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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 12/14/2025 and 03/5/2026 have been considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Examiner notes the following amendments made to the claims:
Claim 1 amended for clarity and to further limit the possible metals included in the second layer
Claims 5-20 amended for clarity
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, by amending to further limit the metals included in the second layer to only indium and silver, the previous prior art has been overcome. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kozinsky (US 20100285360 A1), which teaches a layer of indium oxide in a negative electrode material. Since no arguments are made other than the fact that the previously applied prior art fails to teach the metal compound in the second layer comprising indium or silver, by applying Kozinsky to claims 1, 20, and dependent claims, all claims are rejected and there is currently no allowable subject matter present in the claims.
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.
Claim 9 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. Specifically, amended claim 9 reads “The negative electrode according to claim 5, wherein the second layer partially covers the second layer.” This is unclear wording as it is referring to a part of the invention acting upon itself. For examination purposes, the claim will be read as if it states “the second layer partially covers the negative electrode current collector”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 1, 3, 5, 7-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozinsky (US 20100285360 A1) in view of Woo (US 20190386315 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kozinsky teaches the following elements:
A negative electrode material, that is used for a negative electrode of a lithium secondary battery,(“FIG. 1 depicts a lithium-ion cell 100, which includes a negative electrode 102, a positive electrode 104, and a separator region 106 between the negative electrode 102 and the positive electrode 104. The negative electrode 102 includes electrolyte 112 and a current collector 114. A coating 116 is provided on the current collector 114.” Kozinsky [0013])
a first layer that comprises lithium metal as a negative electrode active material; (“In the ideal discharging of the cell 100, the electrons are generated at the negative electrode 102 because there is extraction via oxidation of lithium ions as lithium is plated on the coating 116 of the negative electrode 102,” Kozinsky [0018])
and a second layer on at least one surface of the first layer, (“The coating 116, however, encourages the growth of a smooth layer of lithium on the collector 114 regardless of surface imperfections in the substrate material. In one embodiment, this is accomplished by providing a coating 116 that exhibits a smoother surface for lithium adherence as compared to the substrate material. Accordingly, the lithium coats more uniformly onto the current collector 114.” Kozinsky [0021]. In this case, the coating layer in between the current collector and lithium metal functions as the second layer, as it is present on a surface of the lithium metal layer.)
wherein the second layer comprises compound represented by a general formula MxAy, wherein M is an element selected from a group consisting of In and Ag, wherein A is an element selected from a group consisting of O, N, P, and F, wherein 0.3<x/y<3, (“The coating 116 may be provided in the form of pure metals and alloys, conducting oxides such as indium oxide or zinc oxide, or sulfides, etc.” Kozinsky [0022]. In this case, the use of indium oxide would meet all of the limitations regarding the compound in the second layer.)
and wherein the second layer has a thickness of 100 nm or less. (“Preferably, the coating 116 is very thin to reduce cost and effects on electronic conductivity. The coating 116 need only be sufficiently thick to provide a very smooth surface on which Li metal can be electrochemically deposited with minimal initial development of roughness.” Kozinsky [0023]. While Kozinsky doesn’t teach an explicit range, it does teach that it is within the scope of routine experimentation to optimize the thickness, and that the thinner it can be while still performing its purpose the better.)
Kozinsky is silent on the following elements of claim 1. Specifically, Kozinsky teaches the presence of an electrolyte but does not specify whether it is aqueous or non-aqueous:
wherein the lithium secondary battery contains a non-aqueous electrolyte solution, (“The separator region 106 includes an electrolyte with a lithium cation and serves as a physical and electrical barrier between the negative electrode 102 and the positive electrode 104 so that the electrodes are not electronically connected within the cell 100 while allowing transfer of lithium ions between the negative electrode 102 and the positive electrode 104.” Kozinsky [0015])
However, it is well known within the art of lithium batteries to use a non-aqueous electrolyte. For example, Woo teaches all of the elements of claim 1 except for the use of indium in its oxide layer, and additionally teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte:
wherein the lithium secondary battery contains a non-aqueous electrolyte solution, (“A lithium secondary battery according to another aspect of the present invention includes an electrode assembly including the above-explained lithium electrode as an anode, a cathode, and a separator interposed between the anode and cathode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte for impregnating the electrode assembly.” Woo [0015])
Woo and Kozinsky are considered to be analogous because they are both within the same field of lithium secondary batteries including a lithium metal layer and coating layer in their negative electrode. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the unspecified electrolyte of Kozinsky to specifically be a non-aqueous electrolyte, as taught by Woo, as this would only require the simple substitution of one electrolyte with another. The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
No further modification or motivation would be needed to meet the limitations of claim 3, 5, 7-16.
Regarding claim 3, Kozinsky teaches all of the additional limitations:
The negative electrode material according to claim 1, wherein A is an element selected from a group consisting of O and N. (“The coating 116 may be provided in the form of pure metals and alloys, conducting oxides such as indium oxide or zinc oxide, or sulfides, etc.” Kozinsky [0022]. In this case, the use of indium oxide would meet all of the limitations regarding the compound in the second layer.)
Regarding claim 5, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 1, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 5:
A negative electrode comprising: the negative electrode material according to claim 1; and a negative electrode current collector that holds the negative electrode material. (“The negative electrode 102 includes electrolyte 112 and a current collector 114. A coating 116 is provided on the current collector 114.” Kozinsky [0013])
Regarding claim 7, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 3, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 7:
A negative electrode comprising: the negative electrode material according to claim 3; and a negative electrode current collector that holds the negative electrode material. (“The negative electrode 102 includes electrolyte 112 and a current collector 114. A coating 116 is provided on the current collector 114.” Kozinsky [0013])
Regarding claim 8, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 5, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 8:
The negative electrode according to claim 5, wherein the second layer entirely covers the first layer (In the case of Kozinsky, the coating layer is formed to specifically cover the current collector, and therefore would meet the limitations of claim 8 requiring it to cover the entire area of lithium metal that is in contact with the current collector.)
Regarding claim 9, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 5, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 9:
The negative electrode according to claim 5, wherein the second layer is arranged such that a part of the second layer is in contact with the negative electrode current collector. (As described above, the second layer of Kozinsky is a coating of indium oxide on the current collector, which is also on the surface of the lithium metal layer as it is in between. Thus, the limitations of the claim are met.)
Regarding claim 10, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 8, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 10:
The negative electrode according to claim 8, wherein the second layer is partially in contact with the negative electrode current collector. (As described above, the second layer of Kozinsky is a coating of indium oxide on the current collector, which is also on the surface of the lithium metal layer as it is in between. Thus, the limitations of the claim are met.)
Regarding claim 11, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 5, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the following elements of claim 11:
The lithium secondary battery comprising: the negative electrode according to claim 5; a positive electrode; and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution. (“ FIG. 1 depicts a lithium-ion cell 100, which includes a negative electrode 102, a positive electrode 104, and a separator region 106 between the negative electrode 102 and the positive electrode 104. The negative electrode 102 includes electrolyte 112” Kozinsky [0013]. By modifying Kozinsky to include the non-aqueous electrolyte of Woo, as described in claim 1, this limitation would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.)
Regarding claim 12, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 8, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the following elements of claim 12:
The lithium secondary battery comprising: the negative electrode according to claim 8; a positive electrode; and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution. (“ FIG. 1 depicts a lithium-ion cell 100, which includes a negative electrode 102, a positive electrode 104, and a separator region 106 between the negative electrode 102 and the positive electrode 104. The negative electrode 102 includes electrolyte 112” Kozinsky [0013]. By modifying Kozinsky to include the non-aqueous electrolyte of Woo, as described in claim 1, this limitation would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.)
Regarding claim 13, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 11, as shown above. Kozinsky is silent on the following elements of claim 13:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte solution comprises a cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom.
However, Woo teaches all of the elements of claim 13 not found in Kozinsky:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte solution comprises a cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom. (“As the organic solvent included in the non-aqueous electrolyte, those commonly used in an electrolyte for a lithium secondary battery can be used without limitations, and for example, ether, ester, amide, linear carbonate, cyclic carbonate, etc.” Woo [0042] and “ Specifically examples of the cyclic carbonates may include ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), 1,2-butylene carbonate, 2,3-butylene carbonate, 1,2-pentylene carbonate, 2,3-pentylene carbonate, vinylene carbonate, vinylethylene carbonate, halogenated products thereof, and a mixture thereof. The halogenated products thereof may include, for example, fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC),” Woo [0044]. In this case, if FEC were used, as is taught in Woo [0058], then the above limitation is anticipated. By modifying Kozinsky to include the non-aqueous electrolyte of Woo, as described in claim 1, this limitation would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.)
Regarding claim 14, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 13, as shown above. Kozinsky is silent on the following elements of claim 14:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 13, wherein a ratio of the cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom to a whole of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution is at least 20 mol % or more and less than 80 mol %.
However, Woo teaches all of the elements of claim 14 not found in Kozinsky:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 13, wherein a ratio of the cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom to a whole of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution is at least 20 mol % or more and less than 80 mol %. (on both sides of a polyethylene porous polymer substrate, a porous coating layer formed of a mixture of alumina and a PVDF binder was formed) between the above prepared cathode and anode was inserted into a pouch-type battery case, and then a non-aqueous electrolyte (1 M LiPF.sub.6, VC 1 wt %, FEC:EMC=3:7 (volume ratio)) was injected into the battery case, which was then completely sealed to prepare a lithium secondary battery.” Woo [0058]. In this case, the ratio of fluorinated cyclic carbonate (FEC) is 30% of the whole non-aqueous electrolyte solution, which anticipates the claimed range. By modifying Kozinsky to include the non-aqueous electrolyte of Woo, as described in claim 1, this limitation would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.)
Regarding claim 15, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 13, as shown above. Kozinsky is silent on the following elements of claim 15:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 13, wherein the cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom comprises at least one of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) and/or difluoroethylene carbonate (DFEC).
However, Woo teaches all of the elements of claim 15 not found in Kozinsky:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 13, wherein the cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom comprises at least one of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) and/or difluoroethylene carbonate (DFEC). (“As the organic solvent included in the non-aqueous electrolyte, those commonly used in an electrolyte for a lithium secondary battery can be used without limitations, and for example, ether, ester, amide, linear carbonate, cyclic carbonate, etc.” Woo [0042] and “ Specifically examples of the cyclic carbonates may include ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), 1,2-butylene carbonate, 2,3-butylene carbonate, 1,2-pentylene carbonate, 2,3-pentylene carbonate, vinylene carbonate, vinylethylene carbonate, halogenated products thereof, and a mixture thereof. The halogenated products thereof may include, for example, fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC),” Woo [0044]. In this case, if FEC were used, as is taught in Woo [0058], then the above limitation is anticipated. By modifying Kozinsky to include the non-aqueous electrolyte of Woo, as described in claim 1, this limitation would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.)
Regarding claim 16, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 14, as shown above. Kozinsky is silent on the following elements of claim 16:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 14, wherein the cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom comprises at least one of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) and/or difluoroethylene carbonate (DFEC).
However, Woo teaches all of the elements of claim 16 not found in Kozinsky:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 14, wherein the cyclic carbonate having a fluorine atom comprises at least one of fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC) and/or difluoroethylene carbonate (DFEC). (“As the organic solvent included in the non-aqueous electrolyte, those commonly used in an electrolyte for a lithium secondary battery can be used without limitations, and for example, ether, ester, amide, linear carbonate, cyclic carbonate, etc.” Woo [0042] and “ Specifically examples of the cyclic carbonates may include ethylene carbonate (EC), propylene carbonate (PC), 1,2-butylene carbonate, 2,3-butylene carbonate, 1,2-pentylene carbonate, 2,3-pentylene carbonate, vinylene carbonate, vinylethylene carbonate, halogenated products thereof, and a mixture thereof. The halogenated products thereof may include, for example, fluoroethylene carbonate (FEC),” Woo [0044]. In this case, if FEC were used, as is taught in Woo [0058], then the above limitation is anticipated. By modifying Kozinsky to include the non-aqueous electrolyte of Woo, as described in claim 1, this limitation would be met without requiring any further modification or motivation.)
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woo (US 20190386315 A1) in view of Kozinsky (US 20100285360 A1)
Regarding claim 20, Woo teaches the following elements:
A method for manufacturing a negative electrode that is used for a lithium secondary battery, the method comprising: preparing a first layer comprising lithium metal as a negative electrode active material; and forming a second layer on at least one surface of the first layer, (“On a lithium metal layer with a thickness of 40 μm, an aluminum oxide layer and a carbon layer were sequentially deposited by sputtering deposition to prepare an anode.” Woo [0055]. Aluminum oxide Al2O3 anticipates the compound in claim 20.)
wherein the lithium secondary battery contains a non-aqueous electrolyte solution, (“A lithium secondary battery according to another aspect of the present invention includes an electrode assembly including the above-explained lithium electrode as an anode, a cathode, and a separator interposed between the anode and cathode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte for impregnating the electrode assembly.” Woo [0015])
wherein the second layer comprises a compound represented by a general formula MxAy, wherein M is an element selected from a group consisting of In, and Ag, wherein A is an element selected from a group consisting of O, N, P, and F, wherein 0.3<x/y<3[[)]],
and wherein the second layer has a thickness of 100 nm or less. (“The sputtering conditions are as shown in Table 1, and deposition was repeated twice, the deposition of the aluminum oxide layer was conducted for a total of 20 minutes, and the deposition of the carbon layer was conducted for a total of 40 minutes. The total thickness of the prepared aluminum oxide layer and carbon layer was measured to be 34.0 nm,” Woo [0056]. The thickness of the aluminum oxide layer of Woo is less than 100nm, and therefore anticipates the range of claim 20.)
Woo is silent on the following elements of claim 20:
wherein the second layer comprises a compound represented by a general formula MxAy, wherein M is an element selected from a group consisting of In and Ag, wherein A is an element selected from a group consisting of O, N, P, and F, wherein 0.3<x/y<3,
However, Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 20 that are not found in Woo. Specifically, Kozinsky teaches the usage of an indium oxide coating layer formed on a surface of a lithium metal layer:
wherein the second layer comprises a compound represented by a general formula MxAy, wherein M is an element selected from a group consisting of In and Ag, wherein A is an element selected from a group consisting of O, N, P, and F, wherein 0.3<x/y<3, (“The coating 116 may be provided in the form of pure metals and alloys, conducting oxides such as indium oxide or zinc oxide, or sulfides, etc.” Kozinsky [0022]. In this case, the use of indium oxide would meet all of the limitations regarding the compound in the second layer.)
Kozinsky and Woo are considered to be analogous for the reasons provided above, regarding claim 1. It would additionally have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the secondary battery of Woo, formed via a method meeting the limitations of claim 20, to substitute the aluminum oxide layer with the indium oxide layer taught by Kozinsky, in order to improve anode morphology (“Thus, by making the surface of the coating 116 very smooth, the anode morphology is improved thereby extending the cycle life and safety of the cell. The coating 116 may be provided in the form of pure metals and alloys,” [0022]). Essentially, the only modification needed would be to either substitute the aluminum oxide layer of Woo with the indium oxide layer of Kozinsky, or to modify the method of Kozinsky to deposit the indium oxide layer onto the lithium metal, rather than directly onto the current collector. Both modifications would be within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 6, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozinsky (US 20100285360 A1) in view of Woo (US 20190386315 A1) and further in view of Kim (US 20190198865 A1) .
Regarding claim 2, Woo and Kozinsky are silent on the following elements. More specifically, Woo teaches that the second layer can be anywhere between 10-100nm, which overlaps the claimed range and could make for a prima facie case of obviousness. However, Kim teaches an inorganic layer that overlaps even more so:
The negative electrode material according to claim 1, wherein the second layer has a thickness of 10 nm or less.
Kim teaches the following elements of claim 2 that are not found in Woo or Kozinsky
The negative electrode material according to claim 1, wherein the second layer has a thickness of 10 nm or less. (“The inorganic protection layer 12 may include a compound of a metal oxide, a metal nitride, a metal nitrate, a metal carbide, a lithiated compound thereof, or a combination thereof or a ceramic electrolyte. The inorganic protection layer 12 may include a metal oxide of alumina (Al2O3),” Kim [0066] and “For example, the thickness of the inorganic protection layer 12 may be in a range of about 1 nm to about 100 nm, about 1 nm to about 60 nm, about 5 nm to about 50 nm, about 5 nm to about 40 nm, about 5 nm to about 30 nm, about 5 nm to about 20 nm, or about 5 nm to about 10 nm.” Kim [0069])
The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 1-100nm for the thickness of the inorganic layer for an anode overlaps the claimed range of less than 10nm for the same parameter. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05.
Kim is considered to be analogous to Kozinsky because they are both related to anodes for lithium batteries containing an inorganic layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the indium oxide layer of Kozinsky to have the thickness of Kim in order to suppress the detachment of the inorganic layer to the first layer (“When the inorganic protection layer 12 has a thickness of about 100 nm or less, detachment between the inorganic protection layer 12 and the second anode layer 11b may be suppressed even after a long period of a charge/discharge process, and lifespan characteristics of a lithium battery including the anode 20 including the inorganic protection layer 12 may improve.” Kim [0069])
No further modification or motivation would be required to meet the limitations of claims 4 and 6.
Regarding claim 4, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 2, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 4:
The negative electrode material according to claim 2, wherein A is an element selected from a group consisting of O and N. (“The coating 116 may be provided in the form of pure metals and alloys, conducting oxides such as indium oxide or zinc oxide, or sulfides, etc.” Kozinsky [0022]. In this case, the use of indium oxide would meet all of the limitations regarding the compound in the second layer.)
Regarding claim 6, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 2, as shown above. Kozinsky teaches the additional elements of claim 6:
A negative electrode comprising: the negative electrode material according to claim 2; and a negative electrode current collector that holds the negative electrode material. (“The negative electrode 102 includes electrolyte 112 and a current collector 114. A coating 116 is provided on the current collector 114.” Kozinsky [0013])
Regarding claim 17, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 11, as shown above. Kozinsky and Woo are silent on the following elements of claim 17:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the negative electrode comprises an alloy of lithium, and an element represented by M contained in the second layer, after the lithium secondary battery is charged and discharged at least once.
However, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 17 that are not found in Kozinsky or Woo:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the negative electrode comprises an alloy of lithium, and an element represented by M contained in the second layer, after the lithium secondary battery is charged and discharged at least once. (“The other anode active material further included in the anode including lithium metal may be, for example, a metal alloyable with lithium.” Kim [0106] There is no evidence supporting that the lithium alloy would no longer be present after charging and discharging the secondary battery.)
Kim and Kozinsky are considered to be analogous for the reasons provided above, regarding claim 2. It would have additionally have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woo to include a lithium alloy in the anode active material layer as this is a known material in the art, and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.07). In this case, the addition of a lithium alloy with the taught density of Kim to the anode material can increase the lifespan characteristics of the battery (“When the lithium metal or the lithium alloy in the second anode layer 11b has a density within these ranges, lifespan characteristics of a lithium battery including the anode 20 including the second anode layer 11b may improve.” Kim [0061].)
No further modification or motivation would be needed to meet the limitations of claim 18.
Regarding claim 18, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 13, as shown above. Kozinsky and Woo are silent on the following elements of claim 18:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 13, wherein the negative electrode comprises an alloy of lithium, and an element represented by M contained in the second layer, after the lithium secondary battery is charged and discharged at least once.
However, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 18 that are not found in Kozinsky or Woo:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 13, wherein the negative electrode comprises an alloy of lithium, and an element represented by M contained in the second layer, after the lithium secondary battery is charged and discharged at least once. (“The other anode active material further included in the anode including lithium metal may be, for example, a metal alloyable with lithium.” Kim [0106] There is no evidence supporting that the lithium alloy would no longer be present after charging and discharging the secondary battery.)
Regarding claim 19, modified Kozinsky teaches all of the elements of claim 17, as shown above. Kozinsky and Woo are silent on the following elements of claim 19:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 17, wherein the second layer comprises nitrogen as an element represented by A, and the negative electrode contains lithium nitride, after the lithium secondary battery is charged and discharged at least once.
However, Kim teaches all of the elements of claim 19 that are not found in Kozinsky or Woo:
The lithium secondary battery according to claim 17, wherein the second layer comprises nitrogen as an element represented by A, and the negative electrode contains lithium nitride, after the lithium secondary battery is charged and discharged at least once. (“The inorganic protection layer 12 may include a compound of a metal oxide, a metal nitride, a metal nitrate, a metal carbide, a lithiated compound thereof, or a combination thereof” Kim [0066], “The inorganic protection layer 12 may include… a metal nitride of … AIN,” Kim [0066] and “The inorganic protection layer 12 may include… a lithium nitride” Kim [0066]. In this case, a combination of AlN and lithium nitride could be used together in the second layer, therefore meeting all of the limitations of claim 19. There is no evidence to suggest that the aluminum nitride of lithium nitride would no longer be present after charging and discharging of the battery.)
Kim and Kozinsky are considered to be analogous for the reasons provided above, regarding claim 2. It would have additionally have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Woo to include the aluminum nitride and lithium nitride of Kim in place of the aluminum oxide of Woo. This would be a simple substitution of one inorganic coating material for another known in the art, and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
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 BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET whose telephone number is (571)272-0156. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6pm except for the first Friday of bi-week.
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, NICHOLAS SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/BENJAMIN ELI KASS-MULLET/Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752