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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (CN Publication 111653842) in view of Wang (CN Publication 112366348).
Regarding claims 1-6, Cheng discloses a lithium ion battery formation method comprising: charging the cell to 50% SOC (primary charging), performing first degassing by rolling the main body of the cell to discharge the internal gas into a gas bag followed by evacuating the vacuum, charging the cell to 100% SOC (secondary charging), aging the cell, and performing second degassing by rolling the main body of the cell to discharge the internal gas into the gas bag followed by evacuating the vacuum (Paragraphs 0083-0087). As to claim 10, Cheng teaches that the positive electrode active material in the battery can be LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 (Paragraph 0077).
Cheng fails to specifically state that the degassing discharges the internal gas to the outside of the battery.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a method of forming a lithium battery comprising: a first degassing step, a pre-charge step, a secondary degassing step, a secondary pre-charge step, an immersion step, a third degassing step and a charging step, wherein the degassing steps consist of rolling the battery cell to discharge the gas into a gas bag, forming an exhaust port in the gas bag, vacuuming out the gas, and sealing the exhaust port (Paragraphs 0039-0046).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the evacuating the vacuuming step of Cheng could include opening a port in the gas bag, vacuuming out the gas, and sealing the port because Wang teaches that these are common steps in the degassing of a battery cell so that the gas is removed to the outside of the battery.
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (CN Publication 111653842) in view of Wang (CN Publication 112366348) as applied to claims 1-6 and 10 above, and further in view of Kawamura (U.S. Patent Publication 2016/0351905).
The teachings of Cheng and Wang have been discussed in paragraph 3 above.
Cheng and Wang fail to disclose that the positive electrode has an additive having the formula of claims 7 and 8 of the present invention, and that the additive is included in an amount of 0.1 to 5 wt% of the total weight of the positive electrode mixture.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Kawamura discloses a secondary battery having a LiNiCoMnO2 as a cathode active material, wherein the cathode also includes an additive, such as Li6Co0.7Zn0.3O4 (Paragraphs 0019, 0048). As to claim 9, Kawamura teaches that the additive can be added in an amount of 4 wt% of the total electrode material (Paragraph 0036).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the cathode of Cheng could include the additive suggested in Kawamura because Kawamura teaches that the additive improves initial charge capacity and prevents decomposition of the electrolyte and generation of gas. It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the additive could be added in an amount of 0.1 to 5 wt% because Kawamura teaches that this range allows for the improvements described above without affecting other properties.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (CN Publication 111653842) in view of Wang (CN Publication 112366348) as applied to claims 1-6 and 10 above, and further in view of Shao (CN Publication 111769332).
The teachings of Cheng and Wang have been discussed in paragraph 3 above.
Cheng and Wang fail to disclose that during the initial charge, the battery is pressurized.
Shao discloses a process of forming a pre-lithium battery comprising: charging, aging, degassing, resealing and charging the battery, wherein the initial charging can be performed while applying pressure (Paragraph 0012-0020).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present invention that the battery of Cheng could be pressurized during initial charging because Shao teaches that this helps to control the gas production during formation of the battery.
Response to Arguments
The amendments made to the claims, filed on 5/7/2026, have overcome the 35 USC 112 rejection that was presented in the last Office Action. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 5/7/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, due to the amendments made to the claims, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of previously cited prior art references.
Applicants argue that Cheng fails to disclose discharging the internal gas containing oxygen to the outside of the battery. Cheng teaches that after rolling the main body of the cell to discharge the internal gas into a gas bag, the vacuum is evacuated. Wang is combined to teach that evacuating the vacuum commonly means that the bag is opened and the gas is vacuumed out to the outside of the battery. Thus, Cheng and Wang teach the limitations of claim 1 of the present invention.
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 BRITTANY L RAYMOND whose telephone number is (571)272-6545. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-6 pm.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
BRITTANY L. RAYMOND
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1722
/BRITTANY L RAYMOND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights