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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 4-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Choi (US-20210399297-A1) (application date 04/07/2021) and Yeon (US-20200168906-A1) are newly applied to teach amended claim 1.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 6 objected to because of the following informalities: claim 4 depends on claim 3 which has been cancelled. claim 6 depends on claim 2 which has been cancelled. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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) 1, 6-11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US-20210399297-A1) (application date 04/07/2021), and in further view of Yeon (US-20200168906-A1).
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a method (see e.g., [0037], [0110], [0117], regarding procedural steps and examples in which the positive electrode active material of the invention are prepared) comprising: combining a bimodal positive electrode active material including a first lithium composite oxide and a second lithium composite oxide (see e.g., Choi; [0018]) wherein the first and second lithium composite oxides are represented by a formula that may include the LiNi0.9Mn0.05Al0.05O2 (NMA) material (see e.g., Choi; [0019]-[0020], regarding formula 1 of Li-wNi1-(x+y+z)CoxMnyM1zO2+d, M1 is at least one selected from P, Sr, Ba, B, Ti, Zr, Al, W, Ce, Hf, Ta, Cr, F, Mg, Cr, V, Fe, Zn, Si, Y, Ga, Sn, Mo, Ge, Nd, Gd and Cu, 0.5≤w≤1.5, 0≤x≤0.50, 0≤y≤0.20, 0≤z≤0.20, and 0≤δ≤0.02; wherein the M1, w, x, y, z, and d may be substituted to be LiNi0.9Mn0.05Al0.05O2 by having w=1, x=0, y=0.05, M1=Al, z=0.05, and d=0). Choi further discloses wherein at least one of the first and second lithium composite oxide materials include a coating layer (see e.g., Choi; [0023]-[0024], [0062]-[0067], [0071]) and method for coating the material in the examples (see e.g., Choi; [0177]). Choi discloses the bimodal cathode material in an electrode for a lithium-ion secondary battery (see e.g., Choi; [0002], [0055]-[0056]). Choi also discloses the cathode material is pristine, which is interpreted as original, untouched, not contaminated, or otherwise unprocessed material (Choi does not provide that the lithium composite oxides were processed prior to the coating and pulverization processes, so the NMA material provided is pristine).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected LiNi0.9Mn0.05Al0.05O2 (NMA) as the first and second lithium composite materials, applied a coating layer to one of the lithium composite materials, and combined the first and second composite materials together for a positive electrode active material. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to enhance integration density, improve lifetime characteristics, and enhance electrical characteristics (see e.g., Choi; [0009]-[0010], [0014]). Thus, Choi corresponds with the claimed method of a LiNi0.9Mn0.05Al0.05O2 (NMA) cathode material, application a coating on the NMA cathode material resulting in a coated NMA cathode material, combining the coated NMA cathode material with a pristine NMA cathode material resulting in a bimodal NMA cathode material; and creating an electrode for a lithium-ion battery; wherein: the electrode comprises the bimodal cathode material.
Choi discloses that the particle diameters of the first and second lithium composite oxides are different, wherein one particle is smaller than the other (see e.g., Choi; [0036]-[0037]). However, Choi does not explicitly disclose the process in which the particle diameters are reduced. Yeon teaches a method comprising pulverizing a lithium composite transition oxide cathode material resulting in a pulverized cathode material (see e.g., Yeon; [0011], [0083], regarding pulverizing process including ball mill or roller mill). Yeon is analogous art because Yeon discloses the positive electrode active material is a similar lithium composite transition metal oxide (see e.g., Yeon; [0070]), and further discloses the pulverization produces a particle size of 1 μm of less (see e.g., Yeon; [0015]) which overlaps with the desired particle size of Choi. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the pulverization method disclosed by Yeon for the lithium composite oxide of Choi in order to reach the desired average particle diameter of 8 μm or less as disclosed by Choi (see e.g., Choi; [0036]), which leads to high energy density (see e.g., Choi; [0013]).
Thus, the combination of Choi with Yeon teaches that the LiNi0.9Mn0.05Al0.05O2 (NMA) is pulverized to reach the desired particle size (D50), and Choi teaches the coating and bimodal combination steps as described above.
Regarding claim 6, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein: the bimodal cathode material comprises the pristine NMA cathode material and the coated pulverized NMA cathode material combined in a ratio in the range of 50:50 to 95:5 (see e.g., Choi; [0037]-[0038], regarding the combination of the first and second lithium composite oxides, wherein the first lithium composite oxide is the smaller particle that has been pulverized and coated as modified above regarding claim 1, in a mixed weight ratio of 5:95 to 50:50, which is the exact same range as claimed).
Regarding claim 7, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 6. As above regarding claim 6, modified Choi teaches the combination of the first and second lithium composite oxides, wherein the first lithium composite oxide is the smaller particle that has been pulverized and coated as modified above regarding claim 1, in a mixed weight ratio of 5:95 to 50:50 (see e.g., Choi; [0037]-[0038]), which is a range that includes the claimed bimodal cathode material comprising the pristine NMA cathode material and the coated pulverized NMA cathode material combined in a ratio of 80:20.
Regarding claim 8, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: utilizing the coated pulverized NMA cathode material in a lithium-ion battery (see e.g., Choi; [0055]-[0056], [0071], regarding the lithium ion chemistry of the battery, [0003]-[0004], regarding the context of the lithium-ion battery which is employed in the invention).
Regarding claim 9, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the pulverizing comprises: grinding the pristine NMA cathode material using a ball mill (see above regarding claim 1; Yeon; [0083], regarding ball mill used for grinding cathode material).
Regarding claim 10, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the pulverizing comprises: grinding the pristine NMA cathode material using a roller mill (see above regarding claim 1; Yeon; [0083], regarding roller mill for grinding cathode material).
Regarding claim 11, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the pulverizing comprises: crushing the pristine NMA cathode material (see above regarding claim 1; Yeon; [0083], regarding pulverization step, wherein pulverization using milling is a process that crushes particles).
Regarding claim 14, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1. Choi discloses that the coating is at least one lithium allow oxide and provides a formula which includes the embodiment of at least aluminum oxide (see e.g., Choi; [0024]-[0025]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected an aluminum oxide as the coating material as disclosed by Choi in order to improve physical and electrochemical characteristics of the material (see e.g., Choi; [0064]).
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US-20210399297-A1) (application date 04/07/2021) and Yeon (US-20200168906-A1), and in further view of Axelbaum (US-20150270545-A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1. Choi discloses a high capacity retention after 50 cycles (see e.g., Choi; [0197], table 16). Choi does not explicitly disclose wherein: the lithium-ion battery retains at least 50% of its capacity retention after 100 cycles at C/3. Axelbaum does disclose that the capacity retention of an aluminum doped lithium composite cathode material may have a capacity retention improved to 99.5% (see e.g., Axelbaum; [0077], regarding dopant-free sample retains 91.5% of its capacity between cycles 6-100 at C/3 rate, which can further be improved by 99.5% by Al doping). Similarly, the cathode composition disclosed by modified Choi is also doped with aluminum having the chemical formula of LiNio.gMno.05Alo.05O2. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery disclosed by Choi such that the battery retain 99.5% of its capacity after 100 cycles at C/3 as disclosed by Axelbaum. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the modification unambiguously provides the benefit of high capacity retention, which allows use of the battery for longer and without failure.
Regarding claim 5, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 4, wherein: the lithium-ion battery retains at least 80% of its capacity retention after 100 cycles at C/3 (see above regarding claim 4).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US-20210399297-A1) (application date 04/07/2021) and Yeon (US-20200168906-A1), and in further view of Manthiram (US-20210305564-A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1. Choi does not explicitly disclose exposing the pulverized NMA cathode material to phosphoric acid, wherein: the exposing results in the coating comprising lithium phosphate to be present on the pulverized NMA cathode material. However, Manthiram teaches that lithiated oxide may be further subjected to surface treatment, wherein the surface treatment may include phosphoric acid (see e.g., Manthiram; [0077]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the surface treatment with phosphoric acid disclosed by Manthiram to the pulverized NMA cathode disclosed by modified Choi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce residual lithium species and enhances surface stability of the material (see e.g., Manthiram; [0080]).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US-20210399297-A1) (application date 04/07/2021) and Yeon (US-20200168906-A1), and in further view of Mane (US-20160260962-A1).
Regarding claim 13, modified Choi teaches the method of claim 1. Choi does not explicitly disclose wherein the applying comprises: using vapor deposition to deposit the coating on the pulverized NMA cathode material. However, Mane teaches that atomic layer deposition, which is a form of vapor deposition, may be used to deposit a coating onto a cathode material (see e.g., Mane; [0023]). Mane is further analogous art because Mane discloses that the cathode composite oxide is a lithium composite oxide material. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the application of the coating taught by modified Choi using the atomic layer deposition method disclosed by Mane. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a coating with precise control of thickness and composition (see e.g., Mane; [0023]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN SONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7337. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571) 270-7871. 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.
/KEVIN SONG/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights