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 .
Response to Arguments
The amendment filed June 29th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-3, 5-9, and 11 are pending in the application. Claims 4 and 10 have been cancelled. Claims 17-18 are new. Claims 1 and 5-9, and 11 have been amended. Applicant’s amendment of claim 1 has overcome the 35 USC § 112 rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed April 1st, 2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 20200251723), and further in view of Kimura et al. (US 8715857) and Huang et al. (US 20130295454 Al).
Claims 1, 5 and 9: Kimura ‘723 teaches a Si alloy for a negative electrode, wherein the Si alloy comprises a Si phase, a Si-Zr compound phase and a Sn-Cu compound phase [0010], wherein the active material comprising Si alloy powder has an average particle diameter within the range 1 µm to 10 µm [0027], and the proportion of the Si phase in an entire Si alloy is 10 mass% to 80 mass% [0015]. Kimura ‘723 does not identically teach the range 30 mass% to 95 mass%. However, overlapping ranges have been held to support a case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05.I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to have used a composition of the Si alloy comprising mass% of the Si phase in the range 30 mass% to 95 mass% with a reasonable expectation of success because they are within the range taught by Kimura ‘723. Kimura ‘723 further teaches the Si phase, the Si-Zr compound phase, and the Sn-Cu phase are separately present in a separate state (Fig. 1) and the average size of the Si phase is 435 nm (the average size calculated from Table 2 ). Kimura ‘723 teaches Si by itself has a high capacity and can absorb and release large amounts of lithium ions [0004]. However, its capacity retention is lowered by the high volume expansion that speeds up deterioration of the electrode’s integrity [0005]. Kimura’723 teaches the cycle characteristics and the capacity retention of the electrode can be improved by miniaturizing the Si phase (i.e., reducing the particle size of the Si phase) and by adding tin and silicon alloys or compounds capable of relieving the stress and improving ion conductivity of the electrode during Si volume expansion [0012-0013].
Kimura ‘723 does not teach the particle size diameters of the other phases. Kimura ‘857 does not explicitly teach the average particle size diameters of the different phases, however, Kimura ‘857 discloses the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image analysis results of a negative electrode active material (Col lines 5-6) which distinctly show the particles of the Si-Fe compound phase (Fig. 3A), the Sn-Cu compound phase (Figs. 3B), and the Si phase (Fig. 3D). Thus, the average particle diameter ratios can be calculated from estimated relative maximum average particle diameters for each phase in the images (see Fig. 1). In accordance with this calculation, the average particle diameter ratios, mdSi/mdSi-Fe and mdSi/mdSn-Cu, are 2.1 and 2.5, respectively. These ratios are within the range 0.1 to 5.0. The ratios can be used to estimate the actual average particle diameters of the Si-Fe phase and the Sn-Cu phase based on the average particle size of the Si phase that Kim ‘857 teaches (1.6 µm, calculated from Table 1). As such, the average particle diameters for the Si-Fe compound and the Sn-Cu compound phases are 0.8 µm and 0.6 µm, respectively. These average particle diameters are within the range 0.1 µm to 50 µm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to make Kimura ‘723’s Si alloy powder wherein the average particle diameters of the Si, Si-Zr and Sn-Cu, are 1.6 µm, 0.8 µm and 0.6 µm, respectively, because Kimura ‘857 teaches that such is a functional Si alloy powder for an anode electrode.
Kimura ‘723 does not teach Al compounds, or Sn compounds comprising other elements except for Cu. However, Huang teaches an electrode composition that includes a combination of finely ground silicon mixture, conductive carbon particles, a polymeric compound and a conductive buffering agent selected from a list of silicides, nitrides, oxides, carbides such as Si-Fe, Al2O3 and Al3C4 ( with preferred size of less than 50 microns) [abstract, 0034, 0038], wherein the function of the buffering agent is to inhibit the agglomeration of the fine silicon nanoparticles and increase the degree of amorphous nature of silicon particles [0037]. Huang teaches the nano particles have been used to address the problems of volume expansion of Si that cause cracking of the anode and curbs the life cycle and performance of the Si anode [0006-0007]. In addition to preserving the small grain size (i.e., less than 50 microns) of the silicon particles [0035], the buffering agent also improves conductivity of the electrode. The use of the buffering agent, therefore, helps to improve the lifecycle and capacity retention of the resulting electrode [0037].
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to modify Kimura ‘723’s anode active material Si alloy composition by including one of Huang’s Al compounds because Honda teaches that such compounds could help improve the capacity retention of the electrode.
FIG. 1 Relative average diameters of the Si, Si-Fe and Sn-Cu phases.
PNG
media_image1.png
859
993
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Kimura ‘723 teaches a Si alloy powder comprising a Si compound phase, Si-Zr [0010]. Kimura ‘723 does not teach Si compounds containing other metals. However, Kimura ‘857 teaches a Si alloy powder comprising a Si-Fe compound (Col 2 line 64). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to modify Kimura ‘723’s anode active material Si alloy composition by substituting the Si-Zr compound phase with Si-Fe compound because Kimura ‘857 teaches that such a mixture makes an operative anode electrode.
Claim 3: Kimura ‘723 teaches the negative electrode active material comprising the Si alloy powder has an average particle diameter within the range 1 µm to 10 µm [0027].
Claims 1-3, 6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 20200251723) , Kimura et al. (US 8715857), and further in view Shimamura (EP 0883199 A1).
Claims 1, 6 and11: Kimura ‘723 teaches a Si alloy for a negative electrode, wherein the Si alloy comprises a Si phase, a Si-Zr compound phase and a Sn-Cu compound phase [0010], wherein the active material comprising Si alloy powder has an average particle diameter within the range 1 µm to 10 µm [0027], and the proportion of the Si phase in an entire Si alloy is 10 mass% to 80 mass% [0015]. Kimura ‘723 does not identically teach the range 30 mass% to 95 mass%. However, overlapping ranges have been held to support a case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05.I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to have used a composition of the Si alloy comprising mass% of the Si phase in the range 30 mass% to 95 mass% with a reasonable expectation of success because they are within the range taught by Kimura ‘723. Kimura ‘723 further teaches the Si phase, the Si-Zr compound phase, and the Sn-Cu phase are separately present in a separate state (Fig. 1) and the average size of the Si phase is 435 nm (the average size calculated from Table 2 ). Kimura ‘723 teaches Si by itself has a high capacity and can absorb and release large amounts of lithium ions [0004]. However, its capacity retention is lowered by the high volume expansion that speeds up deterioration of the electrode’s integrity [0005]. Kimura’723 teaches the cycle characteristics and the capacity retention of the electrode can be improved by miniaturizing the Si phase (i.e., reducing the particle size of the Si phase) and by adding tin and silicon alloys or compounds capable of relieving the stress and improving ion conductivity of the electrode during Si volume expansion [0012-0013].
Kimura ‘723 does not teach the particle size diameters of the other phases. Kimura ‘857 does not explicitly teach the average particle size diameters of the different phases, however, Kimura ‘857 discloses the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image analysis results of a negative electrode active material (Col lines 5-6) which distinctly show the particles of the Si-Fe compound phase (Fig. 3A), the Sn-Cu compound phase (Figs. 3B), and the Si phase (Fig. 3D). Thus, the average particle diameter ratios can be calculated from estimated relative maximum average particle diameters for each phase in the images (see Fig. 1). In accordance with this calculation, the average particle diameter ratios, mdSi/mdSi-Fe and mdSi/mdSn-Cu, are 2.1 and 2.5, respectively. These ratios are within the range 0.1 to 5.0. The ratios can be used to estimate the actual average particle diameters of the Si-Fe phase and the Sn-Cu phase based on the average particle size of the Si phase that Kim ‘857 teaches (1.6 µm, calculated from Table 1). As such, the average particle diameters for the Si-Fe compound and the Sn-Cu compound phases are 0.8 µm and 0.6 µm, respectively. These average particle diameters are within the range 0.1 µm to 50 µm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to make Kimura ‘723’s Si alloy powder wherein the average particle diameters of the Si, Si-Zr and Sn-Cu, are 1.6 µm, 0.8 µm and 0.6 µm, respectively, because Kimura ‘857 teaches that such is a functional Si alloy powder for an anode electrode.
Kimura ‘723 does not teach Al compounds, or Sn compounds comprising other elements except for Cu. However, Shimamura teaches a material for a negative electrode for a secondary battery comprising a host material of lithium such as silicon solid phase that has high absorption capacity for lithium but exhibiting rapid decrease in discharge capacity with repeated cycles due to large volume expansion (Page 6, lines 16-22, Page 8, lines 11-22), wrapped inside a mixed conductor (solid phase B) metal compound capable of alloying with lithium and mitigating Si volume expansion, and exhibiting excellent high-rate charge and discharge characteristics and stable discharge capacity over repeating cycles (Page 3 lines 50-55, Page 6, lines 34-39, Page 8 lines 10-23). Shimamura teaches that it is essential that the solid phase B is a mixed conductor with electron conductivity and lithium ion conductivity (abstract). Shimamura specifically teaches CeAl2 and ThAl3 (see sample No. 19) that have discharge capacity sustainable rates and high efficiency of charge and discharge and (Table 2(B)) (Page 6 lines 54-58).
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to modify Kimura ‘723’s anode active material Si alloy composition by substituting the Sn-Cu compound phase with one of Shimamura’s Al compounds because Shimamura teaches that such compounds can improve the electrode’s capacity retention and cycle characteristics.
Claim 2: Kimura ‘723 teaches a Si alloy powder comprising a Si compound phase, Si-Zr [0010]. Kimura ‘723 does not teach Si compounds containing other metals. However, Kimura ‘857 teaches a Si alloy powder comprising a Si-Fe compound (Col 2 line 64). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to modify Kimura ‘723’s anode active material Si alloy composition by substituting the Si-Zr compound phase with Si-Fe compound because Kimura ‘857 teaches that such a mixture makes an operative anode electrode.
Claim 3: Kimura ‘723 teaches the negative electrode active material comprising the Si alloy powder has an average particle diameter within the range 1 µm to 10 µm [0027].
Claims1-3 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 20200251723), Kimura et al. (US 8715857), and further in view of Honda et al. (US 20090017380 A1).
Claims 1 and 7-8: Kimura ‘723 teaches a Si alloy for a negative electrode, wherein the Si alloy comprises a Si phase, a Si-Zr compound phase and a Sn-Cu compound phase [0010], wherein the active material comprising Si alloy powder has an average particle diameter within the range 1 µm to 10 µm [0027], and the proportion of the Si phase in an entire Si alloy is 10 mass% to 80 mass% [0015]. Kimura ‘723 does not identically teach the range 30 mass% to 95 mass%. However, overlapping ranges have been held to support a case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05.I). Therefore, it would have been obvious to have used a composition of the Si alloy comprising mass% of the Si phase in the range 30 mass% to 95 mass% with a reasonable expectation of success because they are within the range taught by Kimura ‘723. Kimura ‘723 further teaches the Si phase, the Si-Zr compound phase, and the Sn-Cu phase are separately present in a separate state (Fig. 1) and the average size of the Si phase is 435 nm (the average size calculated from Table 2 ). Kimura ‘723 teaches Si by itself has a high capacity and can absorb and release large amounts of lithium ions [0004]. However, its capacity retention is lowered by the high volume expansion that speeds up deterioration of the electrode’s integrity [0005]. Kimura’723 teaches the cycle characteristics and the capacity retention of the electrode can be improved by miniaturizing the Si phase (i.e., reducing the particle size of the Si phase) and by adding tin and silicon alloys or compounds capable of relieving the stress and improving ion conductivity of the electrode during Si volume expansion [0012-0013].
Kimura ‘723 does not teach the particle size diameters of the other phases. Kimura ‘857 does not explicitly teach the average particle size diameters of the different phases, however, Kimura ‘857 discloses the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image analysis results of a negative electrode active material (Col lines 5-6) which distinctly show the particles of the Si-Fe compound phase (Fig. 3A), the Sn-Cu compound phase (Figs. 3B), and the Si phase (Fig. 3D). Thus, the average particle diameter ratios can be calculated from estimated relative maximum average particle diameters for each phase in the images (see Fig. 1). In accordance with this calculation, the average particle diameter ratios, mdSi/mdSi-Fe and mdSi/mdSn-Cu, are 2.1 and 2.5, respectively. These ratios are within the range 0.1 to 5.0. The ratios can be used to estimate the actual average particle diameters of the Si-Fe phase and the Sn-Cu phase based on the average particle size of the Si phase that Kim ‘857 teaches (1.6 µm, calculated from Table 1). As such, the average particle diameters for the Si-Fe compound and the Sn-Cu compound phases are 0.8 µm and 0.6 µm, respectively. These average particle diameters are within the range 0.1 µm to 50 µm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to make Kimura ‘723’s Si alloy powder wherein the average particle diameters of the Si, Si-Zr and Sn-Cu, are 1.6 µm, 0.8 µm and 0.6 µm, respectively, because Kimura ‘857 teaches that such is a functional Si alloy powder for an anode electrode.
Kimura ‘723 does not teach Al compounds, or Sn compounds comprising other elements except for Cu. However, Honda teaches a negative electrode active material layer comprising one selected from the group consisting of silicon, silicon alloys, tin alloys, compounds containing tin and oxygen, compounds containing tin and nitrogen, and compounds containing tin and fluorine [0011, 0041]. Using such a metallic element as a negative electrode active material may achieve a larger negative electrode capacity than using carbon materials such as graphite, which are typical conventional negative electrode active materials [0002].
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to modify Kimura ‘723’s anode active material Si alloy composition by substituting the Sn-Cu compound phase with one of Honda’s Sn compounds because Honda teaches that such is an operative anode electrode with a potential of achieving a large negative electrode capacity.
Claim 2: Kimura ‘723 teaches a Si alloy powder comprising a Si compound phase, Si-Zr [0010]. Kimura ‘723 does not teach Si compounds containing other metals. However, Kimura ‘857 teaches a Si alloy powder comprising a Si-Fe compound (Col 2 line 64). Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to modify Kimura ‘723’s anode active material Si alloy composition by substituting the Si-Zr compound phase with Si-Fe compound because Kimura ‘857 teaches that such a mixture makes an operative anode electrode.
Claim 3: Kimura ‘723 teaches the negative electrode active material comprising the Si alloy powder has an average particle diameter within the range 1 µm to 10 µm [0027].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Arguments/remarks (Page 5-6), filed 6/26/2026 , with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 112 has been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding amendment (iii), see Applicant’s Arguments/remarks (Page 8), filed 6/26/2026 , with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendments. Applicant argues the Y element are not disclosed or suggested in the Park. This amendment overcomes the prior rejection. However, the amendment does not overcome the new grounds of rejection in view of Huang, Shimamura and Honda. Huang teaches a silicon anode active material mixture comprising metal compounds including Al2O3 and Al3C4. Shimamura teaches compounds CeAl2 and ThAl3 that can be used with in silicon anode active material. Honda teaches negative electrode active material comprising a mixture of alloys and compounds including silicon, silicon alloys, tin alloys, tin compounds containing oxygen, nitrogen, and fluorine.
Applicant’s arguments (i) and (ii), see Applicant’s Arguments/remarks (Page 8), filed 6/26/2026 , with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive in view of the amendments. Applicant argues that none of the cited references discloses or suggests either the SiX compound particles or SnY(AlY) compound particles, let alone their average particle diameters. Amending the term phase to particles does not exclude Si entities described as distinct phases. Kimura ‘857 discloses the diameter of the phases as described above. The specification defines “particle diameter” as “the diameter of a circle having the same area, i.e., diameter of equivalent circle, obtained by measuring the area of each phase constituting the present Si alloy powder for a negative electrode under electron microscope observation” [0031]. Thus, the diameter of the Si phases as described by Kimura ‘857 corresponds to the diameter of the particle. Therefore, the ground(s) of rejection(s) in the prior rejection pertaining to these claim limitations are maintained.
Applicant argues that Kimura '723 does not disclose or suggest SiX compound particles or SnY compound particles as separately present, discrete particulate phases with individually defined particle diameters. Kimura '723 does not disclose this limitation. However, Kimura ‘857 discloses discrete particulate phases as described above. Kimura ‘857 discloses SEM images of the particulate phases were used to determine the diameters of the phases. Therefore, the grounds of rejection in the prior rejection pertaining to this claim limitation are maintained.
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 LINAH RUSERE whose telephone number is (571)272-9954. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Michael Cleveland can be reached at 571-272-1418. 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.
/L.N.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1712
/MICHAEL B CLEVELAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights