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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-7) in the reply filed on December 8, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 8, 2025.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. In the instant case, the phrases “the present disclosure relates to”, “according to the present disclosure”, and “is provided” are used.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (US 2022/0093913 A1) in view of Furuichi (US 2018/0047977 A1) and Kaneda (US 2022/0285676 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 5, Example 3 of Ahn teaches a positive electrode active material (positive active material, Ahn [98]) comprising a single particle (small particle diameter monolith particles, Ahn [101]) and an aggregated particle formed of primary particles aggregated to each other (large particle diameter secondary particles, Ahn [98]), wherein a mass ratio between the single particle and the aggregated particle is from 20:80 to 60:40 (Ahn [98]).
Example 3 of Ahn does not teach the single particle including a boron-containing compound or a tungsten-containing compound in a surface thereof.
Ahn teaches that the single particle is a compound represented by Chemical Formula 2 and that boron (B) and tungsten (W) are suitable elements to be included (Q2, Ahn [17-19]).
Furuichi teaches a positive electrode active material particle wherein the surface includes a tungsten-containing compound in order to “reduce the positive electrode resistance of a battery and improve output characteristics” (Furuichi [23]). Furuichi further teaches that this compound “has high lithium ion conductivity and has an effect of promoting the movement of lithium ions” and when it is on the particle surface it leads to the formation of Li conduction paths at the interface with the electrolyte “so that the reaction resistance of the positive electrode active material is reduce to improve output characteristics” (Furuichi [47]).
Since Ahn teaches that W is a suitable element to be including in the single particle and Furuichi teaches that a W-containing compound in a surface of a positive electrode active material particle can reduce positive electrode resistance and improve output characteristics, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a tungsten-containing compound, as taught by Furuichi, to the surface of the single particle of Ahn in order to reduce positive electrode resistance and improve output characteristics.
Ahn is silent to the sphere degree of the single particle.
Kaneda teaches a positive electrode active material for lithium ion batteries (Kaneda claim 1) comprising a single particle and an aggregated particle formed of primary particles (Kaneda claim 1), as taught by Ahn (Ahn Example 3 , Ahn [98]), wherein the sphere degree of the particles in the positive electrode active material is 0.93 to 1.00 (degree of circularity, Kaneda [61-63]).
Since Ahn and Kaneda both teach positive electrode active material for use in lithium ion batteries, Ahn is silent to the sphere degree, and Kaneda teaches that it is desirable for positive electrode active material particles to have a sphere degree of 0.93 to 1.00, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the positive electrode active material of Ahn having single particles with a sphere degree within the range taught by Kaneda, thus being with the claimed range of 0.91 or more, in order to obtain a positive electrode active material suitable for use in lithium ion batteries.
Ahn is silent to the fluidity index of the positive electrode active material.
It is reasonable to presume that the fluidity index being 3.25 or more (claim 1) and from 3.25 to 8.0 (claim 5) is inherent to Ahn in view of Furuichi and Kaneda. Support for said presumption is found in that Ahn in view of Furuichi and Kaneda and the instant specification both disclose a positive electrode active material (Ahn Example 3; instant claim 1), an aggregated particle formed of primary particles aggregated to each other (Ahn [90-92]; instant claim 1), and a single particle including a tungsten-containing compound in a surface (Ahn in view of Furuichi, described above; instant claim 1). Ahn and the instant disclosure both further disclose the primary particles being 100 to 200 nm (Ahn [92]; instant specification pg. 4 line 16 “from 0.1 µm to 0.2 µm”) and a mass ratio between the single particle and the aggregated particle being 20:80 (Ahn Example 3 [98]; instant claim 1). Ahn further discloses the single particle being 4 µm (Ahn [93]), which is within the range disclosed by the instant specification (“more preferably from 1 µm to 5 µm” instant specification pg. 4 line 3).
Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01.
Regarding claim 2, Ahn in view of Furuichi and Kaneda teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Ahn further teaches the single particle including a compound containing nickel, cobalt, and manganese and having a ratio of nickel to metallic elements except lithium of 60 mol% or more (Example 3 uses Synthesis Example 3, Ahn [96]). Ahn teaches the aggregate particle including nickel and cobalt and having a ratio of nickel to metallic elements except lithium of 70 mol% or more (Example 3 uses Synthesis Example 1, Ahn [92]). Example 3 of Ahn does not teach the aggregated particle including Mn.
Ahn teaches that the aggregated particle comprises a compound represented by Chemical Formula 1 and that it is suitable for the aggregated particle to include manganese (Q may be at least one element selected from the list provided in Ahn [16]). Ahn further teaches that the positive electrode active materials disclosed are used in positive electrodes and rechargeable lithium batteries (Ahn [6-7]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an aggregated particle including Mn in the positive electrode active material of Ahn in order to achieve the predictable result of a positive electrode active material suitable for use in positive electrodes for rechargeable lithium batteries.
Regarding claim 3, Ahn in view of Furuichi and Kaneda teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Furuichi further teaches the tungsten-containing compound being lithium tungstate (Furuichi [193]).
Regarding claim 4, Ahn in view of Furuichi and Kaneda teaches all features of claims 1 and 2, as described above. Furuichi further teaches the tungsten-containing compound being lithium tungstate (Furuichi [193]).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Ahn in view of Furuichi and Kaneda teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Ahn further teaches a positive electrode comprising a positive electrode active material layer including the positive electrode active material according to claim 1 (Ahn [98]) and a base material (current collector, Ahn [98]) and a lithium ion battery comprising the positive electrode according to claim 6 (Ahn [98]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kintsu (US 2021/0296638 A1): Kintsu appears to disclose a positive electrode active material comprising single particles and aggregated particles (abstract, [8]).
Takahashi (US 2022/0367852 A1): Takahashi appears to disclose a positive electrode active material comprising single particles and aggregated particles (claim 1).
Jang (US 12,300,807 B2): appears to disclose a positive electrode active material comprising aggregated particles and single particles, wherein the particles are nickel-based positive active materials (abstract).
Kageura (US 2021/0098776 A1): appears to disclose a positive electrode active material comprising single particles and aggregated particles (claim 1, claim 6, Example 1).
Kuroda (US 2021/0013508 A1): appears to disclose a positive electrode active material comprising aggregated particles and single particles (abstract, claim 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA S CASERTO whose telephone number is (571)272-5114. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/J.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789