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 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.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 10-11, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Feridun et al, US 20190326591 A1 (as cited in IDS).
Regarding Claim 1, Feridun discloses a method for coating lithium-containing cathode surfaces, by simultaneously sublimating solid CO2 and condensing atmospheric water vapor onto the surfaces, allowing the CO2 to react with the lithium for a time sufficient to create a lithium carbonate film on the surface [Feridun, 0031], as shown in figure 1 of Feridun, wherein a cathode particle (Feridun, 12; figure 1), comprised of a nickel-based cathode material depicted at LiNixMnyCozO2, indicating a 1:2 molar ratio of lithium and oxygen, with CO2 gas and water condensation at the particles surface [Feridun, 0044]. The water condensation is caused by the cold substrate which condenses the water vapor in the atmosphere [Feridun, 0043]. The method for producing the water resistant cathodes include mixing and heating the mixture to a temperature for a time sufficient to cause the lithium carbonate coating [Feridun, 0030], the reaction atmosphere may be ambient or controlled (closed, semi-sealed, or sealed) [Feridun, 0045], and humidity levels between 1% to 100% are suitable [Feridun, 0062], indicating predetermined time, temperature, pressure and humidity for the reaction of the cathode materials.
Feridun also teaches using dry ice as a CO2 source to mix with cathode particles to convert all soluble lithium species on the cathode surface to lithium carbonates. (Feridun, para 59). In other words, Feridun teaches the amount of CO2 is a result effective variable to ensure conversion of all of the soluble lithium species. Thus, it would have been within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to employ an amount of dry ice that completely sublimates into CO2 in order to ensure complete conversion.
In doing so, at the moment the dry ice completely sublimates, it is the examiner’s position that the claimed combination consisting of “a coated or uncoated nickel-based cathode material” and “an atmosphere” is met.
Regarding Claim 2, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the cathode materials are comprised of lithium, manganese, nickel, cobalt and oxygen [Feridun, 0091] and precursor materials are combined to synthesize LiaNixMnyCozO2, where x, y, and z all satisfy 0 < x, y, z, < 1.0 [Feridun, 0092] a specific example of a cathode material given is LiNi0.6Co0.2Mn0.2O2 [Feridun, 0091], wherein x+y+z = 1, corresponding to a+b+c = 1 of the claim.
Regarding Claim 3, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein examples of exemplary cathode powders are NMC type cathode materials, consisting of nickel, cobalt, manganese, lithium and oxygen, including NMC 111, NMC 523, NMC 622, NMC 811 and combinations thereof [Feridun, 0091].
Regarding Claim 7, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein in an embodiment, utilizing a sealed system, the vapor pressure of the dry ice is 5.73MPa and the ambient temperature is above the sublimation temperature of dry ice, the vapor pressure of the CO2 is naturally high which creates a faster reaction between the condensed H2O and CO2, in which the gaseous CO2 reactions with ionic lithium to generate the solid phase lithium carbonate on the powder surfaces [Feridun, 0065].
Regarding Claim 8, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein ambient temperatures can be utilized, anything above 0 °C is suitable [Feridun, 0063], when the dry ice condenses and freezes the water vapor on the cathode particle surfaces, the ice melt, such as when establishing equilibrium with ambient temperature, and dissolves the lithium on the cathode surface to form the lithium carbonate [Feridun, 0064].
Regarding Claim 10, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a feature of the method disclosed by Feridun is exposing a cathode surface containing impurities to carbon dioxide for a time and temperature sufficient to convert the impurities into a lithium carbonate coating [Feridun, 0025], an advantage to this method is the entire exterior surfaces of the cathode particles are contacted with carbon dioxide [Feridun, 0026]. Further, an embodiment of Feridun that utilizes a sealed system, wherein the vapor pressure of the dry ice is 5.73MPa and the ambient temperature is above the sublimation temperature of dry ice, the vapor pressure of the CO2 is naturally high which creates a faster reaction between the condensed H2O and CO2, in which the gaseous CO2 reactions with ionic lithium to generate the solid phase lithium carbonate on the powder surfaces [Feridun, 0065].
Regarding Claim 11, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein under atmospheric conditions, CO2 draws atmospheric humidity and water vapor condensation occurs, with a humidity level between 1% to 100%, this level of water condensation enriches the surface of lithium species on the cathode surface, wherein surface conversion to Li2CO3 occurs [Feridun, 0062].
Regarding Claim 14, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a benefit of the method is solid cathode particles are contacted with solid carbon dioxide to provide a means for leveraging in situ original surface lithium to produce the carbonate coating [Feridun, 0046]. The method allows for the lithium from the cathode material to react with both water and carbon dioxide [Feridun, 0060]. No additional lithium is added to the cathode material, only the lithium already present on the material is utilized [Feridun, 0091], therefore, indicating the cathode material is untreated prior to exposure to the carbon dioxide and water vapor.
Regarding Claim 16, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein Table 1 shows the results of the cathode material, including CO2 treated, from vacuum drying overnight [Feridun, 0098]. Further, Feridun discloses the state of the art protocols include water content evaporation without filter, including vacuum drying [Feridun, 0019], indicating the common practice.
Claims 4 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feridun et al, US 20190326591 A1 (as cited in IDS) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Yoshida, US 20140087270 A1 (as cited in IDS).
Regarding Claim 4, Feridun teaches on the method of claim 1, but is silent to teach on the nickel-based cathode material comprises one or more of a coated or uncoated metal oxide comprising LiNiO2, LiNi1-yCoyO2, LiNi1-yMnyO2 (0≤Y<1), Li(NiaCobMno)O4 (0<a<2, 0<b<2, 0<c<2, a+b+c=2), LiMn2-zNizO4, Li(NiaCobAlc)O2(0<a<1,0<b<1, 0<c<1, a+b+c=1) or a combination thereof.
Yoshida teaches a coated active material and a lithium solid state battery [Yoshida, 0021], wherein the cathode active material is not particularly limited, but includes oxide cathode active material represented by the general formula LixMyOz, wherein M is a transition metal element and at least one preferably selected from Co, Mn, Ni, V, and Fe, x=0.02 to 2.2, y=1 to 2, and z=1.4 to 4, and can also include cathode active materials such as LiCoO2, LiMnO2, LiNiO2, LiVO2, LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2, LiMn2O4, and Li (Ni0.5Mn1.5)O4 [Yoshida, 0029].
Yoshida and Feridun are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Feridun to include the oxide cathode active material as taught by Yoshida, because such modification would result in a cathode active material with a high-capacity [Yoshida, 0029].
Regarding Claim 17, Feridun teaches the method of claim 1, but is silent to teach on the method further comprising washing of the lithium carbonate coated cathode.
Yoshida teaches a coated active material and a lithium solid state battery [Yoshida, 0021], wherein the coating layer contains and Li ion conductive oxide and further contains lithium carbonate [Yoshida, 0032]. Example 6 of Yoshida the coated active material is poured into 100 mL of pure water, filtered and dried [Yoshida, 0081], corresponding to the washing of the lithium carbonate coated cathode as required by the claim.
Yoshida and Feridun are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Feridun to include the washing step taught in Yoshida because such modification would result in decreased reaction resistance [Yoshida, 0094].
Regarding Claim 18, Feridun teaches the method of claim 1, but is silent to teach on the lithium carbonate coated cathode being combined with one or more suitable binders, solid electrolytes and conductive additive to form a cathode for an electrochemical cell.
Yoshida teaches a cathode active material layer containing at least the cathode active material a solid electrolyte material, a conductive material and a binder [Yoshida, 0048].
Yoshida and Feridun are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify the coated lithium carbonate cathode material as taught by Feridun to be included in the cathode for an electrochemical cell as taught by Yoshida because it is well-known in the art to use a cathode active material in a cathode for an electrochemical cell. Further, a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results supports prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2143, I, B).
Regarding Claim 19, Feridun teaches the method of claim 1, but is silent to teach on integrating the lithium carbonate coated cathode with an anode and a separator to for a functioning electrochemical cell.
Yoshida, teaches a power generating element (Yoshida, 20; figure 2) of a lithium solid state battery comprising a cathode active material layer (Yoshida, 11; figure 2), an anode active material layer (Yoshida, 12; figure 2), and a solid electrolyte layer (Yoshida, 13; figure 2) between the cathode and anode [Yoshida, 0045].
Yoshida and Feridun are considered analogous arts in the area of batteries and power storage devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify the coated lithium carbonate cathode material as taught by Feridun to be included in the cathode and further integrated into the lithium solid state battery as taught by Yoshida because it is well-known to use a cathode in a functioning electrochemical cell. Further, a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results supports prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2143, I, B).
Claims 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Feridun et al, US 20190326591 A1 (as cited in IDS).
Regarding Claim 9, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a preferable mixing temperature is 19 °C and above [Feridun, 0069].
Moreover, according to MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lieinside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim,541F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990).
Regarding Claim 15, Feridun discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the coating obtained by the conversion method of Feridun has a thickness varying between 1 to 10 nm [Feridun, 0074].
Moreover, according to MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lieinside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990).
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Feridun et al, US 20190326591 A1 (as cited in IDS) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Tei et al, JP 2009272051 A (as cited in IDS and English translation provided for citation).
Regarding Claim 12, Feridun teaches the method of claim 1, but is silent to teach on the nickel-based cathode material being coated with a lithium-containing layer prior to exposure to carbon dioxide and water vapor.
Tei teaches an all-solid state battery with a positive electrode [Tei, 0004], wherein an insulator, lithium carbonate, is interposed between the positive and negative electrodes [Tei, 0005]. The positive electrode (Tei, 1; figure 4) is formed on a positive electrode current collector (Tei, 11; figure 4) using a LiCoO2 film, corresponding to the lithium-containing layer of the claim, which is an oxide containing lithium, then the positive electrode layer is exposed to air or carbon dioxide gas, which reacts with the LiCoO2 to form the Li2CO3 insulating film on the surface of the positive electrode [Tei, 0022].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant application, to modify Feridun to include the Li oxide film at taught by Tei because such modification would provide reduced interface resistance [Tei, 0012].
Regarding Claim 13, modified Feridun teaches the method of claim 12, wherein a feature of the invention of Feridun is converting LiOH on cathode particle surfaces to a lithium carbonate film [Feridun, 0029], further, almost all the NMC cathode particles have surface lithium impurities, including Li2O, LiOH, LiHCO3, Li2CO3, and only suitable lithium species are converted to the Li2CO3 [Feridun, 0093]. There is also the possibility of adding fluorine additives that will for a thin LiF component to the surface structure [Feridun, 0105].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim 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.
Applicants argue that claim 1 excludes solid CO2. The examiner agrees. As noted in the above rejection, however, it is the examiner’s position that once Feridun’s solid CO2 sublimates, only gaseous CO2 exists and thus meets the claim.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JONATHAN J JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:30 AM - 3 PM.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-2450. 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.
JONATHAN JOHNSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights