol.% or higher and 95 vol.% or lower (paragraph [0111] e.g. FEC:DEC=3:7 (volume ratio)).
In the alternative, a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand the electrolyte solution as disclosed in the examples is compatible with the different types of positive electrode and negative electrode active materials as disclosed by SON (discussed above), especially since SON discloses using the same electrolyte solution in all of the examples and would have the predictable result of providing a secondary battery with improved reduction of irreversible capacity (paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 6, SON teaches a secondary battery according to claim 5, wherein the electron-withdrawing group is a fluoro group (paragraphs [0092], [0096] and [0111], e.g FEC).
Regarding claim 7, SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the proportion of the acyclic ester is 5 vol.% or higher and 80 vol.% or lower in the electrolyte (paragraph [0111] e.g. FEC:DEC=3:7 (volume ratio)).
Regarding claim 12, SON teaches a vehicle comprising the secondary battery according to claim 1 (paragraph [0100]).
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SON in view of US 12,199,241 hereinafter Takahashi.
Regarding claim 8, SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim1.
SON does not teach wherein the acyclic ester comprises fluorine.
However, Takahashi teaches a secondary battery (column 16, line 11), comprising an electrolyte containing an acyclic ester comprising fluorine (column 9, lines 40-67, e.g. 2,2,2-trifuoroethyl methyl carbonate along with other examples). Takahashi further teaches 2,2,2-trifuoroethyl methyl carbonate is a functional equivalent to diethyl carbonate (DEC) (column 10, lines 12-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SON to incorporate the teachings of Takahashi and to use an acyclic ester comprising fluorine in the electrolyte to provide an electrolyte with good high-temperature cycle characteristics (column 10, line 1).
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SON in view of JP2019032954 hereinafter Machikawa.
Regarding claim 9, SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1.
SON does not teach wherein the positive electrode comprises graphene or carbon nanotube.
However, Machikawa teaches a secondary battery (paragraph [0002]) wherein the positive electrode comprises graphene or carbon nanotube (paragraph [0106]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SON to incorporate the teachings of Machikawa to use graphene or carbon nanotubes in the positive electrode in order to provide a positive electrode with high electrical conductivity (paragraph [0105]).
Regarding claim 10 SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1.
SON does not teach, wherein a magnesium concentration of a surface portion of the positive electrode active material is higher than a magnesium concentration of the inside of the positive electrode active material.
However, Machikawa teaches a secondary battery (paragraph [0002]), wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material, wherein a magnesium concentration of a surface portion of the positive electrode active material is higher than a magnesium concentration of the inside of the positive electrode active material (paragraph [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SON to incorporate the teachings of Machikawa to use a higher magnesium concentration on the surface portion of the positive electrode active material than a magnesium concentration of the inside of the positive electrode active material, in order to provide a stable crystal structure at room temperature (paragraph [0072]).
Regarding claim 11 SON teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1.
SON does not teach, wherein the positive electrode active material comprises fluorine.
However, Machikawa teaches a secondary battery (paragraph [0002]), wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode active material comprising fluorine (paragraph [0071]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified SON to incorporate the teachings of Machikawa to use fluorine in the positive electrode active material, in order to provide a stable crystal structure at room temperature (paragraph [0072]).
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 ROBERT W HODGE whose telephone number is (571)272-2097. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at (571) 272-8105. 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.
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645