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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/02/2026 has been entered.
Summary
This is a continued examination non-final office action for application 17/988,646 in response to the amendments filed on 05/27/2026. Claims 1-10 and 12-19 are under examination.
Withdrawn Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
The amendment(s) to the claim(s) filed on 05/27/2026 is acknowledged and the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection is withdrawn.
Response to Remarks
The remarks/amendments filed on 05/27/2026 in response to the Final Office Action mailed on 04/03/2026 are acknowledged and were found to be persuasive over the previously applied prior art rejection of record. The previous rejections are thus withdrawn. However, in light of the amendments a new search was conducted and new prior art identified that renders the previous arguments moot and new rejections have been set forth. See claims 1-10 and 12-19 rejections below.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2022-0045330 filed on 04/12/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS)s submitted on 11/16/2022, 04/04/2023, 11/14/2023, 01/16/2025, 04/22/2025, 06/24/2025, 04/24/2025, 08/18/2025, 11/06/2025, 12/18/2025, 04/16/2025, 07/10/2026 and 09/24/2026 are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-10 and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 1, claim 1 recites a positive active material comprising a cobalt free lithium nickel manganese based oxide represented by Chemical Formula 4: LiaNixMnyM1zM2wO2-bXb, wherein M1 is selected from Ti, Zr, W, Mo, and Nb and has a coefficient z greater than 0 and less than 0.1, and M2 is selected from Al, Mg, Fe, Cr, Sr, V, B, Ba, Ca, and Si and has a separate coefficient w greater than or equal to 0 and less than 0.1.
However, the specification as originally filed places Al, Mg, Fe, Cr, Sr, and V in the same M1 group as Ti, Zr, W, Mo, and Nb, with the amount of that group represented by a single coefficient z greater than 0 and less than 0.1. The separately quantified M2 group is limited to B, Ba, Ca, and Si (see e.g. paragraphs [0034]–[0039] and [00108]–[00113] of the instant specification).
Thus, the original disclosure permits combinations of the originally listed M1 elements, but limits their combined amount to less than 0.1. Claim 1 instead places some of those elements in a separately quantified M2 group, permitting the combined amount of the originally listed M1 elements to equal or exceed 0.1.
As an example, claim 1 encompasses the species LiNi0.65Mn0.20Ti0.08Al0.07O2, where M1 is Ti, z is 0.08, M2 is Al, w is 0.07, a is 1, and b is 0. The coefficients satisfy the claimed ranges and sum to 1. However, Ti and Al are both members of the originally disclosed M1 group, and their combined coefficient in this composition is 0.15, which exceeds the originally disclosed limit of less than 0.1.
The instant specification does not describe separately assigning the originally listed M1 elements to two groups having independent concentration limits that permit this increased combined amount. Accordingly, the amendment changes the disclosed compositional relationship and is not merely a change in the names of the variables. The original disclosure therefore does not reasonably convey possession of the full scope of the composition now recited in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 12, claim 12 recites Chemical Formula 4-1: LiaNix1Mny1Alw1M1z1O2-bXb, Al has the coefficient w1 and M1, selected from Ti, Zr, W, Mo, and Nb, has the separate coefficient z1; wherein w1 and z1 both follow the range 0 < w1, z1 < 1.
However, the originally disclosed Chemical Formula 4-1 instead assigns the coefficient z1 to Al and the coefficient w1 to M2 selected from B, Ba, Ca, and Si (see e.g. paragraphs [0040]–[0042] and [00115]–[00117] of the instant specification). Although original Chemical Formula 4 permits Al together with Ti, Zr, W, Mo, or Nb, these elements are included within the same group having a combined coefficient less than 0.1.
Thus claim 12 has the same unsupported expansion identified for claim 1 because it permits the combined amount of Al and the recited M1 elements to equal or exceed 0.1.
Regarding Claims 2-10 and 13-19, claims 2-10 and 13-19 are dependent upon claims 1 and 12 and thus are rejected for the same reasons presented above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-10, 12-14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. (KR-20190127412-A) and further in view of Gao et al. (CN 113363461 A). Regarding Claim 1, Lim discloses a rechargeable lithium battery (see e.g. "rechargeable lithium battery" in paragraph [27] on page 3), comprising:
an electrolyte solution (see e.g. "electrolyte" in Abstract) comprising a non-aqueous organic solvent (see e.g. "nonaqueous organic solvent" in Abstract), a lithium salt (see e.g. "lithium salts" in Abstract), and an additive (see e.g. "additive" in Abstract), the electrolyte solution being free from propane sultone (PS) (see e.g. “Additives: 1% by weight of 1,3-propanesultone and 0.5% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane” in paragraph [172] in Example 1 on page 16 and “Lithium was prepared in the same manner as in Example 1, except that the contents of 1,3-propanesultone and 2-fluoro-1,3,2- dioxaphosphorane were changed to 0 wt% and 1 wt%, respectively” in paragraph [178] in Comparative Example 4 on page 17 of Lim; the additive in Comparative Example 4 is free of propane sultone);
a positive electrode (see e.g. "positive electrode" in paragraph [132] on page 12) comprising a positive active material (see e.g. "positive electrode active material" in paragraph [132] on page 12); and
a negative electrode (see e.g. "negative electrode" in paragraph [147] on page 14) comprising a negative active material (see e.g. "negative electrode active material" in paragraph [147] on page 14),
wherein the additive is 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane (see e.g. "1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane" in Comparative Example 4 paragraph [178] on page 16). The prior art discloses an electrolyte additive 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane which is represented by Chemical Formula 1 where R1-R6 is hydrogen, X1 is a fluoro group, and n is 0. The chemical structure of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane can be seen in the image provided below.
Lim does not disclose that the positive active material comprises a cobalt-free lithium nickel manganese based oxide represented by Chemical Formula 4: LiaNixMnyM1zM2wO2-bXb wherein in Chemical Formula 4, 0.9 ≤ a < 1.2, 0 ≤ b < 0.1, 0 ≤ w < 0.1, 0.6 ≤ x < 1.0, 0 < y < 0.4, 0 < z < 0.1, w + x + y + z = 1, M1 is at least one element selected from among Ti, Zr, W, Mo and Nb, M2 is at least one element selected from among Al, Mg, Fe, Cr, Sr, V, B, Ba, Ca, and Si and X is at least one element selected from among S, F and P.
Gao, however, in the same field of endeavor, rechargeable lithium batteries, discloses a cobalt-free positive electrode material that is Li(Ni0.75Mn0.235W0.015)0.99Al0.01O2 (which corresponds to LiNi0.7425Mn0.23265W0.01485Al0.01O2) (see e.g. paragraph [75] of Gao). This corresponds directly with the claimed positive active material. For example, in Chemical Formula 4 if a = 1, x = 0.7425, y = 0.23265, M1 is W, z = 0.01485, M2 is Al, w = 0.01 and b = 0; the corresponding positive active material would be LiNi0.7425Mn0.23265W0.01485Al0.01O2 which is the same positive active material disclosed by Gao.
Gao discloses points that lie within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Gao also teaches that this active material also has high reversible capacity and super strong circulation stability and is a cathode material with low cost and stable performance (see e.g. paragraph [75] of Gao). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the positive active material of Lim et al. such that it comprises a cobalt-free lithium nickel manganese based oxide represented by Chemical Formula 4: LiaNixMnyM1zM2wO2-bXb wherein in Chemical Formula 4, 0.9 ≤ a < 1.2, 0 ≤ b < 0.1, 0 ≤ w < 0.1, 0.6 ≤ x < 1.0, 0 < y < 0.4, 0 < z < 0.1, w + x + y + z = 1, M1 is at least one element selected from among Ti, Zr, W, Mo and Nb, M2 is at least one element selected from among Al, Mg, Fe, Cr, Sr, V, B, Ba, Ca, and Si and X is at least one element selected from among S, F and P as taught by Gao et al. in order to have a cathode material with high reversible capacity, super strong circulation stability, and low cost with stable performance as suggested by Gao.
PNG
media_image1.png
116
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorale, chemical structure depiction, PubChem)
Regarding Claim 2, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim discloses an electrolyte additive that is 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane (see e.g., "1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane" in Comparative Example 4 paragraph [178] on page 16). The prior art discloses an electrolyte additive 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane which is represented by Chemical Formula 1-1 where R1-R6 are hydrogen and n is 0. The chemical structure of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane can be seen in the image below.
PNG
media_image1.png
116
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorale, chemical structure depiction, PubChem)
Regarding Claim 3, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above).
Lim discloses an electrolyte additive that is 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane (see e.g., "1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane" in Comparative Example 4 paragraph [178] on page 16). The prior art discloses an electrolyte additive 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane which is represented by Chemical Formula 1-1A where R3-R6 are hydrogen. The chemical structure of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane can be seen in the image below.
PNG
media_image1.png
116
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorale, chemical structure depiction, PubChem)
Regarding Claim 4, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 3 (see e.g. claim 3 rejection above).
Lim discloses an electrolyte additive that is 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane (see e.g. "1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane" in Comparative Example 4 paragraph [178] on page 16). The prior art discloses an electrolyte additive 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane which is represented by Chemical Formula 1-1A where R3 and R4 are each hydrogen and R5 and R6 are also hydrogen. The chemical structure of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane can be seen in the image below.
PNG
media_image1.png
116
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorale, chemical structure depiction, PubChem)
Regarding Claim 5, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim discloses an electrolyte additive that is 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane (see e.g. “1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane" in Comparative Example 4 paragraph [178] on page 16). The chemical structure of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane can be seen in the image below and is the left compound of Group 1 claimed by the instant application.
PNG
media_image1.png
116
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorale, chemical structure depiction, PubChem)
Regarding Claim 6, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim further discloses that 1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane is used as the electrolyte additive (see e.g. "1.0% by weight of 2-fluoro-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorane" in Comparative Example 4 paragraph [178] on page 16). 1.0% by weight is equivalent to 1.0 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of the electrolyte solution.
Lim discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding Claim 7, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim further discloses that the additive further comprises at least one of vinylene carbonate (VC) (see e.g., "vinylene carbonate" in paragraph [50] on page 5), fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC), difluoroethylene carbonate, chloroethylene carbonate, dichloroethylene carbonate, bromoethylene carbonate, dibromoethylene carbonate, nitroethylene carbonate, cyanoethylene carbonate (see e.g. "The electrolyte may further include... an ethylene-based carbonate compound" in paragraph [121] on page 11 and "Representative examples of the ethylene-based carbonate compounds include difluoro ethylene carbonate, chloroethylene carbonate, dichloroethylene carbonate, bromoethylene carbonate, dibromoethylene carbonate, nitroethylene carbonate, cyanoethylene carbonate, or fluoroethylene carbonate." in paragraph [123] on page 11), propensultone (PST) (see e.g. " 1-propene-1,3-sultone... added as an additive" in paragraph [180] on page 17) and lithium tetrafluoroborate (LiBF4) (see e.g. "LiBF4" in paragraph [130] on page 12).
Regarding Claim 8, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim further discloses the non-aqueous organic solvent is composed of chain carbonate alone (see e.g. "As the non-aqueous organic solvent, a carbonate-based… solvent may be used" in paragraph [113] on page 9 and "Examples of the carbonate solvent include dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), methylpropyl carbonate (MPC), ethylpropyl carbonate (EPC), methylethyl carbonate (MEC)" in paragraph [114] on page 9). Dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), methylpropyl carbonate (MPC), ethylpropyl carbonate (EPC) and methylethyl carbonate (MEC) are all examples of chain carbonates.
Regarding Claim 9, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 8 (see e.g. claim 8 rejection above).
Lim discloses that the non-aqueous can be dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), methylpropyl carbonate (MPC), ethylpropyl carbonate (EPC) or methylethyl carbonate (MEC) (see e.g. "Examples of the carbonate solvent include dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), methylpropyl carbonate (MPC), ethylpropyl carbonate (EPC), methylethyl carbonate (MEC)" in paragraph [114] on page 9). All of the discloses chain carbonates are represented by Chemical Formula 2 with varying C alkyl groups on R7 and R8 respectively.
Regarding Claim 10, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 9 (see e.g. claim 9 rejection above).
Lim further discloses that the non-aqueous solvent can be dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), methylpropyl carbonate (MPC), ethylpropyl carbonate (EPC) or methylethyl carbonate (MEC) (see e.g., "Examples of the carbonate solvent include dimethyl carbonate (DMC), diethyl carbonate (DEC), dipropyl carbonate (DPC), methylpropyl carbonate (MPC), ethylpropyl carbonate (EPC), methylethyl carbonate (MEC)" in paragraph [114] on page 9). Lim further discloses that the organic solvents can be used alone or in combinations of one or more (see e.g. "The organic solvents may be used alone or in combination of one or more" in paragraph [116] on page 11).
Regarding Claim 12, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim does not disclose that the positive active material comprises a cobalt-free lithium nickel manganese based oxide represented by Chemical Formula 4-1: LiaNix1Mny1Alw1M1z1O2-bXb wherein in Chemical Formula 4-1, 0.9 ≤ a < 1.2, 0 ≤ b < 0.1, 0 ≤ w1 < 0.1, 0.6 ≤ x1 < 1.0, 0 < y1 < 0.4, 0 < z1 < 0.1, w1 + x1 + y1 + z1 = 1, M1 is at least one element selected from among Ti, Zr, W, Mo and Nb and X is at least one element selected from among S, F and P.
Gao, however, discloses a cobalt-free positive electrode material that is Li(Ni0.75Mn0.235W0.015)0.99Al0.01O2 (which corresponds to LiNi0.7425Mn0.23265W0.01485Al0.01O2) (see e.g. paragraph [75] of Gao). This corresponds directly with the claimed positive active material. For example, in Chemical Formula 4-1 if a = 1, x1 = 0.7425, y1 = 0.23265, M1 is W, z1 = 0.01485, w1 = 0.01 and b = 0; the corresponding positive active material would be LiNi0.7425Mn0.23265W0.01485Al0.01O2 which is the same positive active material disclosed by Gao.
Gao discloses points that lie within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Gao also teaches that this active material also has high reversible capacity and super strong circulation stability and is a cathode material with low cost and stable performance (see e.g. paragraph [75] of Gao). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the positive active material of Lim et al. such that it comprises a positive active material comprising a cobalt-free lithium nickel manganese based oxide represented by Chemical Formula 4-1: LiaNix1Mny1Alw1M1z1O2-bXb wherein in Chemical Formula 4-1, 0.9 ≤ a < 1.2, 0 ≤ b < 0.1, 0 ≤ w1 < 0.1, 0.6 ≤ x1 < 1.0, 0 < y1 < 0.4, 0 < z1 < 0.1, w1 + x1 + y1 + z1 = 1, M1 is at least one element selected from among Ti, Zr, W, Mo and Nb and X is at least one element selected from among S, F and P as taught by Gao et al. in order to have a cathode material with high reversible capacity, super strong circulation stability, and low cost with stable performance as suggested by Gao.
Regarding Claim 13, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable battery of claim 12 (see e.g. claim 12 rejection above).
Lim does not disclose that in Chemical Formula 4-1, x1 is 0.6 ≤ x1 ≤ 0.79, y1 is 0.2 ≤ y1≤ 0.39, and z1 is 0.01 ≤ z1 < 0.1.
Gao, however, discloses a cobalt-free positive electrode material that is Li(Ni0.75Mn0.235W0.015)0.99Al0.01O2 (which corresponds to LiNi0.7425Mn0.23265W0.01485Al0.01O2) (see e.g. paragraph [75] of Gao). This corresponds with x1 = 0.7425, y1 = 0.23265 and z1= 0.01485.
Gao discloses points that lie within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Gao also teaches that this active material also has high reversible capacity and super strong circulation stability and is a cathode material with low cost and stable performance (see e.g. paragraph [75] of Gao). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the positive active material of Lim et al. such that in Chemical Formula 4-1, x1 is 0.6 ≤ x1 ≤ 0.79, y1 is 0.2 ≤ y1≤ 0.39, and z1 is 0.01 ≤ z1 < 0.1 as taught by Gao et al. in order to have a cathode material with high reversible capacity, super strong circulation stability, and low cost with stable performance as suggested by Gao.
Regarding Claim 14, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim further discloses that the negative active material comprises graphite or Si composites (see e.g. "The anode active material includes a material capable of reversibly intercalating / deintercalating lithium ions... a material doped and undoped with lithium" in paragraph [148] on page 14 and "As a material capable of reversibly intercalating / deintercalating the lithium ions... include crystalline carbon... Examples of the crystalline carbon include graphite" n paragraph [149] on page 14 and "The lithium doped and undoped materials include... Si-C composites" in paragraph [151] on page 14).
Regarding Claim 17, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim in view of Gao is silent as to whether the rechargeable lithium battery is operated at a high voltage of about 4.45 V or higher, however, the battery disclosed by Lim in view of Gao has no structural distinction from the one claimed in the instant application. Since the prior art teaches the same or a substantially similar battery, the claimed properties are reasonably presumed to be inherent or obvious in the prior art structure. See MPEP 2112 (III) and MPEP 2112.01 (I).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. (KR-20190127412-A) in view of Gao et al. (CN 113363461 A) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US-20200373617-A1).
Regarding Claim 15, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 14 (see e.g. claim 14 above).
Lim in view of Gao does not disclose that the Si composite comprises a core comprising Si-based particles and amorphous carbon coating layer.
Kim, however, in the same field of endeavor, rechargeable lithium secondary batteries with Si-C composite negative active materials and non-aqueous electrolyte comprising an organic solvent, lithium salt, and an additive, discloses a Si-C composite with a core comprising crystalline carbon and silicon particles and an amorphous carbon coating layer disposed on the surface of the core (see e.g., paragraph [0049] of Kim).
Kim teaches that a lithium secondary battery including the negative electrode active material may exhibit excellent room-temperature and high-temperature cycle-life characteristics (see e.g. paragraph [0051] of Kim). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify the Si composite of Lim et al. in view of Gao et al. such that it is a Si-C composite with a core comprising crystalline carbon and silicon particles and an amorphous carbon coating layer disposed on the surface of the core as taught by Kim et al. in order to have a negative electrode active material with excellent room-temperature and high-temperature cycle life characteristics as suggested by Kim.
Regarding Claim 16, Lim in view of Gao and further in view of Kim discloses the rechargeable battery of claim 15 (see e.g. claim 15 rejection above).
Lim in view of Gao does not disclose that the Si composite comprises a core comprising Si-based particles and amorphous carbon coating layer and that the Si-based particles comprise at least one selected from among Si particles, a Si-C composite, SiOx, 0 < x ≤ 2, and a Si alloy.
Kim, however, discloses that the core comprises of one selected from silicon particles, a silicon-carbon composite, SiOx (0<x<2), and a Si-Q alloy (see e.g., paragraphs [0047] - [0049] of Kim).
Kim teaches that a lithium secondary battery including the negative electrode active material may exhibit excellent room-temperature and high-temperature cycle-life characteristics (see e.g., paragraph [0051] of Kim). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify the Si composite of Lim et al. in view of Gao et al. such that it is a Si-C composite with a core comprising one selected from silicon particles, a silicon-carbon composite, SiOx (0<x<2), and a Si-Q alloy as taught by Kim et al. in order to have a negative electrode active material with excellent room-temperature and high-temperature cycle life characteristics as suggested by Kim.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. (KR-20190127412-A) in view of Gao et al. (CN 113363461 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US-20190074546-A1).
Regarding Claims 18 and 19, Lim in view of Gao discloses the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lim in view of Gao does not disclose a portable information device comprising the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1 or an electric vehicle comprising the rechargeable lithium battery of claim 1.
Kim, however, in the same field of endeavor, rechargeable lithium batteries with additives designed to enhance battery performance, discloses a portable information device comprising a rechargeable lithium battery and an electric vehicle comprising a rechargeable lithium battery (see e.g. “In an implementation, the rechargeable lithium battery may be included in a device. Such a device may include, e.g., one of a mobile phone, a tablet computer, a laptop computer, a power tool, a wearable electronic device, an electric vehicle, a hybrid electric vehicle, a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, and a power storage device” in paragraph [0089] of Kim).
The prior art includes each element claimed, with Lim in view of Gao teaching the rechargeable lithium battery and Kim teaching the use of such batteries in portable information devices and electric vehicles. The only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is the lack of an express disclosure of combining these elements in a single reference. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that it would have been obvious to apply the rechargeable lithium battery of Lim in view of Gao to the portable information devices and electric vehicles disclosed by Kim. The application of a known rechargeable lithium battery to known devices is a predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the results of this combination would have been predictable since both references are directed to lithium battery technologies, and the battery in Lim in view of Gao would provide the expected electrical energy to power the devices described in Kim.
Furthermore, the scope and content of the prior art demonstrate that the use of rechargeable lithium batteries in consumer electronics and electric vehicles is well-known. The differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are minimal, as Lim in view of Gao provides the battery and Kim suggests applicable devices for its use. Given the level of ordinary skill in the art, it would have been evident to combine the teachings of Lim in view of Gao and Kim to arrive at the claimed invention. See MPEP 2142 I(A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSE EFYMOW whose telephone number is (571)270-0795. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 10:30 am - 8:30 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, MATTHEW MARTIN can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.J.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
