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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I (claims 1-14) in the reply filed on 3/18/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Abe et al (US 2023/0129659 A1, cited in PTO-892 mailed 1/28/26).
Regarding claim 1, Abe et al teaches a positive electrode (paragraph [0213]) for an all-solid battery (paragraph [0241], all solid state battery), comprising:
a positive current collector (paragraph [0213-0214], positive current collector 500); and
a positive active material layer (paragraph [0213], fig 8A-8D) arranged on the positive current collector,
the positive active material layer includes:
a first positive active material (Fig 8a-8D, paragraph [0218], active material 501, corresponding to particles 190 of Embodiment 1);
a second positive active material (Fig 8a-8D, paragraph [0219], second active material 502); and
a solid electrolyte (paragraph [0277], fig 9A-9B, note that the positive electrode active material layer 414 includes a positive electrode active material 411 and a solid electrolyte 421),
wherein:
the first positive active material is a large-diameter positive active material (fig 8A-8D, paragraph [0218], large diameter particle 501),
the second positive active material is a small-diameter positive active material (fig 8A-8D, small diameter particle 502), and
the first positive active material includes a secondary particle (figs 3A-3B, core 191) having a plurality of primary particles (figs 3A-3B, note primary particles defined by the grain boundaries where cracks are generated), and one or more cracks are radially arranged inside the secondary particle (fig 3A-3B, paragraph [0141], crack generated along the crystal grain boundary, increased corrosion resistance, paragraph [0143]).
Regarding claims 6-7, note that Abe et al teaches NiCoMn-based materials (paragraph [0109]) including a ratio of 8:1:1, which is a nickel based first lithium transition metal oxide that falls within the claimed formula.
Regarding claim 12, Abe et al teaches wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (paragraph [0280-0281]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abe et al in view of Niwata et al (US 2021/0143435).
Regarding claim 2, Abe et al teaches the one or more cracks extend to a surface of the secondary particle (figs 3A-3B, see cracks), but is quiet to wherein a ratio of a width to a length of the one or more cracks is in a range of about 1:10 to about 1:1000 and that the length of the one or more cracks is 30 % or more of a diameter of the secondary particle.
Niwata et al teaches a positive electrode including positive active material particles (abstract). The positive active material may be lithium transition metal composite oxides (paragraph [0035]). The particles include broken particles with a crack length 1/5 times or more and 1/3 times or less the longest diameter of the broken particle (abstract, figs 4A-4B). Niwata et al teaches that when the abundance ratio of cracked particles is less than 50%, a good conductive path can be maintained even if the length and the width of the crack increases due to repetition of charge-discharge (paragraph [0028]). Niwata et al’s invention enables good charge-discharge cycle characteristics to be obtained (paragraph [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to include particles having dimensions of the cracks, such as the width to length and the length to the diameter of the secondary particle, within the claimed range, as Niwata et al teaches widths and lengths of cracks and that when the abundance is under 20%, energy density of the battery can be increased (paragraph [0090]).
"[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches wherein a width of the one or more cracks inside the secondary particle is greater than or equal to a width of the one or more cracks at a surface of the secondary particle, and the one or more cracks are connected to each other inside the secondary particle (note combination, Niwata, fig 4A-4B).
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abe et al in view of Park et al (US 2020/0212423, cited in IDS filed 9/14/23, hereinafter Park’423).
Regarding claim 4, Abe et al teaches wherein a particle diameter of the first positive active material is in a range of about 11 um to about 30 um (paragraph [0091], 1 to 30µm), but is quiet to a particle diameter of the second positive active material is in a range of about 1 um to about 9 um.
Park’423 teaches a positive electrode material including a first positive electrode active material and a second positive electrode active material (abstract). The first and second active material may be in a weight ratio of 40:60 to 90:10 (paragraph [0055]). Park’423 teaches the diameter of the first active material is preferably 10 to 20 µm (paragraph [0038]) so that high energy density may be achieved. The diameter of the second active material is preferably 4 to 8 µm, so as to facilitate the movement of lithium ions and substantially improve upon resistance (paragraph [0052]), so that the life characteristics and capacity characteristics of the secondary battery may be improved (paragraph [0054]). The electrolyte may be a solid inorganic electrolyte (paragraph [0101]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the active material layer of Abe et al to include first active materials of a diameter in the range of about 11µm to 30 µm and second active materials of a diameter in a range of about 1 µm to 9 µm, as Park’423 teaches the two diameter ranges are known and that the cycle life and capacity of the battery can be improved (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches wherein a weight ratio of the first positive active material to the second positive active material is in a range of about 90:10 to about 60:40 (Park’423, paragraph [0055]).
Claim(s) 8-11 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abe et al in view of Ito et al (US 2019/0044146, cited in IDS filed 9/14/23).
Regarding claim 8, Abe et al teaches wherein the first positive active material includes a core and a first coating layer arranged on the core (fig 1A-1C, region 193, paragraph [0106], concentration differs between region 191 and 193), the core includes the nickel-based first lithium transition metal oxide (Abe et al, paragraph [0104-0120]), but is quiet to the first coating layer includes an oxide ionic conductor.
Ito et al teaches a lithium secondary battery including a positive electrode, negative electrode, and a sulfide solid electrolyte (abstract). Ito et al teaches a coating film including an oxide including Li and Zr on a surface of the positive active material particles (abstract). Ito et al teaches that when a sulfide-based solid electrolyte is used as the solid electrolyte particle, a resistive component at an interface may occur (paragraph [0032]). Ito et al teaches a coating film of Li2O-ZrO2 (paragraph [0033]) to prevent such problems (paragraph [0033]), and thus improve cycling characteristics, capacity, and rate characteristics (paragraph [0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination so as to further include a coating of Li2O-ZrO2 to the particles of Abe et al, so as to suppress the interfacial reaction between the solid electrolyte and the positive active material (paragraph [0033]) and thereby improve upon cycling and rate characteristics (paragraph [0033]).
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches wherein the oxide ionic conductor includes Li2O-ZrO2 (Ito et al, paragraph [0033]).
Regarding claim 10, note the combination teaches further comprising a second coating layer arranged between the core and the first coating layer, wherein the second coating layer includes a nickel-based second lithium transition metal oxide having a greater Co amount than that of the nickel-based first lithium transition metal oxide (note combination to include the Li2O-ZrO2 coating to the invention of Abe et al, Abe et al’s particles have a core shell structure where the core and the shell may both be lithium transition metal oxides, with one example, paragraph [0117-0118] where NCM of 9:0.5:0.5 is used as the core and the shell is NCM111).
Regarding claim 11, note that Abe et al teaches the second lithium transition metal oxide is a NiCoMn-based material (paragraph [0108-0109]) that encompasses the claimed compositions of Formula 4 (note Formula 4, when α=0, corresponding to a NCM material).
Regarding claim 13, Abe et al teaches a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (paragraph [0280]), but is quiet to the claimed sulfide-based electrolyte.
However, Ito et al teaches the sulfide-based solid electrolyte may be lithium sulfide and phosphorus pentasulfide (paragraph [0056], Li2S and P2S5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the sulfide-based solid electrolyte of Ito et al, as Abe et al is not specific to the solid electrolytes and that Ito et al discloses various sulfide-based electrolytes can be used, including Li2S and P2S5 (paragraph [0114-0118]), which is known to have higher lithium ion conductivity than other inorganic components (paragraph [0117]).
Regarding claim 14, Abe et al teaches wherein the positive active material layer additionally comprises a conductive material and a binder (paragraph [0277]), the conductive material comprises at least one selected from a fibrous conductive material and a particulate conductive material (paragraph [0235], carbon nanotubes, paragraph [0237], carbon black), the binder comprises a fluorine-based binder (), the positive active material layer has a mixture density of 3.3 g/cc or more (paragraph [0026], density higher than 3.5g/cc), and the second positive active material does not comprise the one or more cracks that are radially arranged inside the secondary particle (second active material 502 not discussed as having cracks).
Abe et al is quiet to the binder comprises a fluorine-based binder.
Ito et al teaches a positive electrode composition, where polytetrafluoroethylene and polyvinylidene fluoride as examples of binders (paragraph [0074-0076]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a fluorine-based binder, as fluorine based binders are known in Ito et al, who recognizes that the binder is not limited and may be any suitable non-polar resin that is used in the art (paragraph [0075]).
All the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395. MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACKY YUEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5749. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/JACKY YUEN/
Examiner
Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights