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 .
Claim Status
Claims 4, 6, and 18 are amended. Support for amendment can be found in original claims 6 and 18 and instant specification pages 14-15.
Claims 1-20 are considered on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/20/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
The amendment to claims 6 and 18 overcome the rejection of record.
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the instant application has specific differences from the cited references as follows:.
Even if the active material of Kang is introduced into Xiaoxiong, this merely changes the active material of the electrode and cannot arrive at the interface design of the recited conductive material intended for the protection of the sulfide-based solid electrolyte (Remarks pp. 5)
The composition resulting from the combination of Xiaoxiong and Kang is distinct from the composition with the cathode as claimed
The recited cathode prevents the decomposition of the solid electrolyte by disposing an insulating metal fluoride on the surface of the carbon-based material to block direct contact with the solid electrolyte while maintain the electron conduction path
In regards to arguments a-c, Claim 1 requires a cathode active material, a solid electrolyte, and a conductive material comprising a carbon-based material and a metal fluoride disposed on the surface. These limitations are met by the combination of Xiaoxiong and Kang. Xiaoxiong teaches a cathode for an all-solid-state battery comprising: a transition metal layered oxide cathode active material; a solid electrolyte; and a conductive material, wherein the conductive material comprises a carbon-based material ([0021]; [0032]; [0010]-[0011]). Xiaoxiong teaches transition metal layered oxides as cathode active materials ([0020]; [0034]). Kang teaches a composite cathode material ([0030]-[0031]; [0057]-[0059]) including a carbon particle and a charge carrier ion compound particle dispersed on a surface of the carbon particle and a transition metal compound ([0030]-[0031]; [0071]) where the charge carrier compound may be, for example, LiF, KF or NaF ([0023]; [0065]). Kang teaches that very tiny particles may be densely dispersed on the surface of the carbon particle ([0069]; [0062]-[0068]). The material taught by Kang includes a transition metal compound (corresponding to active material), and a carbon particle mixed with a charge carrier ion compound particle such as an alkali metal fluoride (corresponding to conductive material comprising carbon-based material and a metal fluoride) ([0069]-[0072]; [0065]). Substituting the transition metal oxide cathode active material taught by Xiaoxiong with the composite cathode active material taught by Kang results in a cathode comprising cathode active material (composite material of Kang – transition metal), a solid electrolyte (sulfide solid electrolyte of Xiaxiong), and a conductive material comprising a carbon-based material and a metal fluoride disposed on the surface (composite material of Kang - carbon particle mixed with a charge carrier ion compound particle such as an alkali metal fluoride) thereby meeting the limitations of at least claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the linear material" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4 depends on claim 1 while “a linear material” is claimed in claim 3.
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) 1-2, 5-13, 15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiaoxiong et al. (CN 110911737 A) hereinafter "Xiaoxiong" in view of Kang et al. (US 20170207449 A1) "Kang". Reference is made to the enclosed machine translation of Xiaoxiong.
Regarding claim 1, Xiaoxiong teaches a cathode for an all-solid-state battery comprising: a transition metal layered oxide cathode active material; a solid electrolyte; and a conductive material, wherein the conductive material comprises a carbon-based material ([0021]; [0032]; [0010]-[0011]). Xiaoxiong teaches transition metal layered oxides as cathode active materials ([0020]; [0034]).
Xiaoxiong does not teach a metal fluoride disposed on a surface of the carbon-based material.
However, Kang teaches a composite cathode material ([0030]-[0031]; [0057]-[0059]) including a carbon particle and a charge carrier ion compound particle dispersed on a surface of the carbon particle and a transition metal compound ([0030]-[0031]; [0071]). Kang teaches that very tiny particles may be densely dispersed on the surface of the carbon particle ([0069]). Kang teaches that performance of composite materials for cathode materials in a secondary battery may be improved as the contact area between the transition metal compound and the charge carrier ion compound particle is maximized ([0069]). Kang teaches a novel type of cathode material composites which are not limited by the conventional particular crystal structure or energy level ([0120]-[0121]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the transition metal oxide cathode active material taught by Xiaoxiong with the composite cathode active material taught by Kang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have substituted the transition metal oxide cathode active material taught by Xiaoxiong with the composite cathode active material taught by Kang to improve the energy level of the cathode material and utilize an expanded range of transition metal oxides ([0120]-[0121]). Further, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP §2144.07).
Regarding claim 2, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Modified Xiaoxiong teaches wherein a conductive carbon material is coated in a metal fluoride (Kang [0030]-[0031]; [0071]). Kang further teaches wherein the carbon-based material comprises a nonlinear material, and the nonlinear material comprises at least one of carbon black, graphite, activated carbon, or a combination thereof ([0071]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the metal fluoride is disposed as a powder on the surface of the carbon-based material ([0137]; [0061]; [0069]; [0075]; [0126]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Modified Xiaoxiong teaches wherein the metal fluoride comprises a compound represented by the following Formula 1: [Formula 1] MXa wherein M comprises an alkali metal; X comprises a halogen element; and a satisfies 1≤a≤2 (Kang [0137]-[0139] “LiF-C composite”; [0030]-[0031]).
Regarding claim 7, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the metal fluoride comprises at least one of MgF2, CaF2, LiF, NaF, BaF2 or any combination thereof ([0137]-[0139] “LiF-C composite”; [0125]; [0030]-[0031]; [0065]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the metal fluoride has an average particle diameter (D50) of about 10 nm to 1,000 nm ([0068] “greater than or equal to about 20 nm, and exemplarily less than or equal to about 100 nm”).
Regarding claim 9, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Absent a specific definition of “primary particles”, the charge carrier ion compound with a particle diameter greater than or equal to about 20 nm, and exemplarily less than or equal to about 100 nm, taught by Kang meets the limitation of the metal fluoride comprising primary particles ([0068]; [0125]; [0065]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the conductive material comprises an amount of about 50 % to 90 % by weight of the carbon-based material and an amount of about 10 % to 50 % by weight of the metal fluoride ([0128] For example the case where the weight ratio is 1:1). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05).
Regarding claim 11, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1.
Modified Xiaoxiang does not explicitly teach wherein one part of the surface of the carbon-based material is in contact with the cathode active material, and another part of the surface of the carbon-based material is not in contact with the solid electrolyte by the metal fluoride.
However, Modified Xiaoxiong teaches a composite cathode comprising positive electrode active material, sulfide solid electrolyte, and conductive carbon mixed together and laminated (Xiaoxiong [0032]). Modified Xiaoxing teaches wherein a charge carrier ion compound particle is dispersed on the surface of the carbon particles (Kang [0075]; [0013]) and the charge carrier ion compound-carbon composite is physically mixed with a transition metal compound (Kang [0059]-[0063]; Fig. 1).
Therefore, in the all-solid-state battery taught by modified Xiaoxiong, one part of the surface of the carbon-based material is in contact with the cathode active material, and another part of the surface of the carbon-based material is not in contact with the solid electrolyte by the metal fluoride.
Regarding claim 12, Xiaoxiong teaches a method of manufacturing a cathode for an all-solid-state battery comprising forming a cathode including the conductive material, a cathode active material, and a solid electrolyte ([0032]; [0036]-[0037]). Xiaoxiong teaches lithium thiophosphate solid electrolyte such as Li10GeP2S12 or Li4-xGe1-xPxS4 or Li7P3S11 ([0034]).
Xiaoxiong does not teach preparing a conductive material comprising a carbon-based material and a metal fluoride disposed on a surface of the carbon-based material.
However, Kang teaches method for preparing a composite cathode material ([0030]-[0031]; [0057]-[0059]; [0026]-[0027]) including a carbon particle and a charge carrier ion compound particle dispersed on a surface of the carbon particle and a transition metal compound ([0030]-[0031]; [0071]). Kang teaches that very tiny particles may be densely dispersed on the surface of the carbon particle ([0069]). Kang teaches that performance of composite materials for cathode materials in a secondary battery may be improved as the contact area between the transition metal compound and the charge carrier ion compound particle is maximized ([0069]). Kang teaches a novel type of cathode material composites which are not limited by the conventional particular crystal structure or energy level ([0120]-[0121]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the transition metal oxide cathode active material, and used the associated method of producing, taught by Xiaoxiong with the composite cathode active material taught by Kang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have substituted the transition metal oxide cathode active material, and used the associated method of producing, taught by Xiaoxiong with the composite cathode active material taught by Kang to improve the energy level of the cathode material and utilize an expanded range of transition metal oxides ([0120]-[0121]). Further, the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP §2144.07).
Regarding claim 13, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 12. Kang further teaches wherein the carbon-based material comprises a nonlinear material, and the nonlinear material comprises at least one of carbon black, graphite, activated carbon, or a combination thereof ([0071]).
Regarding claim 15, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 12. Modified Xiaoxiong further teaches wherein the conductive material is prepared by mixing the carbon-based material with the metal fluoride using mechanical milling (Kang [0026]-[0027]; [0127]-[0130] “ball-milled”).
Regarding claim 17, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the metal fluoride is disposed as a powder on the surface of the carbon-based material ([0137]; [0061]; [0069]; [0075]; [0126]).
Regarding claim 18, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 12. Modified Xiaoxiong teaches wherein the metal fluoride comprises a compound represented by the following Formula 1: [Formula 1] MXa wherein M comprises an alkali metal; X comprises a halogen element; and a satisfies 1≤a≤2 ([0137]-[0139] “LiF-C composite”; [0125]; [0030]-[0031]; [0065]).
Regarding claim 19, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 12. Modified Xiaoxiong teaches wherein the metal fluoride comprises at least one of MgF2, CaF2, LiF, NaF, BaF2 or any combination thereof ([0137]-[0139] “LiF-C composite”; [0125]; [0030]-[0031]; [0065]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 1. Kang further teaches wherein the conductive material comprises an amount of about 50 % to 90 % by weight of the carbon-based material and an amount of about 10 % to 50 % by weight of the metal fluoride ([0128] For example the case where the weight ratio is 1:1). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05).
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiaoxiong et al. (CN 110911737 A) hereinafter "Xiaoxiong" in view of Kang et al. (US 20170207449 A1) "Kang" in further view of Lee et al. (US 20160268627 A1) hereinafter "Lee". Reference is made to the enclosed machine translation.
Regarding claim 3, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1.
Modified Xiaoxiong does not teach wherein the carbon-based material comprises a linear material, and the linear material comprises at least one of carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, vapor-grown carbon fibers or any combination thereof.
However, Lee teaches an all-solid-state battery wherein the positive electrode is a composite electrode including a positive electrode active material, a conductor, a binder, and an inorganic solid electrolyte ([abstract]; [0022]). Lee teaches where the conductor can preferably be selected as graphene, carbon nano-tube, Ketjen black, activated carbon, super p carbon in the form of powder, Denka in the form of rod, and vapor grown carbon fiber (VGCF) ([0022]; [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have substituted the conductive carbon taught by modified Xiaoxiong with the conductive material taught by Lee, for example vapor grown carbon fibers.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the conductive carbon taught by modified Xiaoxiong with the conductive material taught by Lee with a reasonable expectation of success because various conductive carbon materials are known in the art. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP §2144.07).
Claim(s) 4, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiaoxiong et al. (CN 110911737 A) hereinafter "Xiaoxiong" in view of Kang et al. (US 20170207449 A1) "Kang" in further view of Kawakami (US 20220320492 A1). Reference is made to the enclosed machine translation.
Regarding claim 4, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the cathode for an all-solid-state battery according to claim 1.
Modified Xiaoxiong does not teach wherein the carbon-based material comprises a linear material having a diameter of about 100 nm to 300 nm and a length of about 2 µm to 10 µm.
However, Kawakami teaches an all-solid-state battery wherein the positive electrode is a composite electrode including a positive electrode active material, a conductor, a binder, and an inorganic solid electrolyte ([0010]; [0024]). Lee teaches where the conductive carbon is a carbon nanotube having a diameter of about 1 nm to 100 nm and a length of about 2 µm to 10 µm ([0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have substituted the conductive carbon taught by modified Xiaoxiong with the conductive carbon nanotubes taught by Kawakami.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the conductive carbon taught by modified Xiaoxiong with the conductive carbon nanotubes taught by Kawakami with a reasonable expectation of success because various conductive carbon materials are known in the art. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP §2144.07). Further, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05)
Regarding claim 14, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 1.
Modified Xiaoxiong does not teach wherein the carbon-based material comprises a linear material having a diameter of about 100 nm to 300 nm and a length of about 2 µm to 10 µm.
However, Kawakami teaches an all-solid-state battery wherein the positive electrode is a composite electrode including a positive electrode active material, a conductor, a binder, and an inorganic solid electrolyte ([0010]; [0024]). Lee teaches where the conductive carbon is a carbon nanotube having a diameter of about 1 nm to 100 nm and a length of about 2 µm to 10 µm ([0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have substituted the conductive carbon taught by modified Xiaoxiong with the conductive carbon nanotubes taught by Kawakami.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the conductive carbon taught by modified Xiaoxiong with the conductive carbon nanotubes taught by Kawakami with a reasonable expectation of success because various conductive carbon materials are known in the art. The selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP §2144.07). Further, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP §2144.05)
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiaoxiong et al. (CN 110911737 A) hereinafter "Xiaoxiong" in view of Kang et al. (US 20170207449 A1) "Kang" in further view of Masuda et al. (US 20170133709 A1) hereinafter “Masuda”. Reference is made to the enclosed machine translation.
Regarding claim 16, modified Xiaoxiong teaches the method according to claim 1.
Modified Xiaoxiong does not teach wherein the conductive material is prepared by spray-coating the metal fluoride on the carbon-based material.
However, Masuda taches a positive electrode wherein the surface of the positive electrode active material is coated with LiF ([0092]-[0094]). Musada teaches that while the materials may be applied to the surface of the active materials using all of the coating methods that are known to the skilled person, spray coating is particularly suitable ([0094]).
Spray coating is a known method of applying a LiF coating to a cathode active material. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method taught by modified Xiaoxiang by using spray coating to apply the LiF coating as taught by Musada.
One of ordinary skill in the art could have modified the method taught by modified Xiaoxiang by using spray coating to apply the LiF coating as taught by Musada with a reasonable expectation of success because spray coating is a known method of applying a LiF coating to cathode active materials.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (Interfacial challenges for all-solid-state batteries based on sulfide solid electrolytes, 2021) teaches that thiophosphate solid electrolytes have poor electrochemical and mechanical stability leading to an increase in interfacial resistance during cycling (p. 210). Wang further teaches that conductive carbon additives provide necessary electronic conductivity in cathode composites for all solid-state batteries however conductive carbon additives accelerate decomposition reactions at the carbon/electrolyte interface (p. 211). Wang teaches that decomposition products from parasitic reaction deposit near the carbon surface and result in capacity decay of the battery (p. 211). Wang teaches that one strategy to suppress these negative effects is to minimize the solid electrolyte exposed area to carbon (p. 211).
Xiaoli et al. (CN112786862A) teaches a fluoride-modified carbon electrode material ([0006]) wherein the core is a carbon material and the outer layer is a fluorine containing compound such as metal fluoride ([0007]; [0028]-[0029]). Xiaoli teaches that in a carbon anode the carbon reacts with an electrolyte to form a solid electrolyte interphase film which generally has poor ionic conductivity and can lead to increased battery impedance ([0002]-[0003]; [0027]). Xiaoli teaches that surface modifying a carbon material with a material such as LiF can increase the ionic conductivity of a SEI layer and ensure ion transport ([0027]). Reference is made to the enclosed machine translation.
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.
/F.B.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights