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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments have been entered. Amendments do not overcome the 103 rejection previously set forth in non-final office action mailed 03/06/2026
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 ,5-6, and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of ‘, ‘Self-ball milling strategy to construct high-entropy oxide coated LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 with enhanced electrochemical performance’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yuan’, in view of Improvement of the Cycling Performance of LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 Cathode Active Materials by a Dual-Conductive Polymer Coating’ hereinafter referred to a ‘Ju’ in view of ‘Improving electrochemical performance of Ni-rich LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 cathode for Li-ion batteries by dual-conductive coating layer of PPy and LiAlO2’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Ma’, in view of ‘A highly stabilized nickel-rich cathode material by nanoscale epitaxy control for high-energy lithium-ion batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’
Regarding Claim 1,
Yuan teaches an electrode for an electrochemical device, comprising: an electroactive material comprising particles of cathode active material, each particle having a surface; a primary coating layer on the surface of each particle of the cathode active material, the primary coating layer comprising a high entropy metal oxide (HEO) (Yuan, “Here, we present a facile self-ball milling method to obtain (La0.2Nd0.2Sm0.2Eu0.2Gd0.2)2Zr2O7 (HEO) coated LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 (NCM811). The HEO coating endows NCM811 with a stable surface, reduces the contact with the external environment (air and electrolyte), and inhibits side reactions between cathode and electrolyte.”, see Abstract); the particles of cathode active material comprise layered lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (Li1+6NixMnyCozO2,6>0, x+y+z=1); layered lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide (LiNixCoyAlzO2, x+y+z=1);LiCoO2; LiNiO2; LiMnO2; lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2); spinel lithium nickel manganese oxide (LiNixMn2-x04, Ox<2); lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4); LiNiPO4; LiMnxFei-xPO4 (0<x1); LiCoPO4; layered sodium transition metal oxide (NaTMO2) (Yuan, “The HEO coating endows NCM811”, see Abstract); or a mixture of any two or more thereof, wherein TM is Fe, Co, Ni, Mn, Cr, V, Cu, Ti, or a combination of any two or more thereof, the primary coating layer is present in a weight percentage from >0 wt.% to about 5 wt. %, based on the weight of the electroactive material (Yuan, “the sample with 5 wt% HEO coated (5HEO-NCM811) delivers enhanced cycling stability”, Introduction):
Yuan does not teach the primary coating has a thickness from about 0.5 nm to about 30 nm.
Yuan teaches the primary coating has of about 100nm in thickness (Yuan, “The prepared HEO is a flake powder with a size of ~100 nm”, see Results and Discussion).
Yuan teaches that is desirable for the coating to be as thin as possible in order to inhibit resistance (Yuan, “According to previous works, the ideal surface coating should meet the following conditions: (1) The coating materials do not change the crystal structure of the cathode material, (2) the coating layer is thin enough and well dispersed so as not to reduce the conductivity, (3)”, see Introduction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the layer thickness of 100nm to be smaller to the claimed range as a matter of optimization to reduce resistance (see MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A))
Yuan does not teach secondary a secondary coating layer comprising an ionic and electronic conductive polymer; wherein: the secondary coating layer, when present, is disposed directly on the primary coating layer
Ju teaches a secondary a secondary coating layer comprising an ionic and electronic conductive polymer (Ju, “LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 cathode materials were surface-modified by coating with a dual conductive poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-co-poly(ethylene glycol) (PEDOT-co-PEG) copolymer”, see Abstract).
Ju teaches that the presence of a conductive polymer suppresses the growth of a resistive layer (Ju, “The presence of a protective conducting polymer layer formed on the cathode also suppressed the growth of a resistive layer and inhibited the dissolution of transition metals from the active cathode materials, which resulted in more stable cycling characteristics than the pristine LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2”, see Abstract).
Yuan and Ju are analogous as they are both of the same field of coatings for electrode materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention as taught in Yuan to add a protective polymer layer.
Modified Yuan does not teach a secondary coating layer, when present, is disposed directly on the primary coating layer.
Ma teaches a secondary coating layer, when present, is disposed directly on the primary coating layer (Ma, “However, NCM still suffers from poor rate capability and insufficient cycle stability owing to the poor conductivity as well as side reactions. Here, a dual-conductive coating strategy is employed to address these issues.”, see Abstract)(see Figure 1).
Ma teaches that a dual coating can suppress side reactions and increase conductivity (Ma, “The LiAlO2 coating can suppress side reactions and enhance ionic conductivity, and the PPy coating can increase electronic conductivity.”, see Abstract).
Modified Yuan and Ma are analogous as they are both of the same filed of coatings of cathode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention as taught in Yuan to have a dual coating as taught in Ma, one of which is a conductive polymer coating, in order to protect the cathode while allowing for increase conductivity along with the inherent benefits of HEO.
Modified Yuan does not teach the primary coating layer is epitaxial to the primary coasting cathode active material.
Kim teaches the primary coating layer is epitaxial to the primary coasting cathode active material (Kim, “In terms of the epitaxial coating process, many researchers have suggested that the interfacial stability and morphological integrity of layered cathode materials could be improved by introducing spinel or layered phases on the cathode surface”, see Broader Context).
Kim teaches that this type of coating can improve ionic and electronic mobility (Kim, “Previously, our group reported a heterostructure LiMn2O4 spinel cathode treated with an epitaxially grown layered phase, which increased the ionic and electronic mobility”, see Broader Context).
Modified Yuan and Kim are analogous as they are both of the same field of cathode coatings.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the HEO coating to be epitaxial growth in order to increase the ionic and electronic mobility.
Regarding Claim 5,
Modified Yuan teaches the electrode of claim 1, wherein secondary coating layer is present and the ionic and electronic conductive polymer comprises poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene), polypyrrole, polyaniline, or a blend of any two or more thereof (Ju, “LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 cathode materials were surface-modified by coating with a dual conductive poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)”, See Abstract).
Regarding Claim 6,
Modified Yuan teaches the electrode of claim 1, wherein the secondary coating layer is present in a weight percentage from 0 wt.% to about 3 wt. %, based on the weight of the electroactive material (Ju, “The weight percentage of the PEDOT-co-PEG copolymer coated on the LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 particle was determined to be about 0.78% see Results and Discussion); and the secondary coating has a thickness from about 0.5 nm to about 20 nm (Ju, “On the contrary, the magnified image around the edge of the surface-modified LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 particle shown in Figure 2b reveals that it is uniformly coated by a thin conductive polymer layer which has a thickness ranging from 11 to 18 nm.”, Results and Discussion).
Regarding Claim 9,
Modified Yuan teaches the electrode of claim 1, wherein the particles of cathode active material comprise polycrystalline particles that are micrometer-sized spherical secondary particles comprising nanometer- sized primary particles, or particles of cathode active material comprise single-crystalline particles that do not contain primary particles (Yuan, see annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
404
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10,
Modified Yuan teaches an energy storage device, comprising a cathode comprising the electrode of claim 1, an anode, a separator, and an electrolyte (Yuan, “The separator and anode were a porous polypropylene membrane (Celgard2500) and a lithium metal disc with a diameter of 15 mm, respectively. The cathode electrodes were fabricated by mixing the active material”, see 2.3 Assessments of Electrochemical Performance) .
Regarding Claim 11,
Modified Yuan teaches the energy storage device of claim 10, wherein the anode comprises lithium metal, sodium metal, graphite, hard carbon, silicon, tin, antimony, phosphorus, transition metal oxide lithium titanate, or a combination of any two or more thereof (Yuan, “The separator and anode were a porous polypropylene membrane (Celgard2500) and a lithium metal disc with a diameter of 15 mm, respectively. The cathode electrodes were fabricated by mixing the active material”, see 2.3 Assessments of Electrochemical Performance).
Regarding Claim 12,
Modified Yuan teaches the energy storage device of claim 10, wherein the cathode and/or the anode comprise one or more of a current collector;a conductive carbon material and a binder that is sodium carboxymethylcellulose, sodium alginate, poly(acrylic acid), lithiated poly(acrylic acid), sodiated poly(acrylic acid), poly (vinyl alcohol), polyvinyl acetate, poly (ethylene imine), carboxymethyl chitosan, glutaradehyde, B-cyclodextrin polymer, Gum Arabic, PEDOT-PSS, polyacrylic latex, gelatin, polyamido amine, polyvinylidene fluoride, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyethylene, polystyrene, polyethylene oxide, polyimide, styrene butadiene rubber (SBR), polythiophene, polyacetylene, poly(9,9-dioctylfluorene-co-fluorenone), poly(9,9- dioctylfluorene-co-fluorenone-co-methylbenzoic ester), or a combination of any two or more thereof (Yuan, “The cathode electrodes were fabricated by mixing the active material, poly(vinyl difluoride) (PVDF), and acetylene black (AB) in a weight ratio of 8:1:1 with the solvent of N-methyl-2- pyrrolidone (NMP). Then the homogenized slurries were coated on Al foil and dried at 100 ℃ for 8 h under vacuum.”, see 2.3 Assessment of Electrochemical Performance ).
Regarding Claim 13,
Modified Yuan teaches the energy storage device of claim 10, wherein the electrolyte comprises a salt and a solvent comprising ethylene carbonate, propylene carbonate, diethyl carbonate, dimethyl carbonate, ethyl methyl carbonate, tetraethylene glycol, dimethylsulfolane, 1,2-dimethoxyethane, 1,2- diethoxyethane, or a combination of any two or more thereof, or b. the electrolyte is a solid electrolyte that is a ceramic electrolyte, a polymer electrolyte, a glass electrolyte, or a combination of any two or more thereof (Yuan, “To evaluate the electrochemical performances of these materials, CR2032 coin half-cells were assembled in a glovebox filled with argon. 1.0 M LiPF6 in a mixture of ethylene carbonate (EC)/dimethyl carbonate (DEC)/ ethyl methyl carbonate (EMC)”, see 2.3 Assessment of Electrochemical Performance ).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Self-ball milling strategy to construct high-entropy oxide coated LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 with enhanced electrochemical performance’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yuan’, in view of Improvement of the Cycling Performance of LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 Cathode Active Materials by a Dual-Conductive Polymer Coating’ hereinafter referred to a ‘Ju’ in further view of ‘Improving electrochemical performance of Ni-rich LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 cathode for Li-ion batteries by dual-conductive coating layer of PPy and LiAlO2’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Ma’, in view of ‘A highly stabilized nickel-rich cathode material by nanoscale epitaxy control for high-energy lithium-ion batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’,
in further view of ‘Designing a double-coated cathode with high entropy oxides by microwave-assisted hydrothermal synthesis for highly stable Li–S batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Colombo’
Regarding Claim 2,
Modified Yuan does not teach the electrode of claim 1, wherein the HEO comprises at least five constituent cations selected from the group consisting of Li, Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, La, Al, Ti, Cu, Si, Mg, Zn, Sn, Ta, Fe, Sb, Y, Cr, Mo, V, and Sc cations; at least five constituent cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, La, Al, Ti, Cu, Si, Mg, Zn, Sn, Ta, Fe, Sb, Y, Cr, Mo, V, and Sc cations; at least five constituent metal cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, La, Al, Ti, and Ta cations; at least five constituent metal cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, Al, Ti, and Ta cations; or at least five constituent metal cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, and Zr cations; and wherein the cations are present with different weight percentages
Colombo teaches wherein the HEO comprises at least five constituent cations selected from the group consisting of Li, Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, La, Al, Ti, Cu, Si, Mg, Zn, Sn, Ta, Fe, Sb, Y, Cr, Mo, V, and Sc cations; at least five constituent cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, La, Al, Ti, Cu, Si, Mg, Zn, Sn, Ta, Fe, Sb, Y, Cr, Mo, V, and Sc cations; at least five constituent metal cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, La, Al, Ti, and Ta cations; at least five constituent metal cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, Zr, Al, Ti, and Ta cations; or at least five constituent metal cations selected from the group consisting of Ni, Co, Mn, Nb, W, and Zr cations; and wherein the cations are present with different weight percentages (Colombo, “By building the dual-layer cathode, in which the sulfur/carbon active material is sandwiched between the aluminum current collector and the (Co0.2Cu0.2Mg0.2Ni0.2Zn0.2)O HEO layer,”, see Introduction) (The examiner notes that considering the molar ratios are equal, the weight percentages must be different due to the different molar masses of each element).
Colombo teaches that this HEO is beneficial (Colombo, “Nonetheless, HEO has been successfully employed as coating of NMC811 cathode active material. In this case, the HEO coating acted as an artificial cathode electrolyte interphase (CEI) that inhibited side reactions at the cathode/electrolyte interface, significantly reducing the polarization of the Li-ion battery and increasing the rate of the capacity retention”, see Introduction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the HEO as taught in Yuan with the HEO as taught in Colombo as matter of obvious simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (MPEP 2143 (I)(B)).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of, ‘Self-ball milling strategy to construct high-entropy oxide coated LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 with enhanced electrochemical performance’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yuan’, in view of Improvement of the Cycling Performance of LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 Cathode Active Materials by a Dual-Conductive Polymer Coating’ hereinafter referred to a ‘Ju’’ in view of ‘Improving electrochemical performance of Ni-rich LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 cathode for Li-ion batteries by dual-conductive coating layer of PPy and LiAlO2’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Ma ’, in view of ‘A highly stabilized nickel-rich cathode material by nanoscale epitaxy control for high-energy lithium-ion batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim as evidenced by ‘Entropy and crystal-facet modulation of P2-type layered cathodes for long-lasting sodium-based batteries’, hereinafter referred to as ‘Fu’
Regarding Claim 4,
Modified Yuan teaches the electrode of claim 1, wherein the primary coating layer comprises aligned diffusion channels for alkaline ions (Yuan, “DLi+ of the two samples have the same order of magnitude, indicating that the HEO coating layer does not hinder the diffusion of Li+. However, compared to NCM811, the DLi+ of 5HEO-NCM811 is slightly larger. This is because the amount of HEO coating is very small relative to that of the bulk material, and the coating layer suppresses the side reaction at the electrode– electrolyte interface, and thus the Li-ion diffusion is slightly improved.”, see Results and Discussion))(The examiner notes that high entropy coating inherently creates more aligned diffusion channels as evidenced by Fu (Fu, “Na0.62Mn0.67Ni0.23Cu0.05Mg0.09-2yTiyO2. The Na+ extraction/insertion kinetics are mainly attributed to the increased structural stability and ion-diffusion channels.”, see Discussion))
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of, ‘Self-ball milling strategy to construct high-entropy oxide coated LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 with enhanced electrochemical performance’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Yuan’, in view of Improvement of the Cycling Performance of LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 Cathode Active Materials by a Dual-Conductive Polymer Coating’ hereinafter referred to a ‘Ju’ in further view of ‘Improving electrochemical performance of Ni-rich LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 cathode for Li-ion batteries by dual-conductive coating layer of PPy and LiAlO2’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Ma’ in view of ‘A highly stabilized nickel-rich cathode material by nanoscale epitaxy control for high-energy lithium-ion batteries’ hereinafter referred to as ‘Kim’, in further view of ‘The Effect of Elemental Doping on Nickel-Rich NCM Cathode Materials of Lithium Ion Batteries’, hereinafter referred to as ‘Dang’
Regarding Claim 8,
Modified Yuan does not teach wherein the electroactive material further comprises dopants selected from the group consisting of Sn, Al, Ti, La, Mg, Zn, Si, Ta, Mo, W, Nb, Fe, Cu, Cr, and Zr.
Dang teaches the electroactive material further comprises dopants selected from the group consisting of Sn, Al, Ti, La, Mg, Zn, Si, Ta, Mo, W, Nb, Fe, Cu, Cr, and Zr (Dang, “Mg- and Al-doped LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 (NCM) materials were synthesized by a hydrothermal method,”, see Abstract).
Dang also teaches that doping with Al improved the performance of the cell. (Dang, “Compared with NCM without doping, the Al-doped NCM (NCM-Al) exhibited improved electrochemical behavior”, see Abstract).
Yuan and Dang are analogous as they are both of the same field of battery materials for lithium nickel cobalt oxides.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrochemical active material as taught in Yuan with the dopant as taught in Dang in order to improve the electrochemical performance of the battery.
Response to Arguments
Arguments filed on 06/05/2026 have been entered. Arguments are fully considered.
On pg. 8 the applicant argues:
“Yuan is directed to a "self-ball milling strategy" for providing LiNio.8Coo.1Mno.102 with an HEO coating. As noted on page 4 of the Office Action, "Yuan does not teach the primary coating has a thickness from about 0.5 nm to about 30 nm." The HEO coating achieved in Yuan is described as "nano-flakes" with "a size of -100 nm," and the SEM images in FIG. 2 indicate-8- ”
The examiner finds this convincing and has added to the record ‘Kim’ which teaches the epitaxial coating on the cathode, which improves ionic mobility of the cathode. The examiner contends that it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the HEO coating to epitaxial in order to improve the mobility of the ions.
On pg. 9, the applicant argues:
“Yuan's disclosure, as well as the other cited references, are bereft of evidence showing that such alteration of the thickness of the HEO coating to provide a particular result. That Yuan describes "the coating layer is thin enough and well dispersed so as not to reduce the conductivity" does not establish all that is required under law for "routine optimization."”
However, this is not convincing. The cited passage from the examiner states, “According to previous works, the ideal surface coating should meet the following conditions: (1) The coating materials do not change the crystal structure of the cathode material, (2) the coating layer is thin enough and well dispersed so as not to reduce the conductivity, (3).” Yuan stating that the coating layer must be thin enough as to not reduce conductivity suggests that a thick coating layer reduces conductivity. Therefore, thickness/thinness is a result effective variable which controls the conductivity (see MPEP 2144.05 (II)(B)). Therefore, thickness would be a variable which would meet the requirements for optimization of ranges and the thickness as claimed would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to optimize.
Conclusion
21`. 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 SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OLATUNJI A GODO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights