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 .
2. The Applicant's amendments filed on January 12, 2026, were received. Claims 1-6, 13, 15, 17 and 19 have been amended. Claims 8-12 have been cancelled. None of the Claims have been withdrawn from consideration or added as new. Therefore, Claims 1-7 and 13-20 are pending in this office action.
3. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action issued on October 16, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. The rejection of Claims 1-2, 6-9 and 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1), has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 6-7 of the Remarks dated January 12, 2026.
5. Claims 1, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yano et al. (JP 2016-096075 A).
With regard to Claims 1, 6 and 7, Yano et al. disclose a in Figure 1, a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, wherein the positive electrode comprises lithium cobalt oxide, and wherein the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a first projection, called granular Zr oxide (4), and a second projection, called granular Zr oxide (4), and wherein the first projection (4) is spaced apart from the second projection (4), wherein Zr is unevenly distributed in each of the first projection (4) and the second projection (4) (paragraphs 0014, 0039), and wherein the secondary battery part of a vehicle (paragraph 0002).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. The rejection of Claims 3-5, 10 and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) in view of Miyazaki et al. (US 2003/0104279 A1), has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 6-7 of the Remarks dated January 12, 2026.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 2-5 and 13-20 are allowed.
8. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With regard to independent Claim 2, the closest prior art, Yano et al. (JP 2016-096075), teach a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, wherein the positive electrode comprises lithium cobalt oxide, but do not teach, fairly suggest or render obvious wherein the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a first projection and a second projection, each comprising at least one selected from Hf, V, Nb, Zr, Ce, and Sm, wherein each of the first projection and the second projection further comprises Mg, and wherein the first projection is spaced apart from the second projection.
With regard to independent Claim 3, the closest prior art, Yano et al. (JP 2016-096075), teach a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, wherein the positive electrode comprises lithium cobalt oxide, but do not teach, fairly suggest or render obvious wherein the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a first projection and a second projection, each comprising at least one selected from Hf, V, Nb, Zr, Ce, and Sm, wherein each of the first projection and the second projection further comprises Mg and F, and wherein the first projection is spaced apart from the second projection.
With regard to independent Claim 4, the closest prior art, Yano et al. (JP 2016-096075), teach a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, wherein the positive electrode comprises lithium cobalt oxide, but do not teach, fairly suggest or render obvious wherein the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a first projection and a second projection, each comprising at least one selected from Hf, V, Nb, Zr, Ce, and Sm, wherein each of the first projection and the second projection further comprises Mg, F and Ni, and wherein the first projection is spaced apart from the second projection.
With regard to independent Claim 5, the closest prior art, Yano et al. (JP 2016-096075), teach a secondary battery comprising a positive electrode, wherein the positive electrode comprises lithium cobalt oxide, but do not teach, fairly suggest or render obvious wherein the lithium cobalt oxide comprises a first projection and a second projection, each comprising at least one selected from Hf, V, Nb, Zr, Ce, and Sm, wherein each of the first projection and the second projection further comprises Mg and F, wherein Al exists at an interface between the first projection and an inner portion of the lithium cobalt oxide, and wherein the first projection is spaced apart from the second projection.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7, filed January 12, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-2, 6-9 and 11-14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) and Claims 3-5, 10 and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) in view of Miyazaki et al. (US 2003/0104279 A1), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yano et al. (JP 2016-096075 A).
Conclusion
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARIE O APICELLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 5:00PM 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/KARIE O'NEILL APICELLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights