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
Claims 2-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Groups 2-6, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on December 23rd 2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1 (Claim 1) in the reply filed on December 23rd, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no undue burden to examine the full scope of the claimed invention. This is not found persuasive because the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. US 2016/0013474 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Liu discloses a lithium manganese phosphate-carbon composite material [Abstract], wherein the lithium manganese phosphate has the general formula LiMnxM1-xPO4 wherein M can be Zr and 0.6≤x≤1.0 [0021-0023], thus Liu discloses a lithium zirconium phosphate with the general formula LiaZrbMc(PO4)d where M is manganese, and the subscripts are as follows:
a = 1.0, which falls within the claimed range
0≤b≤0.4, which overlaps with the claimed range
0.6≤c≤1.0, which falls within the claimed range
d = 1.0, which falls within the claimed range
Liu discloses that the composite material (lithium zirconium manganese phosphate-carbon composite material) has a BET [0054] specific surface area of 9-100 m2/g [0015], which falls within the claimed range. Liu discloses that the composite material has a mean particle diameter of 0.1-150 µm [0014], which overlaps with the claimed range. Liu discloses that the composite material has a tamped density (tapped density) of 0.1-10 g/cm3 [0016], or 100-10,000 g/L, which overlaps with the claimed range. Further, in the embodiments, Liu discloses that primary particles are agglomerated together, thus forming secondary particles that are aggregated primary particles [0092].
In regards to the value of “b”, the mean particle diameter, and the tamped density, the Examiner directs Applicant to MPEP 2144.05 I. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have selected the overlapping ranged disclosed by Liu because selection of the overlapping portion or ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP 2144.05 I.
With regards to the limitation “as determined by static light scattering (SLS)”, Examiner notes that the measurement method does not further limit the structure of the product and thus is not given undue weight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA E GOULD whose telephone number is (571)270-1088. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jeffrey T. Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/A.E.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1726 /DANIEL P MALLEY JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726