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 .
This is the initial Office action based on application number 18/142846 filed on 05/03/2023. Claims 1-5 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, directed to a positive electrode active material and a lithium-ion battery as recited in claims 1-3 in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 4, 5 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group.
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.
Claims 1-3 are 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.
Regarding to claim 1: The term "type" in claim 1 is indefinite as it extends the scope of the expression. See MPEP 2173.05(b). For the interest of compact prosecution, “an O2-type structure” in claim 1 is examined as “an O2 structure”.
Claims 2, 3 are rejected for their dependence of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sugiyama (US 20210119199 A1).
Regarding to claim 1: Sugiyama discloses a method of producing a cathode active material (abstract). The cathode active material (equivalent to a positive electrode active material) has a multi-phase of the O2 structure and the O3 structure (par. 23), wherein the cathode active material has a composition represented by LibNacMnpNiqCorO2, wherein 0<b+c≤1; p+q+r=1, and 3≤4p+2q+3r≤3.5 (equivalent to at least Li, Na, at least one of Mn, Ni, and Co, and O as constituent elements) (par. 47), and the cathode active material has a layered structure (equivalent to Na present in layer form) (par. 36, fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as obvious over Zheng et al. (CN 114447309 A) in view of Saito (JP WO 2015115025 A1). The English translation of the CN 114447309 A and JP WO 2015115025 A1 is attached.
Regarding to claims 1, 2: Zheng et al. disclose a sodium-ion doped lithium-ion battery cathode material and its preparation method (par. 1). The sodium-ion doped lithium-ion battery cathode material (equivalent to a positive electrode active material) has a composition of Lix-yNayNizCowMn1-z-wO2, wherein 0<x≤1; 0<y<0.1, 0.5≤z<1, and 0≤w≤0.5 (par. 8). The composition of Li0.88Na0.08Ni0.52Co0.19Mn0.29O2 (equivalent to a=0.88, b=0.08, x-p=0.29, y-q=0.52, z-r=0.19, p+q+r=0, x+y+z=1 in the instant claim 2) in Example 1 (par. 37, Table 1) is disclosed. The sodium-ion doped lithium-ion battery cathode material has a layered structure with suppressed lithium-nickel mixing (par. 2, 23, 43) (equivalent to Na present in layer form).
Zheng et al. fail to explicitly disclose O2-type structure. However, Saito discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (par.1). The battery comprises a positive electrode active material having a space group P63mc and a crystal structure defined by the O2 structure (par. 17). The positive electrode active material is represented by LixNayCoz1Mnz2M(1-z1-z2)O(2±γ), wherein 0.75<x<1.1, 0<y<0.1, 0.8<z1≤0.98, 0<z2≤0.2, 0≤γ<0.1, and M is at least one metal element (except Li, Na, Co, and Mn) (par. 21) (equivalent to at least Li, Na, at least one of Mn, Ni, and Co, and O as constituent elements ). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to O2 structure of Saito as the crystal structure of the sodium-ion doped lithium-ion battery cathode material of Zheng et al. because Saito teaches O2 structure can achieve a high initial charging efficiency (par. 8).
Regarding to claim 3: Zheng et al. disclose a lithium-ion battery, comprising a positive electrode sheet (equivalent to a positive electrode) (par. 54), an electrolyte layer (par. 6), and a negative electrode (par. 54), wherein the positive electrode comprises the sodium-ion doped lithium-ion battery cathode material according to claim 1 (par. 54).
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as obvious over Saito (JP WO 2015115025 A1) in view of Zheng et al. (CN 114447309 A).
Regarding to claims 1, 2: Saito discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (par.1). The battery comprises a positive electrode active material having a space group P63mc and a crystal structure defined by the O2 structure (par. 17). The positive electrode active material is represented by LixNayCoz1Mnz2M(1-z1-z2)O(2±γ), wherein 0.75<x<1.1, 0<y<0.1, 0.8<z1≤0.98, 0<z2≤0.2, 0≤γ<0.1, and M is at least one metal element (except Li, Na, Co, and Mn) (par. 21). Examples of the metal element M include Ni, Al, Mg, Ti, Bi, Zr, Fe, Cr, Mo, V, Ce, K, Ga, In (par. 24) (The composition of Saito can be Li0.8Na0.05Co0.9Mn0.06Ni0.04O2 when M is Ni, x=0.8, y=0.05, z1=0.9, z2=0.06, 1-z1-z2=0.04, γ=0. The composition of Li0.8Na0.05Co0.9Mn0.06Ni0.04O2 of Saito is equivalent to the composition of the instant claim 2 when a=0.8, b=0.05, x-p=0.06, y-q=0.04, z-r=0.9, p+q+r=0, x+y+z=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); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP §2144.05(I).
However, it is the position of the examiner that other property of said material, Na present in layer form, is inherent, given that the composition of the precursor Na compound, the manufacturing process, and the composition of the positive electrode active material disclosed by Saito and the present application are similar. A reference which is silent about a claimed invention’s features is inherently anticipatory if the missing feature is necessarily present in that which is described in the reference. Inherency is not established by probabilities or possibilities. In re Robertson, 49 USPQ2d 1949 (1999).
Alternatively, Zheng et al. recognize that the layered structure of the sodium-ion doped lithium-ion battery cathode material can have good material structure stability and excellent cycle performance (par. 5). The layered structure can be obtained by first synthesizing the precursor Na compound with the layered structure, and then using an ion exchange method (par. 21). Zheng et al. further recognize that the proportion and rate of ion exchange can be controlled by adjusting the Li/Na molar ratio, and ion exchange time and temperature. Therefore, some Na ions can remain after ion exchange (par. 20). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the Li/Na molar ratio, and ion exchange time and temperature to obtain the desired Na layer structure. Discovery of optimum value of result effective variable in known process is ordinarily within skill of art. In re Boesch, CCPA 1980, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ215.
Regarding to claim 3: Saito discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (equivalent to a lithium-ion secondary battery), comprising a working electrode (1) (equivalent to a positive electrode) (par. 43, fig. 2), a separator (4) (equivalent to an electrolyte layer) (par. 44, fig. 2), and a counter electrode (2) (equivalent to a negative electrode) (par. 44, fig. 2), wherein the working electrode (1) comprises the positive electrode active material according to claim 1 (par. 43).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PIN JAN WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7057. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached on 571-272-1295. 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.
/PIN JAN WANG/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
/Dah-Wei D. Yuan/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1717