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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 8, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment and Claim Status
The amendment filed 8 June 2026 has been entered. Claims 2 and 15 are canceled. Claims 1, 3–14, and 16–30 are pending in the application. Claims 17–28 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Objections
Claims 16 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16, line 3–4 “in a rechargeable lithium battery” should be deleted to avoid issues of antecedent basis;
Claim 30: line 2 “a metal phosphate” should instead read “the metal phosphate”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 8, 10–14, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US 2020/0136132 A1; art already of record) in view of Pan et al. (US 2024/0162420 A1; art already of record).
Regarding Claim 1, Hong discloses a positive active material (see composite cathode active material 300, [0040], FIG. 1) for a rechargeable lithium battery (see lithium battery 1, [0130], FIG. 6), the positive active material comprising:
lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see core 100, [0040], FIG. 1; see specifically Ni-based first lithium transition metal oxide, [0040]) having a molar content of nickel greater than or equal to about 80 mol% based on the total elements excluding lithium and oxygen ([0043]) and containing at least one of B or Nb (see Formulas 4 and 5, [0081]–[0084]);
a first coating layer (see first layer, [0040], which is part of the shell 200, [0040], FIG. 1, and includes the first composition, [0040]) on a surface of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles ([0042], [0051]) and containing at least one of B or Nb (see Formula 1, [0054]–[0055]); and
a second coating layer (see second layer, [0040], which is part of the shell 200, [0040], FIG. 1, and includes the second composition, [0040]) on the first coating layer ([0040]) and containing a metal phosphate (see Formula 2, [0059]–[0060]).
Hong does not disclose wherein a content of the metal phosphate is about 0.1 wt% to about 3 wt% based on 100 wt% of the total metals excluding lithium in the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles.
However, Hong does disclose wherein a content of the metal phosphate is greater than 0 wt% to about 3 wt% based on 100 wt% of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see the amount of the second composition included in the second layer is… 3 parts by weight or less… based on 100 parts by weight of the first lithium transition metal oxide, [0062]); considering that only a portion of the 100 wt% of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles is made up of metals excluding lithium, it can be understood that Hong’s disclosed range will necessarily encompass the claimed range (i.e. to put the disclosed range in terms of the claimed range, the end points of 0 wt% and about 3 wt% must be multiplied by a number greater than 1). Hong discloses that when the content of the metal phosphate is within the disclosed range, cycle characteristics and thermal stability of the lithium battery are further improved. Note that Hong is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of positive active materials for rechargeable lithium batteries ([0062]).
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I). It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the content of the metal phosphate with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in further improved cycle characteristics and thermal stability of the lithium battery.
Hong discloses wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprise cobalt-free layered lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see Formulas 4 and 5, [0081]–[0084], which do not require that the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles include cobalt; [0070] discloses that the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles are layered).
Furthermore, Pan teaches a positive active material (see layered cobalt-free positive electrode material, [0005], [0051]) for a rechargeable lithium battery (see lithium-ion battery, [0052]), the positive active material comprising: lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see layered cobalt-free positive electrode material… wherein the chemical formula is… LiaNibMncMdO2, [0008]) having a molar content of nickel equal to 80 mol% based on the total elements excluding lithium and oxygen ([0010]) and containing at least one of B or Nb ([0008]–[0009]). Pan teaches ([0013]) that utilizing lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles which are cobalt-free greatly reduces the cost of the material due to the high price of cobalt.
Pan is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of positive active materials for rechargeable lithium batteries. It would therefore have further been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a layered lithium nickel-based composite oxide particle that is cobalt-free, as taught by Pan, from the layered lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles disclosed by Hong for the purpose of greatly reducing the cost of the material.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprise secondary particles each formed by aggregation of a plurality of primary particles ([0040]), and
an average particle size of the primary particles is 50 nm to about 200 nm ([0075]).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein an average particle size of the secondary particles is about 6 µm to about 24 µm ([0076]).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprise a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1:
Chemical Formula 1
Lix1Nia1M1b1M2(1−a1−b1)O2
wherein, in Chemical Formula 1, M1 is at least one of B, Sb, or Nb, and M2 is at least one of Al, Ba, Ca, Ce, Cr, Cu, F, Fe, Mg, Mn, Mo, P, S, Si, Sr, Ti, V, W, or Zr, 0.9 ≤ x1 ≤ 1.2, 0.8 ≤ a1 < 1, and 0 ≤ b1 ≤ 0.2.
However, modified Hong does disclose wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprise a compound represented by a chemical formula which substantially overlaps in composition with that of claimed Chemical Formula 1 (see Formulas 4 and 5, Hong [0081]–[0084]).
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I). It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a compound represented by the overlapping portions of the chemical formulae with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in a functional positive active material.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein a thickness of at least a portion of the first coating layer is about 1 nm to about 10 nm ([0048]).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein the first coating layer comprises: an oxide containing lithium and at least one of B or Nb (see Formula 1, [0054]–[0055]).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein a thickness of at least a portion of the second coating layer is about 1 nm to about 20 nm.
However, Hong does disclose wherein a thickness of at least a portion of the second coating layer is about 50 nm or less ([0048]), which encompasses the claimed range. Hong discloses that when the second layer has a thickness within the disclosed range, cycle characteristics and thermal stability of the rechargeable lithium battery are improved.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I). It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the thickness of at least a portion of the second coating layer with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in improved cycle characteristics and thermal stability of the rechargeable lithium battery.
Regarding Claim 13, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein the metal in the metal phosphate of the second coating layer is at least one of Al, Ce, Co, Fe, Mg, Mn, Mo, Si, Ti, V, Zn, or Zr ([0059]–[0060]).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein the metal in the metal phosphate of the second coating layer is at least one of Al or Mg ([0059]–[0060]).
Regarding Claim 29, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Modified Hong further discloses a rechargeable lithium battery (see lithium battery 1, Hong [0130], FIG. 6), comprising
a positive electrode (see cathode 3, Hong [0130], FIG. 6) comprising the positive active material of claim 1 (Hong [0038]),
a negative electrode (see anode 2, Hong [0130], FIG. 6), and
an electrolyte (see organic electrolytic solution, Hong [0130]).
Claims 5–7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US 2020/0136132 A1; art already of record) in view of Pan et al. (US 2024/0162420 A1; art already of record) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Kim et al. (US 2018/0026267 A1; art already of record).
Regarding Claims 5–7, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles are in a form of secondary particles in each of which a plurality of primary particles are aggregated ([0040]) (Claim 5), but does not disclose
wherein at least a portion of the primary particles are radially oriented (Claim 5),
wherein the secondary particles each comprise an inner portion having an irregular porous structure and an outer portion having a radially oriented structure as a region around the inner portion (Claim 6), nor
wherein at least a portion of the primary particles have a plate shape, and each of the secondary particles comprises open pores on the surface thereof, wherein the open pores are formed by the space between the plate-shaped primary particles oriented in a radial direction, and the open pores are directed toward the center from the surface of the corresponding secondary particle (Claim 7).
Kim teaches a positive active material (see nickel-based active material, [0038]) for a rechargeable lithium battery (see lithium secondary battery, [0038]), the positive active material comprising: lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see secondary particle, [0039], also referred to as nickel-based active material secondary particles, [0041], represented by Formula 1, [0049]–[0070]) having a molar content of nickel of 33 to 95 mol% based on the total elements excluding lithium and oxygen (see 0.33 ≤ (1−x−y−z) ≤ 0.95, [0064]) and containing B ([0059]–[0060]). Kim further teaches wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles are in a form of secondary particles (see secondary particle, [0039]) in each of which a plurality of primary particles are aggregated (see primary particles, [0039], [0075]) and at least a portion of the primary particles are radially oriented ([0039]), wherein the secondary particles each comprise an inner portion having an irregular porous structure and an outer portion having a radially oriented structure as a region around the inner portion ([0039]), and wherein at least a portion of the primary particles have a plate shape (see primary plate particles, [0056]), and each of the secondary particles comprise open pores on the surface thereof ([0053], see also surface pores, [0056]), wherein the open pores are formed by the space between the plate-shaped primary particles oriented in a radial direction ([0056]), and the open pores are directed toward the center from the surface of the corresponding secondary particle ([0056]). Kim teaches that the above-described configuration of primary and secondary particles results in an increased rate of lithium diffusion such that high initial efficiency and capacity may be achieved in a lithium secondary battery including the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles ([0056], [0100]).
Kim is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of positive active materials for rechargeable lithium batteries. It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the positive active material of modified Hong such that it has the configuration of primary and secondary particles as taught by Kim, specifically such that at least a portion of the primary particles are radially oriented, the secondary particles each comprise an inner portion having an irregular porous structure and an outer portion having a radially oriented structure as a region around the inner portion, and at least a portion of the primary particles have a plate shape, and each of the secondary particles comprises open pores on the surface thereof, wherein the open pores are formed by the space between the plate-shaped primary particles oriented in a radial direction, and the open pores are directed toward the center from the surface of the corresponding secondary particle, for the purpose of increasing the rate of lithium diffusion such that high initial efficiency and capacity may be achieved in a rechargeable lithium battery including the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US 2020/0136132 A1; art already of record) in view of Pan et al. (US 2024/0162420 A1; art already of record) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Liu et al. (“Uncovering the role of Nb modification in improving the structure stability and electrochemical performance of LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 cathode charged at higher voltage of 4.5 V”; art already of record).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein a content of at least one of B, Sb, or Nb is about 0.01 wt% to about 5 wt% based on 100 wt% of the total metals excluding lithium in the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles.
Liu teaches positive active materials (see Ni-rich cathode materials, p. 150 ¶ “Although lithium-ion…”) for a rechargeable lithium battery (see lithium-ion batteries, p. 150 ¶ “Although lithium-ion…”), the positive active material comprising: lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see Nb modified LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 samples, p. 150 ¶ “LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 was synthesized…”) having a molar content of nickel equal to about 60 mol% based on the total elements excluding lithium and oxygen and containing Nb (p. 150 ¶ “LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 was synthesized…”); and a first coating layer on a surface of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles and containing Nb (see Li3NbO4 coating, p. 151–152 ¶ “Typical field emission…”). Liu teaches that Nb addition increases the stability of the layered structure but decreases coulombic efficiency (p. 152 ¶ “Initial charge and…”). Note that Liu is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of positive active materials for rechargeable lithium batteries.
A result-effective variable is a variable which achieves a recognized result. The determination of the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable is routine experimentation and therefore obvious (MPEP § 2144.05.II). In the instant case, the content of Nb is a variable that achieves the recognized result of affecting the stability of the layered structure and coulombic efficiency, as taught by Liu, thus making the content of Nb a result-effective variable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the positive active material of modified Hong such that a content of the Nb is about 0.01 wt% to about 5 wt% based on 100 wt% of the total metals excluding lithium in the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles via routine experimentation, for the purpose of achieving suitable stability of the layered structure and coulombic efficiency.
Claims 16 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al. (US 2020/0136132 A1; art already of record) in view of Pan et al. (US 2024/0162420 A1; art already of record) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Cho (US 2020/0343550 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein a content of residual lithium on the surface of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles based on 100 wt% of the positive active material is less than about 0.2 wt%.
Cho teaches a positive active material for a rechargeable lithium battery ([0049]), the positive active material comprising: lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see nickel-based lithium metal oxide, [0051]) having a molar content of nickel greater than or equal to 60 mol% (see Chemical Formula 4, [0072]–[0073]) based on the total elements excluding lithium and oxygen and containing at least one of Nb ([0073]) or B ([0075]), and the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprise cobalt-free layered lithium nickel-based composite oxide (see Chemical Formula 4, [0072]–[0073], which does not include Co; [0069] discloses the lithium nickel-based composite oxide is layered). Cho teaches wherein a content of residual lithium on the surface should be limited to 0.1 wt% or less in order to improve safety by reducing a side-reaction of the residual lithium with an electrolyte solution and gas generation at high temperature and voltage, and improve uniformity and pH characteristics of the electrode slurry during manufacture ([0091], [0093]).
Cho is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of positive active materials for lithium rechargeable batteries. It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the positive active material of modified Hong such that the content of residual lithium of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles is less than about 0.1 wt% based on 100 wt% of the positive active material, as taught by Cho, for the purpose of improving safety by reducing a side-reaction of the residual lithium with an electrolyte solution and gas generation at high temperature and voltage, and improving uniformity and pH characteristics of the electrode slurry during manufacture.
Regarding Claim 30, modified Hong discloses the positive active material as set forth above. Hong further discloses wherein the second coating layer comprises the metal phosphate in which the metal is Al or Mg ([0059]–[0060]).
Hong discloses wherein a thickness of at least a portion of the second coating layer is about 50 nm or less ([0048]), which encompasses the claimed range. Hong further discloses that when the second layer has a thickness within the disclosed range, cycle characteristics and thermal stability of the rechargeable lithium battery are improved.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I). It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the thickness of at least a portion of the second coating layer with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in improved cycle characteristics and thermal stability of the rechargeable lithium battery.
Hong does not disclose wherein a content of residual lithium on the surface of the positive active material is less than about 0.2 wt% based on 100 wt% of the positive active material.
Cho teaches a positive active material for a rechargeable lithium battery ([0049]), the positive active material comprising: lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles (see nickel-based lithium metal oxide, [0051]) having a molar content of nickel greater than or equal to 60 mol% (see Chemical Formula 4, [0072]–[0073]) based on the total elements excluding lithium and oxygen and containing at least one of Nb ([0073]) or B ([0075]), and the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprise cobalt-free layered lithium nickel-based composite oxide (Chemical Formula 4, [0072]–[0073] does not include Co; [0069] discloses the lithium nickel-based composite oxide is layered). Cho teaches wherein a content of residual lithium on the surface should be limited to 0.1 wt% or less in order to improve safety by reducing a side-reaction of the residual lithium with an electrolyte solution and gas generation at high temperature and voltage, and improve uniformity and pH characteristics of the electrode slurry during manufacture ([0091], [0093]).
Cho is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of positive active materials for lithium rechargeable batteries. It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the positive active material of modified Hong such that the content of residual lithium of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles is less than about 0.1 wt% based on 100 wt% of the positive active material, as taught by Cho, for the purpose of improving safety by reducing a side-reaction of the residual lithium with an electrolyte solution and gas generation at high temperature and voltage, and improving uniformity and pH characteristics of the electrode slurry during manufacture.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments on p. 11–15 of the Remarks filed 8 June 2026 regarding the reference Min have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Min for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments on p. 15–16 of the Remarks filed 8 June 2026 regarding the rejections of previous Claim 2 (limitations of which are now incorporated into amended Claim 1) have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant argues on p. 15 of the Remarks that a person would not have been motivated to readily adopt a cobalt-free high-nickel oxide due to concerns regarding the severe structural degradation resulting from the complete removal of cobalt, which constitutes a teaching away from such a modification, even if a person of ordinary skill in the art were aware of the cost-reduction benefits disclosed in Pan.
This argument is not persuasive. As set forth in the rejection above, Hong discloses lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles which do not require Co (see Formulas 4 and 5, [0081]–[0085]), and furthermore does not appear to disclose that excluding Co would lead to any negative effects; a person of ordinary skill in the art would thus not be taught away from a Co-free embodiment of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles. Pan further provides a motivation, specifically reduced cost, for utilizing lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles which are free of Co. It is further noted by the examiner that Pan discloses functional Co-free lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles which overlap in composition with that of Hong (see layered cobalt-free positive electrode material… wherein the chemical formula is… LiaNibMncMdO2, [0008]), and therefore a person of ordinary skill in the art, considering the disclosures of Hong and Pan, would have had ample reason to select Co-free lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles from the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles disclosed by Hong with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in a lithium nickel-based composite oxide particle that was functional and cost-effective.
Applicant argues on p. 15–16 of the Remarks that the present invention does not merely eliminate cobalt for the purpose of reducing material costs, but overcomes the associated instability with a unique dual-protection mechanism, namely incorporation of B, Sb, or Nb into the particles and first coating, formation of a second coating layer containing a metal phosphate, the content of which is controlled. However, none of the cited references teach or suggest this specific dual-protection mechanism as a solution, nor do they recognize or suggest any synergistic effect resulting from this combination.
This argument is not persuasive. Firstly, it is noted that cited reference Hong, now utilized as a primary reference in the rejection above, in combination with the other cited references, does disclose or render obvious the elements of the claimed invention described above as comprising the dual-protection mechanism. Secondly, it is noted regarding Applicant’s argument that the cited motivation for modification of the lithium nickel-based composite particles to be Co-free does not contemplate the overcoming of instability due to Co elimination with a unique dual-protection mechanism as described by the present invention, the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Thirdly, regarding Applicant’s argument that the cited references do not recognize or suggest the synergistic effect resulting from the present invention, it is submitted that such a synergistic effect of the present invention has not been sufficiently demonstrated for at least the following reasons:
the instant specification does not describe the results as unexpected, and thus a showing of unexpected results must be in an affidavit or declaration and be compared to the closest prior art. As per MPEP § 716.02(e), an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 must compare the claimed subject matter with the closest prior art to be effective to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness. In re Burckel, 592 F.2d 1175, 201 USPQ 67 (CCPA 1979). Applicants may compare the claimed invention with prior art that is more closely related to the invention than the prior art relied upon by the Examiner. In re Holladay, 584 F.2d 384, 199 USPQ 516 (CCPA 1978); Ex parte Humber, 217 USPQ 265 (Bd. App. 1961). In other words, the evidence of unexpected results must be compared with prior art;
as per MPEP § 716.02(b), the evidence relied upon should establish "that the differences in results are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance." Ex parte Gelles, 22 USPQ2d 1318, 1319 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992). In the instant case, Applicant argues a synergistic effect from the combination of (1) the first coating layer containing at least one of B, Sb, or Nb, (2) the second coating layer containing a metal phosphate, and (3) the content of the metal phosphate. However, Applicant does not appear to have, for example, provided any experimental examples where the content of metal phosphate was varied; and
as per MPEP § 716.02(d), whether unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, “objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support." In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occurred over the entire claimed range, In re Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980). In the instant case, for example, Applicant has not provided any experimental data regarding e.g. the capacity, efficiency, and cycle-life characteristics of the lithium nickel-based composite oxide particles comprising Nb or Sb as claimed, nor any positive active materials comprising second coating layers including metal phosphates other than AlPO4.
Applicant’s arguments on p. 16 of the Remarks filed 8 June 2026 regarding the combination of references, namely Kim, Manthiram, Hong, Choi, and Pan, as being “extensive” has been considered but is moot because the new ground of rejection does not require the above combination. However, it is noted that reliance on a large number of references in a rejection does not, without more, weigh against the obviousness of the claimed invention. See In re Gorman, 933 F.2d 982, 18 USPQ2d 1885 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Applicant’s arguments on p. 16–17 of the Remarks filed 8 June 2026 regarding the reference Choi have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does rely on Choi for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument; it is noted that the arguments against the reference Pan and its combination with other cited references, as well as the specific advantages of the present invention not contemplated by the combination of references, which are described in this same section of the Remarks have already been addressed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA MARIE FEHR, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-0860. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/J.M.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
