DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first office action regarding application number 17/942,489, filed 09/12/2022.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1, 2, and 13-20 in the reply filed on 10/08/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that undue search burden is not proven. This is not found persuasive because the product and method require different limitations with different requirements for search that are not necessarily overlapping, such as the example given in the restriction- the product can be made by another and materially different process, such as a different charging cycle.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 3-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 10/08/2025.
Claims 1, 2, and 13-20 have been fully considered in examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13-16 and 18 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites “the magnesium compound”. However, the magnesium compound has not been introduced and lacks antecedent basis. Claim 13 is interpreted in line with claim 2 and the specification, wherein the magnesium compound is described separately from the magnesium disposed on at least a portion of the surface of the current collector (see claim 2 and page 2 of instant specification). Accordingly, “the magnesium compound” is interpreted as “a magnesium compound”.
Claims 14, 15, and 18 recite the limitation "the protective layer". However, the protective layer has not been introduced and lacks antecedent basis. Claims 14, 15, and 18 are interpreted as “a protective layer”.
Claim 16 recites “a current collector” however, it is unclear whether this is a second current collector or referring to the current collector of claim 1. Claim 16 is interpreted as “the current collector”.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 16 recites “wherein the second electrode comprises a current collector” (see 112(b) rejection above) which does not further limit the invention of claim 1 in which it is dependent, as claim 1 recites “a second electrode comprising a current collector”. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 1-2 and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US-20210280854-A1) in view of Hoshina (US-20170271663-A1).
Regarding claim 1,
Kwon teaches an electrochemical cell (Fig. 2C; 1; [0076] [0123]), comprising:
a first electrode (Fig. 2C, 12; [0076] [0123]) comprising a lithium intercalation compound (see [0081], wherein the positive electrode has material capable of reversibly absorbing lithium ions, thus an intercalation compound) having a nickel content ([0055] and claim 7) of greater than or equal to 70 at% (([0055] and claim 7; wherein 80-98 mol% converts to 80-98 at% in Formula 5 [0050-0052]; which is within the claimed range) relative to other transition metals in the lithium intercalation compound ([0050-0055], wherein the relation is to the other compounds in Formula 5);
a second electrode (Fig. 2C; 20; [0118] [0123]) comprising a current collector (Fig. 2C, 21; [0076], [0123]);
and a separator (Fig. 2C; 30; [0076] [0123]) between the first electrode 20 and the second electrode 12.
However, Kwon fails to teach a second electrode with magnesium on at least a portion of a surface of the current collector.
Hoshina teaches a second electrode (Hoshina; [0061] negative electrode which is second to a first positive electrode [0062]) with magnesium [0060] on at least a portion of a surface (see [0060] wherein a current collector alloyed with Mg has Mg on at least a portion of its surface) of the current collector ([0060], “negative electrode current collector”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to alloy the negative electrode current collector 21 with Mg, as suggested by Hoshina, in order to reduce weight [0093] and improve contact resistance [0097].
Regarding claim 2,
Kwon teaches an electrochemical cell (Fig. 2C; 1; [0076] [0123]), comprising:
a first electrode (Fig. 2C, 12; [0076] [0123]) comprising a lithium intercalation compound (see [0081], wherein the positive electrode has material capable of reversibly absorbing lithium ions, thus an intercalation compound) having a nickel content ([0055] and claim 7) of greater than or equal to 70 at% (([0055] and claim 7; wherein 80-98 mol% converts to 80-98 at% in Formula 5 [0050-0052]; which is within the claimed range) relative to other transition metals in the lithium intercalation compound ([0050-0055], wherein the relation is to the other compounds in Formula 5);
a second electrode (Fig. 2C; 20; [0118], [0123]) comprising a current collector (Fig. 2C, 21; [0076], [0123]);
a separator (Fig. 2C; 30; [0076] [0123]) between the first electrode 20 and the second electrode 12;
and a protective layer ([0083], “coating layer”, wherein any coating layer may be a protective layer) adjacent to the second electrode (Fig. 2C, wherein all the layers of 1 are adjacent to each other), wherein the protective layer [0083] comprises a magnesium ([0083], “Mg”) compound [0083], “compound of a coating element…coating element for the coating layer may be magnesium (Mg)”, and wherein the protective layer [0083] has an average thickness of less than or equal to 10 um ([0066]; less than 100 nm or .1 um and greater than .1 nm, which is entirely within the claimed range).
However, Kwon fails to teach a second electrode with magnesium on at least a portion of a surface of the current collector.
Hoshina teaches a second electrode (Hoshina; [0061] negative electrode which is second to a first positive electrode [0062]) with magnesium [0060] on at least a portion of a surface (see [0060] wherein a current collector alloyed with Mg has Mg on at least a portion of its surface) of the current collector ([0060], “negative electrode current collector”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to alloy the negative electrode current collector 21 with Mg, as suggested by Hoshina, in order to reduce weight [0093] and improve contact resistance [0097].
Regarding claim 13,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the magnesium compound (see 112(b) rejection above; see [0083]) comprises MgO (see [0083] “coating layer may include at least one compound of a coating element selected from…an oxide…of the coating element…the coating element for the coating layer may be Mg”, thus MgO)
Regarding claim 14,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the protective layer [0083] further comprises a lithium compound ([0083], “Li…compound”).
Regarding claim 15,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the protective layer (Fig. 2C, 24; [0123], wherein “a passivation layer” is a protective layer, see 112(b) rejection above) comprises a lithium compound [0123] comprising LiF [0123].
Regarding claim 16,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the second electrode 20 comprises a current collector 21 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 17,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to teach wherein the second electrode 20 is free of lithium. However, in another embodiment, Kwon teaches wherein the second electrode 20 is free of lithium (Fig. 2A, 20; [0120, “22 may be, for example, Li-free regions”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to remove layers 23’ and 24 of Fig. 2C to obtain the structure of 2A in order to simply manufacturing and reduce material cost, and because Kwon teaches 2A as an acceptable embodiment of the invention [0076].
Regarding claim 18,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the protective layer ([0083], “coating layer”; wherein any coating layer is a protective layer, see 112(b) rejection above) has an average thickness of less than or equal to 10 um ([0066]; less than 100 nm or .1 um and greater than .1 nm, which is entirely within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 19,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), further comprising a source of lithium (Fig. 2C, 12; see [0079-0083]wherein the positive electrode contains Li and is thus a source of lithium for the battery).
Regarding claim 20,
Kwon in view of Hoshina teaches the electrochemical cell 1 of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the first electrode 12 comprises a source of lithium (Fig. 2C, 12; see [0079-0083] wherein the positive electrode contains Li and is thus a source of lithium for the battery)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Ryu (US-20230044623-A1), relevant to a positive electrode containing a high nickel content.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL WYROUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-4806. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10am-5pm.
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, TIFFANY LEGETTE can be reached on (571) 270-7078. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL CHRISTIAN ST WYROUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 1728 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723