DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgement has been made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 USC 119 (a-d). The certified copy has been filed on 01/08/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed 06/26/2023, 03/20/2024, 08/15/2025 have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings received 05/18/2023 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 114122385 (published on 03/01/2022 and provided in IDS) to CaO (Cao, US 2023/0234858 is used as English language equivalent).
Regarding claim 1, Cao discloses a ternary positive electrode material for a lithium ion battery (Title), wherein the ternary positive electrode material has a chemical composition Lia(NixCoyM1-x-y )1-bM’bO2-cAc wherein M is at least one selected from the group consisting of Mn and Al, M’ includes Al and optionally one or more selected from the group consisting of Zr, Ti, Y, Sr, W and Mg; and A is one or more selected from the group consisting of S, F and N and 0.75≤ a ≤ 1.2, 0.5≤ x < 1.0, 0 <y ≤ 0.1, 0 <b ≤ 0.01 and 0≤ c ≤ 0.2 (reads on claimed composition when M=Mn, Abstract, claim 1) having single crystal morphology (para 52). CaO does not expressly disclose wherein 0.75≤ x < 1.0, However, in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties. MPEP 2144.05. In addition, Cao discloses the ternary positive electrode material of following composition Li0.99(Ni0.65Co0.05 Mn0.27) 0.998 Zr0.001Al0.001O2 (Exemp.1, para 57, 58) which contains Al: 20.2%, Co: 14.1 %, Mn: 29.1 %, Ni: 33.7%, and Zr: 2.9% based on XPS analysis (para 57). Cao also discloses that based on sum of Ni, Co and Mn elements CMn=29.1/(14.1 +29.1+33.7)=0.38, and CMn-(l-x-y)=0.38-0.27=0.11 i.e. >0.07; CCo =14.1/(14.1+29.1+33.7)=0.18, and CCo -y=0.18-0.08=0.11, i.e >0.05 and CMn-(l-x-y)/ CCo -y=0.18-0.08=0.11 = 1.63 i.e. i.e. within claimed range from 0 to 2.0. Also, Cao discloses that the capacity retention for said material is 96.2%. In other word, Cao discloses the cathode active material wherein range for parameter” b” is close enough to claimed and within the range disclosed by Cao, provides CMn-(l-x-y) >0.07, CCo -y >0.05, CMn-(l-x-y)/ CCo -y= within the range from 0 to 2.0. As such, It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the content of elements in the composition of Cao of in order to provide cathode active material with high retention capacity improves cyclic ability and kinetic performance (para 19).
Alternatively, Cao discloses a ternary positive electrode material for a lithium ion battery (Title), wherein the ternary positive electrode material has a chemical composition Lia(NixCoyM1-x-y )1-bM’bO2-cAc wherein M is at least one selected from the group consisting of Mn and Al, M’ includes Al and optionally one or more selected from the group consisting of Zr, Ti, Y, Sr, W and Mg; and A is one or more selected from the group consisting of S, F and N and 0.75≤ a ≤ 1.2, 0.5≤ x < 1.0, 0 <y ≤ 0.1, 0 <b ≤ 0.01 and 0≤ c ≤ 0.2 (reads on claimed composition when M=Mn, Abstract, claim 1) having single crystal morphology (para 52). Since claimed parameters “a”, “x”, “y”, ”b” and “c” encompassed by parameters “a”, “x”, “y”, ”b” and “c” of Cao, the positive electrode material of Cao is substantially similar chemical composition to that as claimed. Products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties, and thus, the claimed property (i.e. the specific output energy density), is necessarily present in the prior art material. The courts have held that “[p]roducts of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2112. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the content of elements in the composition of Cao in order to provide cathode active material with high retention capacity improves cyclic ability and kinetic performance (para 19).
Alternatively, Cao discloses a ternary positive electrode material for a lithium ion battery (Title), wherein the ternary positive electrode material has a chemical composition Lia(NixCoyM1-x-y )1-bM’bO2-cAc wherein M is at least one selected from the group consisting of Mn and Al, M’ includes Al and optionally one or more selected from the group consisting of Zr, Ti, Y, Sr, W and Mg; and A is one or more selected from the group consisting of S, F and N and 0.75≤ a ≤ 1.2, 0.5≤ x < 1.0, 0 <y ≤ 0.1, 0 <b ≤ 0.01 and 0≤ c ≤ 0.2 (reads on claimed composition when M=Mn, Abstract, claim 1) having single crystal morphology (para 52). In addition, Cao discloses that content of elements in the said positive electrode material affects a capacity retention (Table 1) and as such result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of art at the time the invention was filed to optimize a content of metals in the cathode active material within parameters “a”, “x”, “y”, ”b” and “c” of Cao in order to provide cathode active material with high retention capacity improves cyclic ability and kinetic performance (para 19).
Regarding claim 2, Cao discloses CMn-(l-x-y)=0.11. Cao does not expressly disclose wherein CMn-(l-x-y) ≥ 0.15. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of art at the time the invention was filed to optimize a content of metals in the cathode active material within parameters “a”, “x”, “y”, ”b” and “c” of Cao in order to provide cathode active material with high retention capacity improves cyclic ability and kinetic performance (para 19).
Regarding claim 3, Cao discloses CCo -y=0.11.
Regarding claim 4, CaO discloses Dv50=2.6 µm. It is noted that a specific example in the prior art which is within a claimed range anticipates the range. See MPEP 2131.03.
Regarding claims 5 and 8, CaO discloses a method for preparing the ternary positive electrode material for a lithium, wherein the method comprises the following steps: step S1: selecting a ternary positive electrode precursor containing Ni, Co, and Mn and mixing it with lithium hydroxide (para 38, claim 17) to form a mixture A (para 26), step S2: heating the mixture A in an air or oxygen atmosphere, wherein the mixture A is held at 700~1,100°C for 4~15 hours, followed by rolling and pulverization to obtain an intermediate product II (para 27, reads on claimed product B); step S3: mixing the intermediate product II (product B), a Co- containing solid powder to form a mixture III (mixture C),; (para 28) ;step S4: heating the mixture C in an air or oxygen atmosphere, wherein the mixture C is held at 700~1,100°C for 4~15 hours, followed by rolling and pulverization to obtain the ternary positive electrode material for a lithium ion battery (para 29).
Cao does not expressly disclose addition of Mn-containing powder and a molar ratio for of Mn element in the Mn- containing solid powder to the intermediate product B is 0.5~4%, and a molar ratio of Co element in the Co-containing solid powder to the intermediate product B is 2~4% and wherein a molar ratio of Mn element to Co element in the Mn- containing solid powder and the Co-containing solid powder is 1:4~1:1 in step S3 (re claim 8) However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of art at the time the invention was filed to optimize a content of Mn and Co in the cathode active material within parameters “a”, “x”, “y”, ”b” and “c” of Cao by addition of additional amount of solid powder containing Mn and Co as an obvious design choice in order to provide cathode active material with high retention capacity improves cyclic ability and kinetic performance (para 19).
Regarding claim 6, CaO discloses oxide of element M is added as a dopant in step S1 (par 32).
Regarding claim 7, CaO discloses CoO (Claim 16). Cao does not expressly disclose Mn-containing powder wherein the Mn-containing solid powder is one or more of MnO2,Mn2O3, MnO(OH), and MnO, however it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to choose Mn-containing powder from MnO2,Mn2O3, MnO(OH), and MnO, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, CaO discloses a positive electrode sheet and a lithium ion battery (Abstract).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, CaO discloses a positive electrode sheet and a lithium ion battery (para 46).
Regarding claims 11 and 12 (alternatively), Cao discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1, from, which claim 5 depends. Regarding the limitations: a positive electrode sheet and a lithium ion battery comprising the ternary positive electrode material prepared by the method of claim 5: In accordance to MPEP 2113, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight. Please note that even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product, i.e. a positive electrode sheet and a lithium ion battery, does not depend on its method of production, i.e. method of claim 5. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Federal Circuit 1985).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER USYATINSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7703. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/Alexander Usyatinsky/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751