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 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.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadowaki (US 20200313183 A1) and further in view of Lee (US 20180013129 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kadowaki discloses a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery (abstract, [a positive electrode active material]), comprising
a lithium metal oxide particle (abstract, [includes particles including crystals of a lithium metal composite oxide])
that contains tungsten (para. 0014, [the lithium metal composite oxide may be represented by the following Formula 1 … M is at least one element selected from … W]) and
has a secondary shape in which a plurality of primary particles are aggregated (para. 0016, [the particles may be composed of primary particles [and] secondary particles formed of an agglomeration of the primary particles]),
wherein tungsten is doped into the primary particles (REF)
Kadowaki does not teach:
wherein the lithium metal oxide particle includes, in an internal region thereof, a sulfur- containing portion formed present in a region between the primary particles
Lee, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches:
a nickel manganese cobalt-based composite metal hydroxide (para. 0153)
and an additive/sintering agent of an ammonium ion-containing compound of (NH4)2SO4 (para. 0117, [the sintering agent may specifically be an ammonium ion - containing compound such as (NH4)2SO4])
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have added (NH4)2SO4 to Kadowaki’s nickel manganese cobalt material, as taught by Lee, in order to increase and stabilize the crystallinity of the positive electrode active material, as taught by Lee (para. 0084, [the ammonium cation - containing complexing agent may be added ... as a result , crystallinity of the positive electrode active material may be increased and stabilized.])
Examiner notes that para. 0026 of the instant specification teaches that the mixing of a sulfur containing source within the cathode material results in the presence of sulfur in between the primary particles “a mixture of the metal hydroxide particles, a lithium source, a tungsten-containing source and a sulfur-containing source is formed”.
The addition of (NH4)2SO4 into the cathode material of Kadowaki’s cathode would similarly produce the same result; and therefore, modified Kadowaki teaches:
wherein the lithium metal oxide particle includes, in an internal region thereof, a sulfur- containing portion formed present in a region between the primary particles (Lee, para. 0117, [the sintering agent may specifically be an ammonium ion - containing compound such as (NH4)2SO4]) and para. 0084, [the ammonium cation - containing complexing agent may be added ... as a result , crystallinity of the positive electrode active material may be increased and stabilized.]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the lithium metal oxide particle contains nickel (para. 0198, [the metal composite compound is a compound containing Ni]), and tungsten is doped into the primary particles (para. 0014, Tungsten is included in the primary particles and in Formula 1, Mw stands for an element selected from the group consisting of tungsten (W) and the amount ranges from , 0 ≤w≤ 0.10 , which is a dopant amount).
Regarding claim 3, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein a content of nickel in the lithium metal oxide particle is 80 mol% or more based on all elements except lithium and oxygen (para. 0520, Example 4, [ratio of nickel atoms … 0.88]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein
an amount of sulfur included in the sulfur-containing portion (Lee, para. 0117, The sulfur is included in the sulfur-containing portion [the sintering agent may specifically be an ammonium ion - containing compound such as (NH4)2SO4]) is greater than an amount of sulfur included in the primary particles (Kadowaki, para. 0292, sulfur is not included in the primary particles. The sulfur is included in the coated layer that is formed on the surface of the primary particles).
Therefore, the amount of sulfur included in the coating layer [sulfur containing portion] is greater than the amount of sulfur included in the primary particles.
Regarding claim 5, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein a detection count of sulfur in the sulfur-containing portion is greater than a detection count of sulfur in the primary particles in an energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis of a cross-section of the lithium metal oxide particle (para. 0292, sulfur is not included in the primary particles. The sulfur is included in the coated layer that is formed on the surface of the primary particles [para. 0278] and in the sulfur-containing portion due to the addition of the ammonium-ion additive/agent (Lee, see claim 1). Therefore, the amount of sulfur included in the sulfur containing portion is greater than the amount of sulfur included in the primary particles. No sulfur would be detected in an EDS analysis of the primary particles).
Regarding claim 6, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein an amount of tungsten included in the primary particles is greater than an amount of tungsten included in the sulfur-containing portion (para. 0014, Tungsten is included in the primary particles and in Formula 1, Mw stands for an element selected from the group consisting of tungsten ((W)) (para. 0278 – tungsten is not contained in sulfur-containing portion, therefore an amount of tungsten included in the primary particles is greater than an amount of tungsten included in the sulfur-containing portion).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein a detection count of tungsten in the primary particles is greater than a detection count of tungsten in the sulfur-containing portion in an energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis of a cross-section of the lithium metal oxide particles (para. 0014, in Formula 1, Mw stands for an element selected from the group consisting of W) (para. 0278 – tungsten is not contained in sulfur-containing portion, therefore an amount of tungsten included in the primary particles is greater than an amount of tungsten included in the sulfur-containing portion. No tungsten would be detected in an X-ray EDS analysis of tungsten in the sulfur containing portion).
Regarding claim 9, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the primary particles include a layered crystal structure (para. 0088-0089, [a crystal structure of a lithium metal composite oxide is a layered structure]), and when a radius of the primary particle is designated as Rp, the primary particle does not include a cubic crystal structure in a region within a radius of 0.9Rp from a center of the primary particle (para. 0089, the crystal does not include a cubic crystal structure in its layered structure. The crystal structure is preferably a hexagonal crystal structure or a monoclinic crystal structure]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the primary particles include a layered crystal structure and do not include a cubic crystal structure (para. 0089, the crystal does not include a cubic crystal structure in its layered structure. The crystal structure is preferably a hexagonal crystal structure or a monoclinic crystal structure]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 11, wherein the sulfur-containing portion is present in a region other than the region within the radius of 0.6Rs (Kadowaki, para. 0292, sulfur is not included in the primary particles. Sulfur is included in the coated layer that is formed on the surface of the primary particles [para. 0278] and in the sulfur-containing portion due to the addition of the ammonium-ion additive/agent (Lee, see claim 1). Therefore, the sulfur containing portion is present in a region other than the region within the radius of 0.6Rs).
Regarding claim 13, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1, wherein, when a radius of the lithium metal oxide particle is designated as Rs, tungsten is present in a region within a radius of 0.6Rs from a center of the lithium metal oxide particle (para. 0014, Tungsten is included in the primary particles and in Formula 1, Mw stands for an element selected from the group consisting of tungsten (W) and the amount ranges from , 0 ≤w≤ 0.10 , which is a dopant amount, therefore Tungsten can be present anywhere within the core of the particle, including within a radius of 0.6Rs from a center).
Regarding claim 14, modified Kadowaki discloses the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 13, wherein tungsten is present in a region other than the region within the radius of 0.6Rs (para. 0014, Tungsten is included in the primary particles and in Formula 1, Mw stands for an element selected from the group consisting of tungsten (W) and the amount ranges from , 0 ≤w≤ 0.10 , which is a dopant amount, therefore Tungsten can be present anywhere within the core of the particle, including within a radius of 0.6Rs from a center).
Regarding claim 20, modified Kadowaki discloses a lithium secondary battery, comprising: a cathode comprising the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery according to claim 1(claim 10, [a lithium-ion battery comprising, a positive electrode, a negative electrode … the positive electrode includes a positive electrode active material … which includes the positive electrode active material according to claim 1]); and an anode facing the cathode (Fig. 2 shows the anode [item 120] facing the cathode [item 110]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadowaki (US 20200313183 A1) and further in view of Lee (US 20180013129 A1) and Zhang (Zhang, Nan, et al. “Improving the electrochemical performance of lithium-rich cathode materials li1.2mn0.54ni0.13co0.13o2 by a method of tungsten doping.” Ionics, vol. 25, no. 11, 12 June 2019, pp. 5239–5247.).
Regarding claim 8, modified Kadowaki teaches the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1.
Kadowaki does not teach wherein, in an energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis of a cross-section of the lithium metal oxide particle, a difference between a maximum detection count of tungsten and an average detection count of tungsten is 45% or less of the average detection count, and a difference between a minimum detection count of tungsten and the average detection count of tungsten is 45% or less of the average detection count.
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, lithium metal oxide cathode materials, teaches the use of energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy to analyze tungsten in a lithium metal oxide particle doped sample pg. 5240, 1st column, second paragraph [the W-doped samples Li1.2Mn0.54-xNi0.13Co0.13WxO2 ]). Zhang teaches that element distribution of the material can be observed using EDS (Zhang, pg. 5240, Materials characterization, [the element distribution of the material surface was observed by EDS]).
Therefore, absent a showing of persuasive secondary considerations, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the instant invention was filed, to have utilized energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy to research the W-doping content and to determine that the distribution of elements is homogeneous (Zhang, pg. 5245, conclusion, 1st paragraph).
It is the Examiner’s position that this material characterization would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to have arrived at a difference between a maximum detection count of tungsten and an average detection count of tungsten is 45% or less of the average detection count, and a difference between a minimum detection count of tungsten and the average detection count of tungsten is 45% or less of the average detection count, without undue experimentation, particularly given that Zhang teaches that appropriate W-doping can prominently raise its [cathode active material’s] electrochemical performance (Zhang, pg. 5245-5246, conclusion, 1st paragraph).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadowaki (US 20200313183 A1) and further in view of Lee (US 20180013129 A1) and Seo (US 20230170478 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Kadowaki teaches the cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery of claim 1.
Kadowaki does not teach wherein, when a radius of the lithium metal oxide particle is designated as Rs, the sulfur-containing portion is present in a region within a radius of 0.6Rs from a center of the lithium metal oxide particle.
Seo, in the same field of endeavor, batteries, teaches that when a radius of the lithium metal oxide particle is designated as Rs, the sulfur-containing portion is present in a region within a radius of 0.6Rs from a center of the lithium metal oxide particle (Seo, claim 1, [ a part of transition metal sites in a crystal lattice of the crystal structure is substituted with a doping element M, and a part of oxygen sites in the crystal lattice is substituted with sulfur (S)]). Examiner notes that since the particle’s crystal lattice includes sulfur then it would be expected that sulfur would exist in a region within a radius of 0.6R from a center of the lithium metal oxide particle.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have doped Kadowaki’s lithium metal oxide particle with sulfur, as taught by Seo, in order to have a cathode active material with high capacity and long life characteristics, as taught by Seo, (para. 0028, [the positive active material according to an embodiment of the present disclosure has high capacity and long life characteristics, by having a part of transition metal substituted with a doping element M, and a part of O substituted with S]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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.
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 VERITA E GRANNUM whose telephone number is (571)270-1150. The examiner can normally be reached 10-5 EST / 7-2 PST.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/V.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights