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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/25/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 is amended.
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed on 11/25/2025 have been entered.
103 rejection of Claim 1 has been modified in view of Applicant’s amendments.
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 -10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jia et al (CN 114447334 A, machine translation) in view of Zhao et al (CN 111900501 A, machine translation) as evidenced by Schaschke, Carl. (2014, Dictionary of Chemical Engineering. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpDCE00021/dictionary-chemical-engineering/dictionary-chemical-engineering).
Regarding Claim 1,
Jia teaches a lithium ion battery that comprises a cathode material, an anode material, and an electrolyte. The cathode material comprises Li9N2Cl3 (Paragraph 0008), active material LiaNixCoyMnzO2, wherein, 1.0≤a<1.1, 0.80≤x<1, 0<y<0.20, 0<z<0.10 (Paragraph 0006, this material has the same elemental combination of Li2MnO3, and one or more selected from Li5FeO4, Li2NiO2, Li6CoO4 and Li6MnO4 as claimed). Jia teaches that the positive electrode material is made by mixing the raw materials including an active material matrix, lithium nitride and anhydrous lithium chloride. The mixture is heat treated (Paragraph 0023 and 0024). The mixing method includes at least one of grinding mixing and ball milling mixing (Paragraph 0031). Such a mixing method produces a homogenous mixture of the raw materials.
Jia does not teach the proportion of components in the cathode material as stated in the claim: (xLi9N2Cl3.yLi2MnO3.zA), wherein 0 < x ≤ 0.25, 0 < y ≤ 0.5, 0.5 ≤ z ≤ 1.
However, Zhao teaches in Paragraph 0022 that the lithium supplement additive is 1-10% of the positive electrode layer. This means that the proportion of Li9N2Cl3 material (i.e. ‘x’ per claim) to the positive active material (i.e. ‘y’ +’z’ per claim) is max 10:90. If x = 0.1, then y+z = 0.90 (where y = 0.4, z =0.5). These values of x, y, z fall within the ranges as specified in the claim, and amount to some overlap between the claimed invention and Zhao. Zhao also teaches that the lithium supplement additive is Li9N2Cl3 (Paragraph 0100), and the positive active material are Li-Mn-Ni-Co type material (Paragraph 0056).
Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the cathode material in Jia with the proportion stated in Zhao for positive electrode materials to form the material as stated in this claim. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the teachings in order to develop this material with high initial charge and discharge efficiency that improves battery capacity, and energy density (Paragraph 0008).
Schaschke defines eutectic mixture as a mixture of substances having the lowest freezing point of all mixtures of the substances. Jia teaches a mixture of the raw materials as explained above made using grinding or ball milling mixing methods. Combination of Jia and Zhao as explained above suggests the proportion of components in the mixture. Hence, the combination of Jia and Zhao suggests a eutectic mixture based on the components, proportion, and heat-treatment/mixing methods.
Regarding Claim 2,
Jia teaches Li9N2Cl3 in which X = Cl. Jia does not teach the values of x,y,z being integral multiples of 0.05.
However, Zhao teaches the use of lithium halide that includes one or more of F, Cl, Br, I bonds (Paragraph 0015). Zhao also teaches in Paragraph 0022 that the lithium supplement additive is 1-10% of the positive electrode layer. This means that the proportion of Li9N2Cl3 material (i.e. ‘x’ per claim) to the positive active material (i.e. ‘y’ +’z’ per claim) is max 10:90. One such possible option is that x = 0.1, then y+z = 0.90 (where y = 0.4, z =0.5). Here, x, y, and z are integral multiples of 0.05 as stated in the claim. There are other overlapping values of x, y, z that amount to the proportion in Zhao. Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the material proportion in Zhao in order to optimize the initial charge and discharge efficiency of lithium-ion batteries, effectively improve the energy density of lithium-ion batteries and extend their cycle life by continuously releasing lithium ions (Paragraph 0027).
Regarding Claim 3-10,
These claims outline the product made by the claimed method steps. Per MPEP 2113, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.”
Claims 3-10 provide method steps to make the product of claims 1, 2 without the addition of any further structure implied by the process steps. The instant specification compares present invention with prior art, and provides some beneficial effects (Page 4, Lines 18-30). Li3N is inserted into the lattice structure by sintering multiple times. Li9N2X3 forms a eutectic with the base material, which further reduces the surface residue, improves the storage and cycling performance of the material, and fully utilizes Li3N as a fast ion conductor. By improving and optimizing the sintering process, the obtained delithiating material has the advantages of stable performance and easy storage. The lithium ion battery prepared from the delithiating material of the present invention as the cathode material has an initial delithiation capacity of over 400 mAh/g.
These benefits are stated in Zhao and Jia as well. Zhao teaches that the lithium supplement additive has high stability, is safer, improves cycle life of batteries (Paragraph 0008). Zhao also teaches that the Lithium replenishment capacity per unit mass is 1081 mAh/g (Paragraph 0082). Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method and composition in Jia and Zhao in order to achieve the same beneficial effects of the method as stated in the instant specification.
Furthermore, many aspects of the claimed product-by-process are included in the steps provided in Jia and Zhao.
Jia teaches in Paragraphs 0089- 0092, that the active material mix is made by adding Li source, Ni source, Co source and Mn source to the solvent and mixing them uniformly to obtain a mixture; or, mixing the precursor and the Li source uniformly to obtain a mixture. The mixture is dried and sintered to obtain an active material matrix. The Mn source includes at least one of manganese sulfate. Jin also teaches that the atmosphere of the heat treatment is a nitrogen atmosphere. Further, Jin states that the active material matrix, lithium nitride and anhydrous lithium chloride uniformly are mixed according to a preset ratio (Paragraph 0105). The mixture is then heat treated.
The heat treatment is performed in a nitrogen atmosphere so that part of the nitrogen is doped into the material to reduce the internal resistance of the positive electrode material and the battery, and reduce the resistance to charge transfer during the charging and discharging process, thereby improving its electrochemical lithium storage performance. Partial nitrogen doping can stabilize the material structure while increasing the reversible capacity of the positive electrode material. The electronegativity of nitrogen is greater than that of oxygen, and its electron-absorbing ability is stronger. It has a stronger binding force on Mn, which can reduce the solubility of manganese in the organic electrolyte and improve the chemical properties of the material (Paragraph 0112). Jia also teaches that the sintering treatment time is 5 h to 10 h (Paragraph 0116).
Zhao teaches mixing Li3N with lithium halide in inert atmosphere such as nitrogen, and calcining at 400-1000 ˚C (Paragraph 0037). The mixture is ground and tableted before calcining (Paragraph 0049). The calcined product is crushed and ground to obtain a suitable particle size.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states that the addition of ‘eutectic’ mixture to Claim 1 is not a mere physical mixture of the components (Page 5, Paragraph 5), and that a eutectic mixture is an integrated crystalline structure (Page 6, Paragraph 6). Schaschke’s definition of ‘eutectic’ mixture does not limit the mixture as stated by Applicant. Furthermore, Jia teaches that some atoms of the selected coating enter the crystal lattice during the heat treatment process implying that a crystalline structure exists for the mixture (Paragraph 0115). The method in Jia involves a sintering stage or a heat treatment step at 650 to 900 ˚C (Paragraph 0034). In the instant invention, sintering step is performed around 700 to 950 ˚C (instant specification, Page 7). Further, instant invention also discloses a crushing step after sintering which is akin to the step of grinding or ball milling as described in Jia. The equivalence of the methods of the instant disclosure and the prior art shows that the materials formed are also the same i.e. eutectic mixture.
Applicant argues that there are distinct phases in the cathode material of Jia and Zhao instead of integrated crystalline structure. Based on the above explanation of eutectic mixture, and the teaching that the materials of Jia are mixed via grinding or ball milling and then heat treated implies a mixture that has a uniformly combined phase of materials.
Applicant argues that Jia’s coating layer does not consist solely of Li9N2Cl3. Examiner notes that claim 1 is ‘comprising’ of the claimed mixture. Hence, Applicant’s argument that the layer ‘consists solely of’ is not persuasive and not commensurate in scope with the claim.
Applicant argues that Zhao provides 2 distinct phases. Examiner notes that Zhao teaches a mixture of the claimed components in a slurry form. Furthermore, the rejection of claim 1 cites the mass fraction used in Zhao which suggests the claimed proportions. Zhao’s invention is related to a lithium additive that has high stability and can supplement active lithium for lithium ion batteries in a relatively safe manner, and thereby improve initial charge and discharge efficiency, energy density, and cycle life of lithium ion batteries. Claimed invention is also providing a lithium supplement material/delithiation material to compensate the irreversible lithium capacity loss. Hence, motivation exists for combining prior art. Hence, Zhao provides motivation to use the mass fraction of the claimed mixture, and in combination with Jia allows a person of ordinary skill in the art to form a eutectic mixture of the claimed positive electrode material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-6278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Maria Veronica D. Ewald can be reached on 571-272-8519. 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.
/SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783