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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/08/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claim 10 is newly added. Claims 1-10 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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.
Claims 1 & 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa (WO 2018/116941 A1, and hereinafter using, for citation purposes, corresponding US 2019/0326640 A1) in view of Toyama (US 2021/0336260 A1) and Nagata (US 2019/0067677 A1).
Regarding claims 1 & 7-10, Hasegawa teaches a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery including a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a nonaqueous electrolyte, wherein the positive electrode includes a positive electrode active material such as a lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide in which a molar content of nickel among the transition metals is preferably 80% or more; and the nonaqueous electrolyte includes 1.5 mass% or less of an isocyanuric acid ester component having at least one unsaturated organic group with an unsaturated carbon-carbon bond such as triallyl isocyanurate and diallyl isocyanurate ([0019]-[0029], [0034]-[0038] & [0049]). Hasegawa is silent as to the positive electrode active material including the claimed component M and the limited range for the content of Co. Toyama teaches a positive electrode active material including a lithium transition metal oxide comprising Ni, Co, M (where M includes one or more of metals such as Mn and Al), wherein a content of Co can be from 0 mol% to 5 mol% based on the total molar content of transition metals ([0030]-[0045]) which reads on the presently claimed range for x1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to provide Co in Hasegawa’s active material in an amount ranging from 0 mol% to 5 mol% based on the total amount of transition metals because good charge-discharge cycle properties while providing a reduction in cost as taught by Toyama ([0043]-[0044]). Nagata teaches a positive electrode active material comprising a lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide comprising an additional component M such as W in an amount of 0.15 mol% relative to the total molar content of Ni, Co and Al ([0031]-[0033] & [0055]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to include a component M such as W in Hasegawa’s active material in order to improve the battery capacity and the capacity retention as taught by Nagata (Table 1).
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa (WO 2018/116941 A1, and hereinafter using, for citation purposes, corresponding US 2019/0326640 A1), Toyama (US 2021/0336260 A1) and Nagata (US 2019/0067677 A1), and further in view of Ito (US 2016/0211553 A1).
Regarding claims 2-5, Hasegawa as modified by Toyama and Nagata teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1 but is silent as to the electrolyte including a cyclic sulfite ester component. Ito teaches a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising an electrolyte which can include at least one of triallyl isocyanurate and diallyl cyanurate and a sulfur-containing organic compound such as ethylene sulfite, wherein a content of the sulfur-containing organic compound is preferably 0.3 mass% to 3 mass% based on the total mass of the electrolyte ([0112]-[0113], [0164]-[0168], [0362]-[0386] & [0910]-[0912]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to include 0.3 mass% to 3 mass% ethylene sulfite in Hasegawa’s electrolyte in order to ensure easy control of characteristics such as output characteristics, load characteristics, low-temperature characteristics, cycle characteristics and high-temperature storage characteristics as taught by Ito ([0168]). Furthermore, Hasegawa teaches an exemplary embodiment using 0.75 mass% triallyl isocyanurate (Example 1) such that when 0.3 mass% to 3 mass% ethylene sulfite is included in the electrolyte, a resulting mass ratio of the isocyanuric acid ester component relative to the cyclic sulfite ester components becomes 0.22 to 4 which encompasses the presently claimed range of 0.5 to 1.5 in claim 5.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa (WO 2018/116941 A1, and hereinafter using, for citation purposes, corresponding US 2019/0326640 A1), Toyama (US 2021/0336260 A1) and Nagata (US 2019/0067677 A1), and further in view of Han (US 2020/0185714 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Hasegawa as modified by Toyama and Nagata teaches the nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery of claim 1, where a Co content in Toyama corresponds to a x1 value of 0 to 0.05 where x1 can be less than 0.03 or even less than 0.01 in some instances ([0043]-[0044]) but is silent as to, wherein in the composition formula, 0 ≤ x2 ≤ 0.1 and 0.05 ≤ y+x2 ≤ 0.2 are satisfied. Han teaches a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising a positive electrode including a positive electrode active material such as lithium nickel-manganese-cobalt-aluminum oxide in which a molar content of Co preferably ranges from 0.01 to 0.1 based on the total molar contents of the transition metals (i.e Ni, Co, Mn and Al), a molar content of Mn ranges from more than 0 to 0.15 and a molar content of Al ranges from more than 0 to 0.15 which overlap with the presently claimed ranges ([0047]-[0061] & [0105]-[0112]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to limit y and x2 in Hasegawa’s active material to the presently claimed ranges in order to ensure a high nickel content (i.e from 80 mol% to 98 mol% relative to the total molar content of transition metals) thereby yielding high-capacity properties as taught by Han ([0032]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 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. The subject matter of claims 1 & 6-10 is found to be obvious over the combined teachings of Hasegawa, Toyama and Nagata and the subject matter of claims 2-5 and 6 is found to be obvious further in view of Ito and Han, respectively, as noted in the above updated rejection. Thus, in view of the foregoing, claims 1-10 stand rejected.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL T ZEMUI whose telephone number is (571)272-4894. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm (EST).
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.
/NATHANAEL T ZEMUI/Examiner, Art Unit 1727