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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 06/30/2023, 09/13/2024 and 10/16/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being 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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2021/0184204 to Oh.
With respect to claim 1, Oh teaches a negative electrode active material comprising: silicon-containing composite particles comprising (a) SiOx, wherein 0<x<2, (b) pores, and (c) a Mg compound; an outer carbon layer present on a surface of the silicon-containing composite particles, wherein a BET specific surface area of the negative electrode active material is 5.5 m2/g (3 m2/g to 15 m2/g) (Oh: Sections [0011], [0081] and [0083]-[0084]).
Oh does not specifically teach an inner carbon layer present inside the pores, however, a CVD treatment is performed with a gas mixture of argon and methane under a gas mixture of argon and methane to form a carbon coating layer. It is recognized that the sample 1-8 obtained by the processing is one that forms an external carbon layer provided on the surface of the silicon-based composite particles of the present application. Furthermore, as described above, since Oh describes that the pores of the silicon oxide complex may contain open pores, a part of the carbon penetrates into the open pores, that is, it is understood that the examples 1-7 are also formed with the "inner carbon layer" as the present application.
With respect to claim 2, Oh teaches the negative electrode active material, wherein a Mg element is present in an amount of 9 wt% (0.1 wt % to 10 wt %) based on a total 100 wt % of the silicon-containing composite particles (Oh: Sections [0083]-[0084]).
With respect to claim 3, instant claim is proviso upon limitation, a Li element is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 10 wt % based on a total 100 wt % of the silicon-containing composite particles, not required by the claim 1; therefore, the limitation of instant claims do not come into force.
With respect to claim 4, Oh teaches the negative electrode active material, wherein a total wt % of the outer carbon layer and the inner carbon layer is 5 wt % based on a total 100 wt % of the negative electrode active material (Oh: Sections [0083]-[0084]).
With respect to claim 5, Oh teaches the claimed invention except for the outer carbon layer is present in an amount of 1 wt % to 10 wt % based on a total 100 wt % of the negative electrode active material. However, the amount of outer carbon layer is present is a result effective variable. It would have been obvious as of the effective filing dated of the claimed invention to have the outer carbon layer is present in an amount of 1 wt % to 10 wt % based on a total 100 wt % of the negative electrode active material, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It has been held that discovering that general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller,105 USPQ 233. Generally, differences in ranges will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such ranges is critical. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969).
With respect to claim 6, Oh teaches the claimed invention except for the inner carbon layer is present in an amount of 4 wt % to 35 wt % based on a total 100 wt % of the negative electrode active material. However, the amount of outer carbon layer is present is a result effective variable. It would have been obvious as of the effective filing dated of the claimed invention to have the inner carbon layer is present in an amount of 4 wt % to 35 wt % based on a total 100 wt % of the negative electrode active material, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It has been held that discovering that general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller,105 USPQ 233. Generally, differences in ranges will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such ranges is critical. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). In re Hoeschele, 406 F.2d 1403, 160 USPQ 809 (CCPA 1969).
With respect to claim 7, Oh teaches the negative electrode active material, wherein a pore size of the pores is 50 nm or less (Oh: Sections [0011], [0081] and [0083]-[0084]).
With respect to claim 8, Oh teaches the negative electrode active material, wherein the negative electrode active material has an average particle diameter (D.sub.50) of 6.5 μm (2 μm to 15 μm) (Oh: Sections [0011], [0081] and [0083]-[0084]).
With respect to claims 9-12, the limitations, “the method comprising: forming silicon-containing composite particles comprising pores from preliminary silicon-containing composite particles comprising SiOx, where 0<x<2, and a Mg compound; forming a preliminary negative electrode active material comprising an outer carbon layer by disposing a carbonaceous precursor on the silicon-containing composite particles, and then subjecting the carbonaceous precursor to a first heat treatment; and subjecting the preliminary negative electrode active material to a second heat treatment; wherein the forming of the silicon-containing composite particles comprising pores from preliminary silicon-containing composite particles comprising SiOx, where 0<x<2, and a Mg compound comprises etching the preliminary silicon-containing particles using an acid or a base; wherein the first heat treatment is performed at a temperature of 600° C. to 1100° C, and wherein the second heat treatment is performed at a temperature of 600° C. to 1100° C,” are product-by-process limitations. It would have the same functionality or purpose as the claimed limitation. Accordingly, in a product-by-process claim, the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. In re Thorpe 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964,966 (Fed Cir. 1985) and MPEP 2113.
With respect to claim 13, Oh teaches a negative electrode comprising the negative electrode active material (Oh: Sections [0011], [0081] and [0083]-[0084]).
With respect to claim 14, Oh teaches a secondary battery comprising the negative electrode (Oh: Sections [0011], [0081] and [0083]-[0084]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINGWEN R ZENG whose telephone number is (571)272-6649. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm.
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, Milton I Cano and Tiffany Legette can be reached on (313) 446-4937 and (571) 270-7078, respectively. 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.
/LINGWEN R ZENG/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 2/15/2026