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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-2 has been amended. Claims 1-7 are pending. Claims 1-7 are rejected to.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 23, 2026 has been considered by the examiner.
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 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Pre-Grant Publication 2015/0086877, hereinafter Yamazaki, and further in view of U.S Pre-Grant Publication 2021/0336269, hereinafter Sugimoto.
Regarding claim 1, Yamazaki teaches a positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, comprising a positive electrode current collector, and a positive electrode mixture layer formed on a surface of the positive current collector ([0239] and [0275]). The positive electrode mixture layer contains a positive electrode active material containing a lithium transition metal composite oxide having a lithium phosphate ([0247]). The lithium transition metal composite oxide contains at least Ni and Al, and at least one of Ca or Sr (‘lithium-nickel composite oxide represented by formula (6) LiNi1-cM-2cO2 wherein 0≤c≤0.5’ and M2 is at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Fe, Co, Mn, Cu, Zn, Al, Sn, Cr, V, Ti, Mg, Ca, Sr, B, Ga, In, Si, and Ge’ [0243]). A content ratio of Ni in the lithium transition metal composite oxide is greater than or equal to 75 mol% with respect to the total amount of metal elements excluding Li (‘LiNi1-cM-2cO2 wherein 0≤c≤0.5’ [0243]. This demonstrates an overlap in ranges taught. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a Prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).). In the positive electrode mixture layer, a content of the lithium phosphate is greater than or equal to 0.1 parts by mass and less than or equal to 5 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of a content of the positive electrode active material (‘the lower limit of the amount of lithium phosphate to be used relative to the total amount of the positive electrode active material and lithium phosphate is most preferably 0.5% by mass or more, and the upper limit thereof is most preferably 5% by mass or less’ [0247]. This range falls within the claimed range and therefore anticipates.).
However, Yamazaki fails to teach the lithium transition metal composite oxide having a layered halite structure.
Sugimoto teaches an all-solid-state secondary battery that includes a cathode layer that
contains a cathode active material layer. The cathode active material layer is a lithium nickel aluminum oxide with a lithium phosphate. This cathode active material layer has a layered
halite structure ([0043]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have the lithium-nickel composite oxide of Yamazaki in the form of a layered halite structure because ‘when the cathode active material includes a layered halite structure, the energy density and thermal stability of the all-solid-state secondary battery 10 may be enhanced.’ (Sugimoto, [0043]).
Regarding claim 3, Yamazaki teaches the positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1 [0239], wherein the lithium transition metal composite oxide contains secondary particles formed by aggregation of primary particles (‘primary particles may aggregate and form secondary particles’ [0251]), and the at least one of Ca or Sr is present on a surface of the secondary particle of an interface at which the primary particles are in contact with each other (‘the positive electrode active material in which a material having different composition is attached to the surface thereof may be used. Examples of surface-attached materials include calcium oxide, calcium sulfate, or calcium carbonate’ [0248]).
Regarding claim 4, Yamazaki teaches the positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein a content ratio of Ca in the lithium transition metal composite oxide is less than or equal to 1.0 mol% with respect to the total amount of metal elements excluding Li (‘lithium-nickel composite oxide represented by formula (6) LiNi1-cM-2cO2 wherein 0≤c≤0.5’ and M2 is at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Fe, Co, Mn, Cu, Zn, Al, Sn, Cr, V, Ti, Mg, Ca, Sr, B, Ga, In, Si, and Ge’ [0243]. This demonstrates an overlap in ranges taught. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a Prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).).
Regarding claim 5, Yamazaki teaches the positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein a content ratio of Sr in the lithium transition metal composite oxide is less than or equal to 0.3 mol% with respect to the total amount of metal elements excluding Li (‘lithium-nickel composite oxide represented by formula (6) LiNi1-cM-2cO2 wherein 0≤c≤0.5’ and M2 is at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Fe, Co, Mn, Cu, Zn, Al, Sn, Cr, V, Ti, Mg, Ca, Sr, B, Ga, In, Si, and Ge’ [0243]. This demonstrates an overlap in ranges taught. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a Prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).).
Regarding claim 6, Yamazaki teaches the positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the lithium transition metal composite oxide is represented by a general formula LiaNixAlyCozM1wM2vO2-b where M1 is at least one or more elements selected from Mn, Zr W, Mo, Ti, and Nb, and M2 is at least one of Ca or Sr (‘lithium-nickel composite oxide represented by formula (6) LiNi1-cM-2cO2 wherein 0≤c≤0.5’ and M2 is at least one metal selected from the group consisting of Fe, Co, Mn, Cu, Zn, Al, Sn, Cr, V, Ti, Mg, Ca, Sr, B, Ga, In, Si, and Ge’ [0243]). Each variable is summarized in the table below:
Variable
Claim
Reference
a
0.8 ≤ a ≤ 1.2
a=1
x
0.75 ≤ x ≤ 0.95
0 ≤ x ≤ 0.5
y
0 < y ≤ 0.10
0 ≤ y ≤ 0.5
z
0 ≤ z ≤ 0.05
0 ≤ z ≤ 0.5
w
0 ≤ w ≤ 0.20
0 ≤ w ≤ 0.5
v
0 < v ≤ 0.013
0 ≤ v ≤ 0.5
b
0 ≤ b < 0.05
b=0
The claims also states that x + y + z + w = 1; because the amount of nickel is 1-c and the amount of each additional metal (other than lithium) is c, the sum of the metals excluding lithium will always be 1. From the above analysis it is clear the art teaches overlapping ranges and compositions. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a Prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 7, Yamazaki teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising the positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery according to claim 1, a negative electrode, and a non-aqueous electrolyte (‘the lithium-ion secondary battery of the present invention includes a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and the above-described electrolyte solution’ [0237] and ‘the electrolyte solution of the present invention is preferably a non-aqueous electrolyte solution’ [0043]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki and
Sugimoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication
2018/0102540, hereinafter Shindo.
Regarding claim 2, Yamazaki and Sugimoto teach a positive electrode for a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, comprising a positive electrode current collector, and a positive electrode mixture layer formed on a surface of the positive current collector ([0239] and [0275]). The positive electrode mixture layer contains a positive electrode active material containing a lithium transition metal composite oxide having a lithium phosphate ([0247]). The lithium transition metal composite oxide contains at least Ni and Al, and at least one of Ca or Sr ([0243]). A content ratio of Ni in the lithium transition metal composite oxide is greater than or equal to 75 mol% with respect to the total amount of metal elements excluding Li ([0243]). In the positive electrode mixture layer, a content of the lithium phosphate is greater than or equal to 0.1 parts by mass and less than or equal to 5 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of a content of the positive electrode active material ([0247]).
However, Yamazaki and Sugimoto fail to teach an average particle size of the lithium phosphate in the positive electrode mixture layer.
Shindo teaches a lithium ion secondary battery that comprises a cathode including a cathode active material layer comprising a cathode active material and Li3PO4, an anode including an anode active material layer comprising an anode active material, and an electrolyte layer being disposed between the cathode and the anode and comprising a liquid electrolyte (Abstract). When the lithium phosphate is in the form of particles, the average particle diameter of the lithium phosphate particles is not particularly limited. It may be 100nm or more and may be 20µm or less [0042] (range is the same as the claimed range and therefore anticipates).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the lithium phosphates with the particle size range of Shindo in the active material mixture of modified Yamazaki because ‘the desired liquid electrolyte decomposition inhibiting ability is easily obtained’ and ‘it is easy to obtain an ion conducting path between electrodes, making it easy to keep the desired battery performance’ [0042].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed May 13, 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1 and 3-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Yamazaki, Sugimoto, and Shindo.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mia K Holbrook whose telephone number is (571)272-9253. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571) 270-5256. 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.
/M.K.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights