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 Amendment
The amendment filed 1/14/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-25 remain pending in this application. Claims 14-17 remain withdrawn. The examiner acknowledges no new matter has been added.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the objections to the specification and 112(b) rejections to claims 2, 7, and 21 previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 1/14/2026.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-11, 18, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0173076 A1) in view of Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1). Kim et al. was cited in the IDS filed 12/14/2022. Fujiki et al. was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding claim 1, Kim et al. teaches a positive electrode (see e.g. the positive electrode in Para. 6) for an all-solid-state battery (see e.g. the lithium rechargeable battery in Para. 6 that may comprise a solid electrolyte in Para. 82), the positive electrode comprising:
a first positive electrode active material (see e.g. the first positive active material in Para. 60) comprising a lithium nickel-based composite oxide (see e.g. the first positive active material may be the nickel and lithium based composite positive active material shown in Para. 49-55 and Chemical Formula 1) and being in a form of secondary particles comprising a secondary particle in which a plurality of primary particles are aggregated and at least a portion of the primary particles are radially arranged (see e.g. the first positive active material including secondary particle(s) including at least two agglomerated primary particles wherein at least one part of the primary particles has a radial arrangement structure in Para. 60 and of which there are a plurality as noted in Para. 31 and 137);
a second positive electrode active material (see e.g. the second positive active material in Para. 60) comprising a lithium nickel-based composite oxide (see e.g. the second positive active material may be the nickel and lithium based composite positive active material shown in Para. 49-55 and Chemical Formula 1) and being in a form of single particles (see e.g. the monolith structure in Para. 60 that is defined as separate or dispersed particles that are mutually distinguishable independent phases i.e. single types);
a solid electrolyte (see e.g. the solid electrolyte in Para. 82 that may be located in the open pores or partially be located in the closed pores of the secondary particle of the first positive active material in Para. 29 and 35);
a conductive agent (see e.g. the conductive agent in Para. 66); and
a binder (see e.g. the binder in Para. 66).
wherein the lithium nickel-based composite oxide of the second positive electrode active material is represented by Chemical Formula 1:
Chemical Formula 1
Lia1Nix1M1y1M21-x1-y1O2-zXz, and
in Chemical Formula 1, 0.9≤a1≤1.8, 0.5≤x1≤1, 0≤y1≤0.5, and 0≤z≤0.1, M1 and M2 are independently at least one element of Al, B, Ba, Ca, Ce, Co, Cr, Fe, Mg, Mn, Mo, Nb, Si, Sr, Ti, V, W, or Zr, and X is at least one element of F, P, or S (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches Lia(Ni1-x-y-zCoxMnyMz)O2 for the second positive active material in Para. 49-51 in which z may be 0 and 0.95 ≤ a ≤ 1.3 overlaps the claimed range of a1 in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05). Kim et al. also teaches x≤(1-x-y-z), y≤(1-x-y-z), 0<x<1, 0≤y<1, and 0≤z<1 in Para. 49-51. M1 may be Mn and 0≤y<1 overlaps the claimed range of y1 in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05). M2 may map to Co. For example, Kim et al.’s x of Co may be 0.2 and both Kim et al.’s y and the claimed y1 of Mn may be 0.3. In order for the claimed subscript of M2 or Co to equal a total of 0.2, the claimed subscript of M2 or Co as defined in the claim of 1 – x1 – y1 must equal 0.2. Because y1 is noted earlier as 0.3, x1 must equal 0.5 (if 1 – x1 – 0.3 = 0.2). The value 0.5 happens to fall within the claimed range of x1, the subscript of Ni, of 0.3≤x1≤1. Kim et al.’s subscript of Ni, 1-x-y-z, would then equal 0.5 as well because x has been defined as 0.2, y has been defined as 0.3, and z has been defined as 0. Because all inequalities therefore may both by satisfied by the instant claim and Kim et al, for example by LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2, the Chemical Formula 1 of Kim et al. overlaps the claimed ranges of x1 and the rest of the inequalities and thus Chemical Formula 1 in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)).
Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein the second positive electrode active material comprises a zirconium-containing coating layer on a surface of the single particles.
However, Fujiki et al. teaches an all-solid lithium ion secondary battery in the title and abstract of which the positive electrode active material may comprise a coated particle 10a and a second coating layer 12 in Para. 59. It is noted that “particle” is phrased by Fujiki et al. in the singular tense and is therefore reasonably interpreted to be made up of a singular particle. The positive active material particle may be a LCO particle 11a that may include nickel in Para. 61. The coating 11b and second coating layer 12 may contain Zr in Para. 61-63 and 70. Fujiki et al. teaches discharge capacities and cycle characteristics of an all-solid lithium ion secondary battery containing the positive active material particle are improved in Para. 27.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first positive active material or the lithium and nickel containing primary or single particles of Kim et al., to have a zirconium-containing coating, as taught by Fujiki et al., to improve the discharge capacities and cycle characteristics of the all-solid lithium ion secondary battery of Kim et al. as noted in Para. 27 of Fujiki et al.
Regarding claim 2, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1, wherein
based on a total weight of the first positive electrode active material, the second positive electrode active material, the solid electrolyte, the conductive agent, and the binder, the positive electrode comprises
about 55 wt% to about 99.7 wt% of the first positive electrode active material and the second positive electrode active material;
about 0.1 wt% to about 35 wt% of the solid electrolyte;
about 0.1 wt% to about 5 wt% of the conductive agent; and
about 0.1 wt% to about 5 wt% of the binder
(See e.g. Kim et al. teaches about 10 wt. % to about 50 wt. % based on a total weight of the positive active material is the second positive active material in Para. 46 and in Para. 107 that a mixing ratio of the first nickel-based oxide and the second nickel-based oxide may be, for example, about 9:1 to about 5:5 based on weight. Therefore mathematically, it would be reasonably expected based on the range taught in Para. 46 and the ratio taught in Para. 107, that the total positive active material of the first positive active material and the second positive active material may result in, as shown in the examples below, 55 wt. % or 100 wt. % of the positive electrode material which may be reasonably considered as about 55 wt. % and about 99.7 wt. %.
F
i
r
s
t
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
E
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
A
c
t
i
v
e
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
=
F
P
E
A
S
S
e
c
o
n
d
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
E
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
A
c
t
i
v
e
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
=
S
P
E
A
S
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
E
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
A
c
t
i
v
e
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
=
P
E
A
S
P
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
E
l
e
c
t
r
o
d
e
=
P
E
F
P
E
A
S
+
S
P
E
A
S
=
P
E
A
S
Examples:
If FPEAS is 55 wt. % and the mixing ratio is 9:1
55
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
+
55
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
*
1
w
t
S
P
E
A
S
9
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
=
55
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
+
6.1
w
t
S
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
=
56.1
w
t
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
If FPEAS is 55 wt. % and the mixing ratio is 5.5:4.5 (resides between 9:1 to 5:5)
55
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
+
55
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
*
4.5
w
t
S
P
E
A
S
5.5
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
=
55
w
t
F
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
+
45
w
t
S
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
=
100
w
t
P
E
A
S
100
w
t
P
E
Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach about 0.1 wt. % to about 35 wt. % of the solid electrolyte;
However, Kim et al. teaches the solid electrolyte in Para. 82 that may be located in the open pores are partially be located in the closed pores of the secondary particle of the first positive active material. Kim et al. teaches one may modify the pore diameter in Para. 29 and the secondary particles may have a porous structure in the internal part in Para. 40 so that a diffusion distance of lithium ions to the internal part of the secondary particle may be decreased, and the external part of the secondary particle may be radially arranged toward the surface, so that lithium ions are easily intercalated into the surface. In some embodiments, the sizes of the primary particles of the positive active material for a rechargeable lithium battery are small so that it is easy to secure a lithium transfer path between the crystal grains. In some embodiments, the sizes of the primary particles are small and the pores between primary particles alleviate volume changes that occur during charging and discharging, minimizing or reducing particle stress when the volume changes during charging and discharging. The porosity and pore volume of the active material directly correlates with the quantity of electrolyte in the active material.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the size and number of pores in the positive active material of which is directly correlated with the weight percent of the amount of electrolyte in the positive active material because it fills the pores of the positive active material. This would support lithium transfer between crystal grains and alleviate particle size changes during charging and discharging and stress as noted in Para. 40 of Kim et al.
Kim et al. teaches about 0.1 wt. % to about 5 wt. % of the conductive agent by the about 2 to 5 parts by weight based on a total weight of 100 parts by weight of the positive active material in Para. 69; and
about 0.1 wt. % to about 5 wt. % of the binder by the 1 part by weight to about 50 parts by weight of the positive active material in Para. 67).
Regarding claim 4, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1, wherein secondary particle of the first positive electrode active material comprise an inner portion in which the primary particles and pores are irregularly arranged (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the primary particles in the internal part and pores may be arranged without regularity or have irregular porous pores without uniformity in Para. 27 and 38), and an outer portion in which at least a portion of the primary particles are radially arranged as a region around the inner portion (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the external part of the secondary particle may be radially arranged toward the surface in Para. 40 and Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 4, wherein
a radius ratio of a radius of the inner portion to a total radius of the secondary particle of the first positive electrode active material is about 50% to about 55% (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the length from the center of the “internal part” is about 50 length % to about 70 length % in Para. 28 with respect to the center to the surface of the secondary particle i.e. the radius.
This overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)).
Regarding claim 6, Kim et al. teaches in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1, wherein
the secondary particle of the first positive electrode active material comprise plate-shaped primary particles (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the plate shaped primary particles that make up the secondary particle of the first positive active material in Para. 30 and Fig. 2),
at least a portion of the plate-shaped primary particles have a long axis arranged in a radial direction (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the long-axis of at least one part of the primary particle may be arranged in a radial direction in Para. 30),
an average length of the plate-shaped primary particles along the long axis is about 150 nm to about 500 nm (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the average length of the primary particles that may be plate shaped in Para. 30 is 0.01 to 5 µm in Para. 32. This equates to 10 to 5000 nm which overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)),
an average thickness of the plate-shaped primary particles is about 100 nm to about 200 nm (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the average thickness of the primary particles that may be plate shaped in Para. 30 is greater than or equal to about 100 nm in Para. 33, which overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)), and
a ratio of the average thickness to the average length is about 1:2 to about 1:5 (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the ratio between the average thickness and the average length may be about 1:1 to about 1:6 in Para. 33 which overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)).
Regarding claim 7, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 4, wherein
the inner portion of the secondary particle of the first positive electrode active material comprises pores having a larger size than pores in an outer portion (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the pore sizes and porosity in the internal part may be larger and more irregular than those in the external part of the secondary particle in Para. 38-39 and Fig. 3,
a pore size in the inner portion of the secondary particle is about 150 nm to about 1 pm (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the open pore in the center of the internal part may be about 148 nm in Para. 29 which is reasonably about 150 nm), and
a pore size in the outer portion of the secondary particle is less than 150 nm (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches this because it would be reasonably be expected to be met if the open pores in the center of the internal part are about 150 nm or about 148 nm in Para. 29 and the open pores that are present in the internal part are larger than the pores in the external part, then the pores in the external part would have to be smaller than 150 nm).
Regarding claim 8, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1, wherein
an average particle diameter (D50) of the secondary particles of the first positive electrode active material is about 5 µm to about 20 µm (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the average particle diameter of the secondary particles that is part of the first electrode active material is about 1 µm to about 20 µm in Para. 41 which overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)), and
an average particle diameter (D50) of the single particles of the second positive electrode active material is about 0.05 µm to about 8 µm (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches an average particle diameter of the second positive active material may be about 0.05 μm to about 10 μm in Para. 48 and being in a form of single particles by the monolith structure in Para. 60 that is defined as separate or dispersed particles that are mutually distinguishable independent phases i.e. single types. This overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)).
Regarding claim 9, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1, wherein
about 50 wt% to about 90 wt% of the first positive electrode active material, and
about 10 wt% to about 50 wt% of the second positive electrode active material, are in a positive electrode active material of the positive electrode
(See e.g. Kim et al. teaches in Para. 107 that a mixing ratio of the first nickel-based oxide and the second nickel-based oxide may be, for example, about 9:1 to about 5:5 by weight. Therefore mathematically, it would be reasonably expected based on the ratio taught in Para. 107, that the first nickel-based oxide or first positive active material may be 50 wt. % to 90 wt. % of the positive active material and the second nickel-based oxide or second positive active material makes up about 10 wt. % to about 50 wt. % considering those two components cumulatively make up the positive electrode active material in the positive electrode components).
Regarding claim 10, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1, wherein
the lithium nickel-based composite of the first positive active material is represented by Chemical Formula 1:
Chemical Formula 1
Lia1Nix1M1y1M21-x1-y1O2-zXz;
Wherein, in Chemical Formula 1, 0.9≤a1≤1.8, 0.3≤x1≤1, 0≤y1≤0.7, and 0≤z≤0.1, M1 and M2 are independently at least one element of Al, B, Ba, Ca, Ce, Co, Cr, Fe, Mg, Mn, Mo, Nb, Si, Sr, Ti, V, W, or Zr, and X is at least one element of F, P, or S (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches Lia(Ni1-x-y-zCoxMnyMz)O2 for the first positive active materialin Para. 49-51 in which z may be 0 and 0.95 ≤ a ≤ 1.3 overlaps the claimed range of a1 in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05). Kim et al. also teaches x≤(1-x-y-z), y≤(1-x-y-z), 0<x<1, 0≤y<1, and 0≤z<1 in Para. 49-51. M1 may be Mn and 0≤y<1 overlaps the claimed range of y1 in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05). M2 may map to Co. For example, Kim et al.’s x of Co may be 0.2 and both Kim et al.’s y and the claimed y1 of Mn may be 0.3. In order for the claimed subscript of M2 or Co to equal a total of 0.2, the claimed subscript of M2 or Co as defined in the claim of 1 – x1 – y1 must equal 0.2. Because y1 is noted earlier as 0.3, x1 must equal 0.5 (if 1 – x1 – 0.3 = 0.2). The value 0.5 happens to fall within the claimed range of x1, the subscript of Ni, of 0.3≤x1≤1. Kim et al.’s subscript of Ni, 1-x-y-z, would then equal 0.5 as well because x has been defined as 0.2, y has been defined as 0.3, and z has been defined as 0. Because all inequalities therefore may both by satisfied by the instant claim and Kim et al, for example by LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2, the Chemical Formula 1 of Kim et al. overlaps the claimed ranges of x1 and the rest of the inequalities and thus Chemical Formula 1 in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05)).
Regarding claim 11, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1,
wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based solid electrolyte, and the sulfide-based solid electrolyte comprises Li2S-P2S5, Li2S-P2S5-Lil, Li2S-P2S5-LiBr, Li2S-P2S5-LiCI, Li2S- P2S5-Li2O, Li2S-P2S5-Li2O-Lil, Li2S-P2S5-Li2O-LiCI, Li2S-SiS2, Li2S-SiS2-Lil, Li2S-SiS2- LiBr, Li2S-SiS2-LiCI, Li2S-SiS2-B2S3-Lil, Li2S-SiS2-P2S5-Lil, Li2S-B2S3, Li2S-P2S5-ZmSn (wherein m and n is each an integer and Z is Ge, Zn, or Ga), Li2S-GeS2, Li2S-SiS2- Li3PO4, Li2S-SiS2-LipMOq (wherein p and q are integers and M is P, Si, Ge, B, Al, Ga, or In), or a combination thereof (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the inorganic solid electrolyte in Para. 85 of which the electrolyte may be Li3PO4—Li2S—SiS2 in Para. 82, a sulfide-containing compound)
Regarding claim 18, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches an all-solid-state battery (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the lithium rechargeable battery in Para. 6 that may comprise a solid electrolyte in Para. 82), comprising:
the positive electrode of claim 1 (see e.g. the combined teachings of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. in the 103 rejection of claim 1 above), a negative electrode (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the negative electrode in Para. 9), and a solid electrolyte layer between the positive electrode and the negative electrode (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the electrolyte between the positive electrode and negative electrode in Para. 9 that may be solid in Para. 82).
Regarding claim 19, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18, wherein
the negative electrode comprises a current collector (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the current collector in Para. 65) and a negative electrode active material layer on the current collector (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the negative active material layer on each current collector for the negative electrode in Para. 65).
Regarding claim 21, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18, wherein the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode and a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer comprise a same compound (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the electrolyte may be solid in Para. 82 and in Para. 35 that some of that electrolyte may fill the pores of the secondary particles of the positive active material in Para. 35-36 so it would be reasonably expected that the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode and a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer comprise the same compound lacking anything to the contrary).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0173076 A1) in view of Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) as applied to claims 1 above and further in view of Kwak et al. (US 2022/0216463). Kwak et al. was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding claim 3, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1.
Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein the first positive electrode active material comprises a zirconium-containing coating layer on a surface of the secondary particles.
However, Kwak et al. teaches a zirconium-containing coating film found on the surface of the secondary particle that is formed of an aggregation of primary particles in Para. 12 and 15. Kwak et al. explains this supports excellent capacity properties and lifespan characteristics in Para. 15
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a zirconium-containing coating of Kwak et al. to the secondary particles of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al., as taught by Kwak et al., to support excellent capacity properties and lifespan characteristics as noted in Para. 15 of Kwak et al.
Claims 12, 13, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0173076 A1) in view of Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) as applied to claims 1, 11, and 18 above, and further in view of Tsujimura et al. (US 2017/0187066 A1). Tsujimura et al. was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding claim 12, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 11,
wherein the solid electrolyte is a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (see e.g. Kim et al. teaches the inorganic solid electrolyte in Para. 85 of which the electrolyte may be Li3PO4—Li2S—SiS2 in Para. 82, a sulfide-containing compound)
Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein the solid electrolyte is an argyrodite-type sulfide-based solid electrolyte.
However, Tsujimura et al. teaches a sulfide-based solid electrolyte of an argyrodite structure to have improved ion conductivity in Para. 36.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sulfide-based solid electrolyte of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. to be of an argyrodite structure, as taught by Tsujimura et al., for improved ion conductivity as noted in Para. 36 of Tsujimura et al.
Regarding claim 13, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the positive electrode of claim 1.
Kim et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein an average particle diameter (D50) of the solid electrolyte is less than or equal to about 5.0 µm.
However, Tsujimura et al. teaches in Para. 59 an average particle diameter of a solid electrolyte may be in a range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm. In Para. 60, Tsujimura et al. teaches when the average particle diameter of the solid electrolyte is within the range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm, the binding properties increase during a process for forming a solid electrolyte, which may improve the ion conductivity and lifespan characteristics of solid electrolyte particles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solid electrolyte particles of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. to have an average particle diameter of about 1 μm to about 10 μm, as taught by Tsujimura et al., to increase binding properties and improve ion conductivity and lifespan characteristics as noted in Para. 60 of Tsujimura et al.
This overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 22, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18.
Kim et al. teaches the electrolyte may be solid in Para. 82 and in Para. 35 that some of that electrolyte may fill the pores of the secondary particles of the positive active material in Para. 29 and 35-36 so it would be reasonably expected and inherent that the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode and a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer comprise the same compound lacking anything to the contrary. Upon the combined teachings, it would be reasonably expected
Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode and a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer are both an argyrodite-type sulfide-based solid electrolyte.
However, Tsujimura et al. teaches a sulfide-based solid electrolyte of an argyrodite structure to have improved ion conductivity in Para. 36.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sulfide-based solid electrolyte of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. to be of an argyrodite structure, as taught by Tsujimura et al., for improved ion conductivity as noted in Para. 36 of Tsujimura et al.
Regarding claim 24, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18.
Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein an average particle diameter (D50) of the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode and a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer is about 0.5 µm to about 5.0 µm.
However, Tsujimura et al. teaches in Para. 59 an average particle diameter of a solid electrolyte may be in a range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm. In Para. 60, Tsujimura et al. teaches when the average particle diameter of the solid electrolyte is within the range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm, the binding properties increase during a process for forming a solid electrolyte, which may improve the ion conductivity and lifespan characteristics of solid electrolyte particles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solid electrolyte particles of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. to have an average particle diameter of about 1 μm to about 10 μm, as taught by Tsujimura et al., to increase binding properties and improve ion conductivity and lifespan characteristics as noted in Para. 60 of Tsujimura et al.
This overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2019/0173076 A1) in view of Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Yamazaki (US 2013/0017443 A1). Yamazaki et al. was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding claim 20, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18, wherein
Kim et al. teaches the negative active material may comprise a lithium metal in Para. 74 of which is layered onto the negative electrode current collector in Para. 65.
Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach, wherein the negative electrode comprises a current collector and a negative electrode catalyst layer on the current collector, and the negative electrode comprises a lithium metal layer between the current collector and the negative electrode catalyst layer.
However, Yamazaki teaches covering the active material layer with the catalyst layer and the carbon layer in Para. 74 allows suppression of a volume change of the active material layer due to absorption and release of carrier ions, which prevents the active material layer from being damaged even when charge/discharge cycles are repeated allowing for excellent cycle characteristics in Para. 51. It further transmits lithium ions and serves as a “catalyst in formation of graphene having good quality” in Para. 46.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the catalyst and carbon layer to the active material layer of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. that comprises lithium metal over the current collector of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al., as taught by Yamazaki et al., in order to prevent the active material layer from being damaged even when charge/discharge cycles are repeated allowing for excellent cycle characteristics as noted in Para. 51 of Yamazaki and further transmits lithium ions and serves as a catalyst in formation of graphene having good quality as noted by Yamazaki in Para. 46.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kim et al. (US 2019/0173076 A1) in view of Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2016/0043430 A1). Lee et al. was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding claim 23, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18.
Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach, wherein an average particle diameter (D50) of the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode is smaller than an average particle diameter (D50) of a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer.
However, Lee et al. teaches a secondary battery including a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a solid electrolyte layer disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode in Para. 10. Lee et al. teaches wherein the positive and negative electrodes include first solid electrolyte particles and the solid electrolyte layer includes second solid electrolyte particles in Para. 10. The particle diameter of the second solid electrolyte particles is greater than the particle diameter of the first solid electrolyte particles in Para. 10. Lee et al. teaches in Para. 11 this may increase the amount of movement of lithium ions by increasing a contact area between the solid electrolyte particles and electrode active material and may minimize the reduction of ionic conductivity by decreasing interfacial resistance due to the contact between the electrode and the solid electrolyte layer, therefore improving stability and performance of the secondary battery.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solid electrolyte particles of Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. for the average particle diameter of the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode to be smaller than the average particle diameter of the solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer, as taught by Lee et al., in order to improve stability and performance of the secondary battery as noted in Para. 11 of Lee et al..
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Kim et al. (US 2019/0173076 A1) Fujiki et al. (US 2016/0079597 A1) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2024/0304794 A1) and Tsujimura et al. (US 2017/0187066 A1). Kim et al. and Tsujimura et al. was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
Regarding claim 25, Kim et al. in view of Fujiki et al. teaches the all-solid-state battery of claim 18.
Kim et al. ‘076 in view of Fujiki et al. fails to explicitly teach wherein an average particle diameter (D50) of the solid electrolyte in the positive electrode is about 0.5 µm to about 2.0 µm, and an average particle diameter (D50) of a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer is about 2.1 µm to about 5.0 µm.
However, Kim et al. ‘430 teaches in Para. 95 and Table 2, it can be seen that if the particle diameter (D50) of the powder of the solid electrolyte used in the preparation of the composite for the positive electrode active material is out of the range of 0.2 µm to 2 µm, the initial discharge capacity and high rate discharge capacity of the all-solid-state batteries using the same are significantly reduced. Also, if the particle diameter (D50) of the powder of the solid electrolyte used in the preparation of the composite for the positive electrode active material meets the above range, the initial discharging capacity and high-rate discharging capacity of all-solid-state batteries using the same are remarkably improved.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the particle diameter of the electrolyte in the positive active material later of Kim et al. ‘076 in view of Fujiki et al. to be between 2.0 µm to 2 µm, as taught by Kim et al. ‘794, to improve the initial discharging capacity and high-rate discharging capacity of all-solid-state batteries, as noted in Para. 95 of Kim et al. ‘794.
This overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Kim et al. ‘076 in view of Fujiki et al. and further in view of Kim et al. ‘794 fails to explicitly teach and an average particle diameter (D50) of a solid electrolyte in the solid electrolyte layer is about 2.1 µm to about 5.0 µm.
Tsujimura et al. teaches in Para. 59 an average particle diameter of a solid electrolyte may be in a range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm. In Para. 60, Tsujimura et al. teaches when the average particle diameter of the solid electrolyte is within the range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm, the binding properties increase during a process for forming a solid electrolyte, which may improve the ion conductivity and lifespan characteristics of solid electrolyte particles.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the particle diameter of the electrolyte in the electrolyte layer of Kim et al. ‘076 in view of Fujiki et al. and further in view of Kim et al. ‘794 to be in a range of about 1 μm to about 10 μm, as taught by Tsujimura et al., to improve the ion conductivity and lifespan characteristics of solid electrolyte particles as noted in Para. 60 of Tsujimura et al.
This overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues Kim et al. fails to anticipate the now amended claim 1 as it does not disclose expressly or inherently a zirconium-containing coating layer on the surface of the single particles.
Examiner respectfully agrees, Kim et al. does not anticipate all claim limitations of the newly amended claim 1. The newly amended claim 1 contains claim limitations from previous claim 3 and 10, both of which were rejected under 103 in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025. Thus, the argument is not relevant.
For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues Kwak et al. fails to anticipate the now amended claim 1 as it does not disclose expressly or inherently a zirconium-containing coating layer on the surface of the single particles.
Examiner respectfully points out Kwak et al. was never relied upon to teach the claim limitation of “a zirconium-containing coating layer on the surface of the single particles.” Kwak et al. was only relied upon to teach “a zirconium-containing coating layer on the surface of the secondary particles.” Thus, the argument is not relevant.
For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues Fujiki et al. does not cure the deficiency of Kim et al. because Fujiki et al.’s coated LCO particles are part of coagulated positive active materials with a size consistent with a secondary particle aggregate and its “first coating layer” includes Ni while it’s composition list for “element M” happens to include Zr. Fujiki et al. teaches secondary particles having a coating layer in Para. 9-11 in which LCO particles are used as primary particles which are coagulated into secondary particles. Additionally, the LCO of Fujiko has a different concentration of Ni than the amended claim as it doesn’t teach a concentration of nickel about 40%.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is unclear where the understanding of LCO particles are a part of coagulated positive active material particles or secondary particle aggregates originates other than Para. 9-11 of Fujiki et al.. However, NCM and NCA are noted as having to be made in the form coagulated secondary particles of the primary particles if these materials are chosen are used. LCO primary particles are noted as an alternative improvement of the NCM/NCA active materials. Based on the wording, the use of secondary particles only relates to NCM/NCA of which LCO is an alternative that shows improvement. Additionally, LCO Is shown as positive active material particle 11 in Fig. 1 which it appears to be a primary particle by the singular circle and noted as such in Para. 9. Additionally, just because the LCO particle of Fujiki et al. has a different size as to what is later claimed, it does not preclude it from being considered a single particle or being relied upon for a separate teaching. In regards to the argument of the coating composition, the claim does not recite a specific composition of the coating beyond zirconium-coating. It does not recite that it cannot contain Nickel or that it requires a certain amount of Zirconium. Fujiki et al. teaches the coating may contain zirconium and benefits of the coating on the primary LCO particle 11a, thus forming the foundation of the 103 rejection. Regarding the argument of the different Ni compositions of the LCO of Fujiki et al. and the claim, the compositions between Fujiki et al. and Kim et al. remain very similar of lithium cobalt oxides than contain Ni, thus it’s still reasonable to apply the coating teaching of Fujiki et al. to the LCO of Kim et al.
For the above reason, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2022/0388852 A1 teaches a coating over a primary particle. This was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
US 2019/0355981 A1 teaches a cathode active material with aggregated particles comprising secondary particles. This was cited in the Non-Final Rejection filed 10/15/2025.
US 2022/0085378 A1 teaches zirconium-coating over a single particle.
US 2021/0167366 A1 teaches zirconium-coating over a single particle.
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 KATHERINE J METZGER whose telephone number is (571)272-0170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (1st week) or Monday - Friday (2nd week) 7:30am-5:00am - 9-day biweekly schedule.
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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/KATHERINE J METZGER/Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/CHRISTIAN ROLDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
05/01/2026
Prosecution Insights