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 .
Summary
The Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments received October 7, 2025 have been entered into the file. Currently, claims 1-12 are amended, resulting in claims 1-12 pending for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/22/2025 and 10/07/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deng, et al. (US 2021/0384510 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Deng teaches a negative electrode active material to be used as the negative electrode of a lithium ion battery (¶ [0044], Ln. 1-2). Deng teaches that the negative electrode active material includes a composite matrix material including lithium silicate, an oxide of silicon, an activator, and silicon embedded in the lithium silicate and the oxide of silicon (silicon phase dispersed in the lithium silicate phase) (¶ [0008], Ln. 1-3). Deng teaches that the activator in the composite matrix material improves the conductivity of the material, enhances the electrochemical property of the negative electrode material, and improves the crystal structure of the lithium silicate (lithium silicate phase contains at least one element M) (¶ [0010], Ln. 1-6), further teaching that the activator includes any one or a combination of at least two alkali metals, transition metals, alkali metal oxides, transition metal oxides, potassium, magnesium, aluminum, potassium oxide, magnesium oxide, and aluminum oxide (¶ [0013], Ln. 1-6). Specifically, Examples 1-5 include magnesium (Group II element), Example 6 includes potassium (alkali metal), and Example 7 includes aluminum (¶ [0059], [0061]-[0064], [0068], [0073]).
While it is acknowledged that an electron diffraction image of the negative electrode active material obtained using a transmission electron microscope having a spot image belonging to the lithium silicate phase is not expressly recited by Deng, the reference teaches a negative electrode active material with substantially the same composition, including a crystalline lithium silicate phase, which the reference teaches as essential to achieving the claimed property. Therefore, the claimed property, i.e., an electron diffraction image of the negative electrode active material obtained using a transmission electron microscope having a spot image, would be implicitly achieved by a negative electrode active material with a crystalline lithium silicate phase. The instant specification has not provided adequate teachings that the claimed property is only obtainable with the claimed material.
As evidence that the claimed property is inherent to the negative electrode active material taught by Deng, the reference teaches a negative electrode active material with substantially the same composition, including a negative electrode active material including silicon and a phase including a silicate compound. Paragraph [0015] of the instant specification teaches that when the crystallinity of the lithium silicate phase is low, a concentric circular pattern appears in the diffraction image and when the lithium silicate phase is completely amorphous, no diffraction pattern belonging to the lithium silicate phase appears. Deng teaches that the lithium silicate has a crystal structure, and the presence of the activator improves the crystal structure so that lithium ions have sufficient space to be separated from and embedded into the structure (¶ [0010], Ln. 5-8). Thus, Deng teaches a crystalline lithium silicate phase, and therefore teaches the essential properties to achieving an electron diffraction image of the negative electrode active material obtained using a transmission electron microscope having a spot image belonging to the lithium silicate phase.
Regarding claim 2, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the activator of Examples 1-5 is magnesium and the activator of Example 6 is potassium (¶ [0059], [0061]-[0064], [0068]).
Regarding claim 4, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the activator of Example 7 is aluminum (¶ [0073]).
Regarding claim 5, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the negative electrode material is formed by sintering a mixture of SiOC and lithium hydroxide, and then fusing the sintered mixture with the activator to obtain an activated precursor, and finally sintering the activated precursor to obtain the negative electrode material (¶ [0039]-[0042]). While it is acknowledged that a lithium silicate phase having a composition represented by the compositional formula LiaMbSiOx, where 0.3≤a≤2, 0.01≤b≤0.4, and 1≤x≤3.5 is not expressly recited by Deng, the composition would be inherent to the negative electrode material taught by Deng.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that, upon fusing the sintered mixture containing lithium silicate and the activator, the resulting silicate phase would include both lithium and the activator. The phase would be expected to be represented by the general formula LiaMbSiOx, where 0.3≤a≤2, 0.01≤b≤0.4, and 1≤x≤3.5 and M is the activator used, at some point during charging and discharging.
Regarding claims 10-11, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above and further teaches that the silicon is embedded in the lithium silicate (¶ [0008], Ln. 1-3), forming a network of silicon. During charging and discharging, lithium ions separate from and embed in the composite matrix material (¶ [0010], Ln. 5-8), and silicon expands and contracts, thus, the silicon particles communicate with each other.
Regarding claim 12, Deng teaches a lithium ion battery including the negative electrode meeting the limitations of claim 1 (¶ [0045], Ln. 1-3). While it is acknowledged that Deng does not expressly teach the positive electrode and electrolyte included in the lithium ion battery, Deng teaches that the negative electrode material reduces the consumption of lithium separated from the positive electrode material, indicating the presence of a positive electrode (¶ [0048], Ln. 3-6). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a lithium ion battery including the negative electrode of Deng would necessarily include a positive electrode and electrolyte in order to function.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 3 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng, et al. (US 2021/0384510 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Asano, et al. (US 2020/0020932 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Deng does not expressly teach that the activator included in the composite matrix material may be a rare-earth element selected from the group consisting of lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, and neodymium.
Asano teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery including a positive electrode, negative electrode, and non-aqueous electrolyte (¶ [0075], Ln. 1-6). The negative electrode includes a negative electrode active material including a lithium silicate phase, silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and at least one element Me dispersed in the lithium silicate phase and selected from the group consisting of a rare-earth element and an alkaline-earth metal (¶ [0011], Ln. 1-8). Asano teaches that the element Me reduces the area on which side reactions occur, thus reducing the amount of gas generation (¶ [0039], Ln. 1-8). The element Me also increases the hardness of the lithium silicate phase, making cracking less likely during charging and discharging (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-6). Asano specifically teaches an embodiment in which cerium is selected as the element Me (¶ [0115], Ln. 1-4), resulting in a lithium silicate phase containing cerium.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the composite matrix material of Deng to include a rare-earth element such as cerium based on the teachings of Asano, therefore dispersing the rare-earth element in the lithium silicate phase. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include a rare-earth element silicate, in order to reduce the area on which side reactions occur and therefore reduce gas generation, and to increase the hardness of the lithium silicate phase.
Regarding claims 6-8, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Deng does not expressly teach that the negative electrode material includes a crystalline phase represented by the general formula La2Si2O7 dispersed in the lithium silicate phase.
Asano teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery including a positive electrode, negative electrode, and non-aqueous electrolyte (¶ [0075], Ln. 1-6). The negative electrode includes a negative electrode active material including a lithium silicate phase, silicon particles dispersed in the lithium silicate phase, and at least one element Me dispersed in the lithium silicate phase and selected from the group consisting of a rare-earth element and an alkaline-earth metal (¶ [0011], Ln. 1-8). Asano teaches that the element Me reduces the area on which side reactions occur, thus reducing the amount of gas generation (¶ [0039], Ln. 1-8). The element Me also increases the hardness of the lithium silicate phase, making cracking less likely during charging and discharging (¶ [0040], Ln. 1-6). Asano does not teach a specific embodiment including lanthanum as the rare-earth element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the composite matrix material of Deng to include a rare-earth element based on the teachings of Asano, therefore dispersing the rare-earth element in the lithium silicate phase. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include a rare-earth element in the silicate, in order to reduce the area on which side reactions occur and therefore reduce gas generation, and to increase the hardness of the lithium silicate phase. Given the finite number of options for rare-earth elements to choose from, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to try lanthanum with a reasonable expectation of success (See MPEP 2143 (I)(E)). In including lanthanum, the formula of the silicate compound would be expected to be La2Si2O7 (crystalline phase containing the rare-earth element, silicon, and oxygen).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng, et al. (US 2021/0384510 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhu, et al. Scalable Production of Si Nanoparticles Directly from Low Grade Sources for Lithium-Ion Battery Anode. Nano Letters, Vol. 15, Issue 9 (Aug. 10, 2015), pp. 5750-5754.
Regarding claim 9, Deng teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 above. Deng does not expressly teach that the negative electrode active material includes iron.
Zhu teaches that ferrosilicon is a well-known source of silicon for lithium-ion battery anodes (pp. 5750, Col. 2, Ln. 14-16). Further, Zhu teaches that when ferrosilicon is used, the iron can buffer the volume expansion of Si particles during cycling, which is beneficial for electrochemical cycling performance (pp. 5751, Col. 1, Ln. 11-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the negative electrode active material of Deng to use ferrosilicon as a silicon source based on the teachings of Zhu. Ferrosilicon is a well-known source of silicon for negative electrode active material. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use ferrosilicon in order to buffer the volume expansion of Si particles during cycling, benefitting the electrochemical cycling performance.
Response to Arguments
Response-Claim Rejections – Double Patenting
The terminal disclaimer filed October 7 has been approved and the1, 3, and 6-8 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 4-5 of copending Application No. 17/927,292 are withdrawn.
Response-Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103
In light of the Applicant’s statement, see pages 6-7 of the remarks filed October 7, 2025, invoking the 102(b)(2)(c) exception, the previous rejections of claims 1-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) over Asano, et al. (US 2022/0263033 A1) are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4-5, and 10-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) over Choi, et al. (US 2018/0342757 A1), claims 1, 4, and 10-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) over Minami, et al. (US 2017/0309950 A1), claims 3 and 6-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Choi in view of Asano, et al. (US 2020/0020932 A1), and claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Choi in view of Zhu, et al. (Scalable Production of Si Nanoparticles Directly from Low Grade Sources for Lithium-Ion Battery Anode. Nano Letters, Vol. 15, Issue 9 (Aug. 10, 2015), pp. 5750-5754) 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
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 SARAH J JACOBSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at (571) 272-1291.
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.
/SARAH J JACOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1785
/MARK RUTHKOSKY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1785