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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8, in the reply filed on 26 February 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 9 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 26 February 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2 December 2022 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the Office.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
As to Claim 1: The claim states “A method for activating electrochemical property”. However, it appears it should read “A method for activating an electrochemical property”.
Claim 1 has an open parenthesis after molecular formula 1 which should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-8 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to Claim 1: The claim sets forth Formula 1, which includes “Li1+x(M’M)1-xO2”. However, the variable x is undefined in the equation and it is not clear nor could a definition be found in the specification. For the purposes of further examination since the claim is drawn to a lithium rich metal oxide x was considered to be any 0 < x < 1.
As to Claim 1: The claim sets forth the limitation M’ and M are one or more selected from 3d, 4d, 5d transition metals or non-transition metals including Al, Mg, Mn, Ni, Co, Cr, V and Fe”. This is indefinite as it is unclear what metals are being claimed. Is the claim drawn to all 3d transition metals, 4d transition metals, 5d transition metals and non-metals or is it drawn only to the mixture of transition metals and non-transition metals listed specifically recited in the claim and thus the specific elements are required. The specification did not appear to provide further guidance in the form of a definition so additional support was used from the examples and only the specific elements recited were considered for M’ and M.
As to Claim 2: The claim recites the limitation “an amount of lithium to be delithiated is 10 to 30 mol%”. It is unclear if the step is met by delithiating 10 to 30 mol% or if an intent to delithiate 10 to 30 mol% is all that is needed to read on the claim limitations. If the latter is true, it is unclear how to know how much was intended to be delithiated. For the purposes of further examination, it is considered to be an amount of lithium delithiated is 10 to 30 mol%.
As to Claim 3: The claim recites the limitation “an amount of lithium to be delithiated”. It is unclear if the step is met by delithiating any amount of lithium that then will not reach a voltage plateau or if an intent to delithiate an amount of lithium that then will not reach a voltage plateau is all that is needed to read on the claim limitations. If the latter is true, it is unclear how to know how much was intended to be delithiated. For the purposes of further examination, it is considered to be an amount of lithium that then will not reach a voltage plateau which must be within the range of 10-30 mol% as the claim is dependent on claim 2 and must further limit claim 2.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "powder chemically delithiated" in Line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, this claim language would be better understood if written as “a chemically delithiated powder”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (“Remaining Li-content Dependent Structural Evolution during High Temperature Re-Heat Treatment of Quantitatively Delithiated Li-Rich Cathode Materials with Surface Defect-Spinel Phase” ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12 pgs. 27226-27240, hereinafter referred to as “Liu”).
As to Claim 1: Liu teaches a method of delithiating a cathode active material by taking a Li-rich layered material with the structure Li1.11Mn0.5Ni0.32Co0.07O2 (matching the structure of Formula 1) and dispersing it an aqueous solution of (NH4)2SO4 mixing until evaporated and then heating the resulting powder at 300°C for 15 hours (Section 2.1, Sample Preparation).
As to Claim 2: Liu teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Liu further teaches that the lithium can be delithiated by 22% (Table 1).
As to Claim 3: Liu teaches the method of claim 2 (supra). Liu does not expressly teach the amount of lithium delithiated is in a range that will not reach a characteristic voltage plateau portion in the 4.4 to 4.6 V section which is shown in the Li-rich metal oxide. Consequently, the Office recognizes that all of the claimed effects or physical properties are not positively stated by Liu. However, Liu teaches a process using the claimed steps, claimed processing conditions, and the claimed ingredients in the claimed amounts. According to the original specification, by heat-treating the lithium-rich metal oxide in which a plurality of lithium vacancies are induced in the crystal structure . Therefore, the claimed effects and physical properties, i.e. the amount of lithium delithiated is in a range that will not reach a characteristic voltage plateau portion in the 4.4 to 4.6 V section which is shown in the Li-rich metal oxide, would naturally flow from a process employing the claimed steps, claimed processing conditions, and the claimed ingredients in the claimed amounts. See In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990) and MPEP 2111.01 (I)(II). If it is the applicant's position that this would not be the case: (1) evidence would need to be provided to support the applicant's position; and (2) it would be the Office's position that the application contains inadequate disclosure as to how to obtain the claimed properties by carrying out a process with only the claimed steps, claimed processing conditions, and the claimed ingredients in the claimed amounts.
As to Claims 4 and 5: Liu teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Liu further teaches that the delithiation step is performed by an aqueous solution of (NH4)2SO4 (which reads on a chemical delithiation and NH4 is taught in the instant specification to be a lithium adsorbent [0044]) (Section 2.1, Sample Preparation).
As to Claim 6: Liu teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Liu further teaches that the mixture is evaporated and then heating the resulting powder at 300°C for 15 hours (which reads on a powder chemically delithiated) (Section 2.1, Sample Preparation).
As to Claim 7: Liu teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Liu further teaches that the heat treatment is performed at 300°C for 15 hours (Section 2.1, Sample Preparation).
As to Claim 8: Liu teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Liu further teaches that the heat treatment is performed for 15 hours at 300°C (Section 2.1, Sample Preparation).
Claims 1 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han et al. (“Surface structural conversion and electrochemical enhancement by heat treatment of chemical pre-delithiation processed lithium-rich layered cathode material” Journal of Power Sources 268 (2014) pgs. 683-691, hereinafter referred to as “Han”).
As to Claim 1: Han teaches a chemical pre-delithiation processed lithium-rich layered cathode material which is made through soaking in an Na2S2O8 aqueous solution and then annealing (Abstract). Han further teaches that a layered Li1.143Mn0.544Ni0.136Co0.136O2 powders were mixed with aqueous solutions of Na2S2O8 and dried into a powder which is heated at 300°C for 10 hours (Section 2.1, Material preparation and treatment). Han further teaches that for the N-40 sample the plateau around 4.5 V disappears (Pg. 685, Col. 2).
As to Claims 4 and 5: Han teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Han further teaches that layered Li1.143Mn0.544Ni0.136Co0.136O2 powders were mixed with aqueous solutions of Na2S2O8 which is a chemical delithiation method wherein the Na2S2O8 is a lithium adsorbent (Section 2.1, Materials preparation and treatment).
As to Claims 6-8: Han teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Han further teaches the chemically delithiated material is dried into a powder and heated at 300°C for 10 hours (Section 2.1, Material preparation and treatment).
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2016/0133931, hereinafter referred to as “Kim”).
As to Claim 1: Kim teaches a method for pre-activating lithium transition metal oxides with a structure (1-x)LiM’O2-yAy-xLi2MnO3-y’Ay’ (Abstract) which reads on the structure of Formula 1. Kim further teaches that the pre-activating may include a chemical delithiation process (delithiation step) and a high temperature delithiation process (heat-treatment step) [0020-0022].
As to Claims 4 and 5: Kim teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Kim further teaches a chemical delithiation step which is completed with a lithium adsorbent, such as BF4 salt and/or ammonium salt [0021].
As to Claim 7: Kim teaches the method of claim 1 (supra). Kim further teaches that the heat treatment can be performed at 250 °C [0022].
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J OYER whose telephone number is (571)270-0347. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at (571)272-1197. 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.
/Andrew J. Oyer/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767