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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita et al. (English machine translation of JP 2018098183 A).
Regarding Claims 1 and 7-9: Kurita et al. teaches a method of making a positive electrode active material comprising spraying an alkaline solution comprising a tungsten compound (spraying agent containing at least one element) onto a composite metal compound powder (precursor compound of a positive electrode active material) ([0001] and [0047]-[0049]). Kurita et al. teaches that the resultant product is then mixed with a lithium salt (lithium compound) ([0055]).
Kurita et al. does not teach the method wherein the lithium salt is first mixed with the composite metal compound powder. In the present case, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to mix the lithium salt in any of the claimed process steps of Kurita et al. and would have been motivated to do so because the selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results, and selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claims 2-4: Kurita et al. teaches evaporation of the alkaline solution upon spraying (drying step) at a temperature of 100-150 °C ([0049]). While Kurita et al. does not specify an internal pressure less than atmospheric pressure, it is well known in the art to use techniques such as partial vacuum (pressure lower than atmospheric pressure) to aid in the removal of solvents by ubiquitous laboratory equipment such as vacuum lines.
Regarding Claim 5: Kurita et al. teaches that the tungsten is in the form of a compound such as tungsten oxide ([0051]).
Kurita et al. does not teach the wt% of tungsten in the solution. However, generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. “[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). In the present case, Kurita et al. teaches that the concentration of tungsten can be adjusted to provide the desired amount of tungsten in the final product ([0138]).
Regarding Claim 6: Kurita et al. teaches that the composite metal compound powder comprises nickel ([0125]). Kurita et al. teaches that the resultant electrode material made by mixing the composite metal compound powder and lithium compound has an average particle size of 4.5 µm ([0125]), therefore, the composite metal compound powder would have a particle size of 5.5 µm or less.
Regarding Claim 10: Kurita et al. teaches the lithium compound as a powder ([0125]).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER F GODENSCHWAGER whose telephone number is (571)270-3302. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00, M-F 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, Mark Eashoo can be reached at 571-272-1197. 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.
/PETER F GODENSCHWAGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1767 February 6, 2026