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 1-10 and 16) in the reply filed on September 2, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on September 2, 2025.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 9-10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (Li, G. et al. Effect of precursor structures on the electrochemical performance of Ni rich LiNi0.88Co0.12O2 cathode materials. Electrochimica Acta. 270, 319-329 (2018)) in view of Hou (Hou, P. Multishell Precursors Facilitated Synthesis of Concentration-Gradient Nickel-Rich Cathodes for Long-Life and High-Rate Lithium-Ion Batteries. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 10, 24508-24515 (2018)) and Huang (Huang, Y. et al. Preparation and Performance of the Heterostructured Material with a Ni Rich Layered Oxide Core and a LiNi0.5Mn1.5O4 like Spinel Shell. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 11, 16556-16566 (2019)).
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a positive electrode active material precursor comprising:
a particle having a first region and a second region, wherein the composition of the particle includes Ni (M1), Co (M2), and (OH)2, a = 0.88, b = 0.12, and d = 0 (Li Section 2.1 Precusor-1).
wherein the first region is at a center of the particle (core material, Li Section 2.1, Precursor-1)
wherein a molar ration of M1 in the first region is 90 mol% or more relative to a total molar amount of transition metals in the first region (transition metal of the core material is Ni, Li Section 2.1, Precursor-1)
wherein the second region is disposed on the first region (core encapsulated with cobalt hydroxide, second region is the encapsulation layer, Li Section 2.1, Precursor-1)
wherein a molar ratio of M2 in the second region is 90 mol% or more relative to a total molar amount of transition metals in the second region (transition metal of the encapsulation layer is Co, Li Section 2.1, Precusor-1)
Li further teaches that the cobalt hydroxide coating layer (second region of the instant claim) results in the positive electrode active material synthesized using the precursor having improved electrochemical performance (Li abstract).
Li does not teach the positive electrode active material precursor particle containing M3 and does not teach a third region comprising 90 mol% or more of the element M3 relative to the total molar amount of transition metals.
Hou teaches positive electrode active material precursors comprising multiple regions (shells) and containing Ni, Co, and Mn (Hou abstract). Hou teaches that having a core with high capacity and a shell with superior stability is desired when designing positive electrode active material precursors (Hou pg. 2 right column last paragraph). Hou further teaches the content of Ni being highest in the core and the contents of Mn and Co being highest in the outer shell (Hou Fig. 2h).
Huang teaches a positive electrode active material precursor comprising a high nickel core (Ni0.88Co0.09Al0.03, Huang pg. 16558 left column) and Co, as taught by Li, and a coating on the core comprising Mn (MnO2, Huang pg. 16558 left column). Huang further teaches that “the participation of the Mn element may affect the surface structure of NCA particles and offer a compact surface structure to avoid the permeation of the electrolyte” (Huang pg. 16558 left column).
Since Li teaches that it is suitable to coat a high Ni core with a region (layer) containing 90 mol% or more of a different transition metal in order to improve performance of a positive electrode active material formed from the precursor, Hou teaches that particles having multiple regions (shells) and containing Ni, Co, and Mn are known and suitable for use as positive electrode (cathode) active material precursors, and Huang teaches a Mn coating on the core of a positive electrode active material precursor particle in order to avoid permeation of the electrolyte, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a coating layer containing Mn at a molar ratio of 90 mol% or more relative to the total molar amount of transition metals in the coating layer to the positive electrode active material precursor of Li, thus resulting in a third region disposed on the second region and 0 < c < 1, in order to obtain a positive electrode active material precursor with suitable performance for a desired application and prevent electrolyte permeation.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Li teaches a, b, and d falling within the claimed ranges (a = 0.88, b = 0.12, d = 0, Li Section 2.1 Precursor-1). Li does not expressly teach a positive electrode active material precursor including M3 and thus does not expressly teach stoichiometric amounts claimed in instant claims 4 and 5.
Modified Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches a positive electrode active material precursor including Ni, Co, and Mn. Huo teaches a positive electrode active material precursor comprising Ni, Co, and Mn, wherein a = 0.7 (Ni), b = 0.15 (Co), c = 0.15 (Mn), and d = 0 (Hou, pg. 6 Experimental Section).
Since Hou teaches that having stoichiometric amounts of a = 0.7, b = 0.15, c = 0.15 are suitable for positive electrode active material precursors containing Ni, Co, and Mn, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to tune the amounts of Ni, Co, and Mn in the precursor of modified Li to be a = 0.7, b = 0.15, c = 0.15, thus obtaining a precursor with stoichiometric amounts within the ranges recited in instant claims 4 and 5, in order to obtain the predictable result of a positive electrode active material precursor suitable for use as a precursor for positive electrode active materials.
Regarding claim 7, Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Li further teaches M1 being Ni and M2 being Co, and modified Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches M3 being Mn.
Regarding claims 9-10, Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Li is silent regarding the crystalline sizes in the (100) and (001) crystal planes of the positive electrode active material precursor.
The instant specification recites “according to the study of the present inventors, in a case in which nickel, cobalt, and manganese were respectively mainly distributed in different regions in the precursor particle as in the present invention, it was found that a crystalline size in a (100) crystal plane was increased…in comparison to a conventional positive electrode active material precursor in which transition metals were mixed” (instant specification [55]).
The precursor production methods of Li (Li, Section 2.1 Precusor-1) and the instant specification (instant specification [62-106]) are substantially similar and both include: preparing raw metal solutions in water, adding a cationic complexing agent and basic compound to each raw metal solution to form reaction solutions, adjusting the pH according to the metal contained in a given reaction solution, and the sequential addition of different reaction solutions, each containing a different transition metal at 90 mol% or more relative to the total molar amount of transition metals present in that reaction solution (for example, stopping the supply of a first reaction solution, then starting the addition of a second reaction solution that contains a different transition metal at 90 mol % or more).
Since modified Li teaches a positive electrode active material precursor comprising a first region, a second region, and a third region, wherein the stoichiometric amounts fall within the ranges recited in instant claim 1 and wherein each region contains a different transition metal selected from Ni, Co, or Mn at a molar ratio of 90 mol% or greater relative to the total molar amount of transition metals in the region, the instant specification attributes the increase in (100) crystal plane size to Ni, Co, and Mn being “mainly distributed in different regions”, and Li and the instant specification disclose substantially similar precursor production methods, there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a crystalline size in a (100) crystal plane of 30 nm or more and a ratio C100/C001 in a range of 3.5 to 6.0 would obviously flow from the positive electrode active material precursor of modified Li.
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01.
Regarding claim 16, Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Li further teaches a positive electrode active material prepared by sintering a lithium raw material and the positive electrode active material precursor of claim 1 (“prepared by sintering the precursors with LiOH•H2O”, Li pg. 321 left column second paragraph).
Claims 2-3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Hou and Huang, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Yang (Yang, H. Fabrication and characteristics of high-capacity LiNi0.8Co0.15Al0.05O2 with monodisperse yolk-shell spherical precursors by a facile method. RSC Advances. 4, 35522 (2014)).
Regarding claims 2-3 and 8, Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Li does not teach the positive electrode active material precursor including M4.
Yang teaches positive electrode active material precursors having multiple regions and including Ni and Co (Yang abstract), as taught by Li. Yang further teaches that it is known to add Al to positive electrode (cathode) active materials to improve cycling stability (Yang pg. 1 left column).
Since Yang teaches that it is known to add Al to positive electrode active materials to improve cycling stability, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add Al to the modified positive electrode active material precursor of Li in view of Hou and Huang, thus resulting in a fourth region including Al (M4) that is disposed on at least one of an interface between the first region and the second region, an interface between the second region and the third region, or the third region and resulting in M4 being included in at least one of the first region, the second region, or the third region, in order to improve cycling stability.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Hou and Huang. (Alternative interpretation of independent claim 1).
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a positive electrode active material precursor comprising:
a particle having a first region and a third region (core encapsulated with cobalt hydroxide, third region is the encapsulation layer, Li Section 2.1, Precursor-1), wherein the composition of the particle includes Ni (M1), Co (M3), and (OH)2, a = 0.88, c = 0.12, and d = 0 (Li Section 2.1 Precusor-1).
wherein the first region is at a center of the particle (core material, Li Section 2.1, Precursor-1)
wherein a molar ratio of M1 in the first region is 90 mol% or more relative to a total molar amount of transition metals in the first region (transition metal of the core material is Ni, Li Section 2.1, Precursor-1)
wherein a molar ratio of M3 in the third region is 90 mol% or more relative to a total molar amount of transition metals in the third region (transition metal of the encapsulation layer is Co, Li Section 2.1, Precusor-1)
The Examiner notes that the limitation “disposed on” does not limit how or where the region is “disposed on” another region and does not exclude intervening layers/regions.
Li further teaches that the cobalt hydroxide coating layer (second region of the instant claim) results in the positive electrode active material synthesized using the precursor having improved electrochemical performance (Li abstract).
Li does not teach the positive electrode active material precursor particle containing M2 and does not teach a second region comprising 90 mol% or more of the element M2 relative to the total molar amount of transition metals.
Hou teaches positive electrode active material precursors comprising multiple regions (shells) and containing Ni, Co, and Mn (Hou abstract). Hou teaches that having a core with high capacity and a shell with superior stability is desired when designing positive electrode active material precursors (Hou pg. 2 right column last paragraph). Hou further teaches the content of Ni being highest in the core and the contents of Mn and Co being highest in the outer shell (Hou Fig. 2h).
Huang teaches a positive electrode active material precursor comprising a high nickel core (Ni0.88Co0.09Al0.03, Huang pg. 16558 left column) and Co, as taught by Li, and a coating on the core comprising Mn (MnO2, Huang pg. 16558 left column). Huang further teaches that “the participation of the Mn element may affect the surface structure of NCA particles and offer a compact surface structure to avoid the permeation of the electrolyte” (Huang pg. 16558 left column).
Since Li teaches that it is suitable to coat a high Ni core with a region (layer) containing 90 mol% or more of a different transition metal in order to improve performance of a positive electrode active material formed from the precursor, Hou teaches that particles having multiple regions (shells) and containing Ni, Co, and Mn are known and suitable for use as positive electrode (cathode) active material precursors, and Huang teaches a Mn coating on the core of a positive electrode active material precursor particle in order to avoid permeation of the electrolyte, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a coating layer containing Mn at a molar ratio of 90 mol% or more relative to the total molar amount of transition metals in the coating layer to the positive electrode active material precursor of Li, thus resulting in a second region disposed on the first region, 0 < b < 1, and the third region disposed on the second region, in order to obtain a positive electrode active material precursor with suitable performance for a desired application and prevent electrolyte permeation.
Regarding claim 6, Li in view of Hou and Huang teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. The modified precursor of Li in view of Hou, as described above, teaches M1 being Ni, M2 being Mn, and M3 being Co.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park (US 20190006669 A1): appears to disclose a positive electrode active material comprising a nickel-containing core and a shell containing a transition metal oxide other than nickel (claim 1, Fig. 1B).
Yu (US 20130202966 A1): appears to disclose a positive electrode active material precursor comprising a concentration gradient (claim 10).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA S CASERTO whose telephone number is (571)272-5114. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789