DETAILED ACTION
Application 18/275,751, “PRECURSOR FOR POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL AND METHOD OF PREPARING THE SAME”, was filed with the USPTO on 8/3/2023 and has a foreign priority document of KR10-2021-0021657 filed on 2/18/2021.
This office action is in response to communication filed on 8/3/2023.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 4/14/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 11-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/14/2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18/275,751, filed on 8/3/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 8/3/2023, 8/23/2024 and 8/5/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because “grow the precursor seed” should read “grow the precursor seeds”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 11-13 are objected to because each of them does not have the correct status identified. To overcome the objection, Examiner suggests that claims 11-13 should be indicated as withdrawn. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a positive electrode active material” three times. It is not clear if the second and the third “a positive electrode active material” refers to the same positive electrode active material as the first one. For examination purposes the second and third aforementioned recitation has been interpreted as “the positive electrode active material”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a transition metal aqueous solution” two times. It is not clear if the second “a transition metal aqueous solution” refers to the same transition metal aqueous solution as the first one. For examination purposes the second aforementioned recitation has been interpreted as “the transition metal aqueous solution”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an ammonium cationic complexing agent” two times. It is not clear if the second “an ammonium cationic complexing agent” refers to the same ammonium cationic complexing agent as the first one. For examination purposes the second aforementioned recitation has been interpreted as “the ammonium cationic complexing agent”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a basic compound” two times. It is not clear if the second “a basic compound” refers to the same basic compound as the first one. For examination purposes the second aforementioned recitation has been interpreted as “the basic compound”.
Claims 2-10 are rejected as they depend from, and therefore incorporate the claimed subject matter from claims rejected under this statute.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of copending Application No. 18/276,366 (hereinafter 366’) in view of Park (KR-20150059820-A, provided on IDS filed 8/3/2023, citations see machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, 366’ teaches a method of preparing a precursor for a positive electrode active material, the method comprising:
forming precursor seeds for a positive electrode active material by a co-precipitation reaction while supplying a transition metal aqueous solution, an ammonium cationic complexing agent, and a basic compound to a reaction solution; and
growing precursor particles for a positive electrode active material from the precursor seeds by a co-precipitation reaction while supplying a transition metal aqueous solution, an ammonium cationic complexing agent, and a basic compound to the reaction solution containing the precursor seeds (see claim 1 of 366’).
366’ does not teach wherein the co-precipitation reaction to grow the precursor particles proceeds while continuously increasing feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent.
Park teaches wherein the co-precipitation reaction (a coprecipitation method, [015]) to grow the precursor particles (particle size grows with time, see Fig. 1) proceeds while continuously (see Fig. 1) increasing feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal solution, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1) and the ammonium cationic complexing agent (NH4OH, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
734
996
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the feed rates for the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor particles as taught by 366’ to be continuously increasing taught by Park because such control of a supply rate of a metal salt leads to an increase in particle size during a coprecipitation reaction, thereby improving battery characteristics (see Park [020]).
Regarding claim 2, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein the feed rates for the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor particles are continuously increased (see rejection of claim 1 above) until the feed rates for the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor particles are 2 times to 10 times feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor seeds (see claim 2 of 366’).
Regarding claim 3, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein the feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor particles are continuously increased (see rejection of claim 1 above) until the feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor particles are 2 times to 5 times (“3 times to 5 times greater”, see claim 3 of 366’) feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution and the ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor seeds (see claim 3 of 366’).
Regarding claim 4, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein, to grow the precursor particles (to grow the precursor particles, see claim 4 of 366’), a feed rate increase rate (interpreted as: how much the final feed rate at the end of the step increases compared to the initial feed rate at the beginning of the step; note: claim 4 of 366’ has the initial feed rate at the beginning of the particles growing step is equal to the feed rate at the end of precursor seeds forming step) of the transition metal aqueous solution and a feed rate increase rate of the ammonium cationic complexing agent are equal (see claim 4 of 366’; note: when the ratio of the feed rate of the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles compared to the rate to grow the seeds is equal to the ratio of the feed rate of ammonium cationic complexing agent to grow the precursor particles compared to the rate to grow the seeds, the feed rate increase rate are equal.).
Regarding claim 5, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein the co-precipitation reaction to grow the precursor seed is performed for 1 hour to 8 hours (see claim 5 of 366’).
Regarding claim 6, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein the transition metal aqueous solution comprises nickel, cobalt, and manganese elements, and comprises nickel among total transition metal elements in an amount of 30 mol % or more (see claim 6 of 366’).
Regarding claim 7, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein the transition metal aqueous solution comprises the nickel among the total transition metal elements in an amount of 70 mol % or more (80 mol % or more, see claim 7 of 366’).
Regarding claim 8, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein, to grow the precursor seed (in the seed forming step, see claim 8 of 366’), the basic compound is added in an amount such that a pH of the reaction solution is maintained at 11.0 to 12.5 (see claim 8 of 366’).
Regarding claim 9, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein, to grow the precursor particles, the basic compound is added in an amount such that a pH of the reaction solution is maintained at 10.5 to 11.7 (pH 10.5 to 12.0, see claim 9 of 366’).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the range of pH 10.5 to 12.0 taught by 366’ to be 10.5 to 11.7 because pH 10.5 to 12.0 appears substantially close/identical to pH 10.5 to 11.7. Furthermore, it’s been held that in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
Regarding claim 10, 366’ in view of Park teaches wherein a temperature of the reaction solution is in a range of 40° C. to 65° C. to grow the precursor seeds and to grow the precursor particles (see claim 10 of 366’).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al. (US 20190393502 A1, provided on IDS filed 8/3/2023) in view of Park (KR-20150059820-A, provided on IDS filed 8/3/2023, citations see machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Yun et al. teaches a method of preparing a precursor for a positive electrode active material (Preparation Example 2: Preparation of Nickel-Based Active Material Precursor (7:1.5:1.5), see [0102]), the method comprising:
forming precursor seeds (first act, [0103]-[0104]; note: first act is to form a precursor seed, see [0047]) for a positive electrode active material (nickel-based active material precursor (Ni0.7Co0.15Mn0.15(OH)2), see [0106]) by a co-precipitation reaction (co-precipitation, [0099]; note: example 2 (Ni0.7Co0.15Mn0.15(OH)2) was also synthesized through co-precipitation) while supplying a transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, see [0104]; nickel (II) sulfate hexahydrate (NiSO4.6H2O), cobalt (II) sulfate heptahydrate (COSO4.7H2O), and manganese (II) sulfate monohydrate (MnSO4.H2O) in a molar ratio of 7:1.5:1.5, see [0103]), an ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, [0104]), and a basic compound (NaOH, [0104]) to a reaction solution (reaction mixture, [0104]); and
growing precursor particles (second act and third act, [0104]-[0106]; note: second act and third act are to grow the precursor from the precursor seed formed in first act, see [0047]) for a positive electrode active material (nickel-based active material precursor (Ni0.7Co0.15Mn0.15(OH)2), [0106]) from the precursor seeds (after 6 hours of the first act reaction, [0105]) by a co-precipitation reaction (co-precipitation, [0099]) while supplying a transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, [0105]-[0106]), an ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, [0105]-[0106]), and a basic compound (NaOH, [0106]) to the reaction solution containing the precursor seeds (reaction mixture after the first act reaction, [0104]),
wherein the co-precipitation reaction to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, [0104]-[0106]) proceeds while increasing feed rates (feed rate of metal-containing materials increases from 6.50 L/hr (second act) to 8.50 L/hr (third act); feed rate of ammonia water increases from 0.77 L/hr (second act) to 1.15 L/hr (third act); see [0104]-[0106]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, [0104]-[0106]) and the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, [0104]-[0106]).
Yun et al. does not teach continuously increasing the feed rates.
Park teaches wherein the co-precipitation reaction (a coprecipitation method, [015]) to grow the precursor particles (particle size grows with time, see Fig. 1) proceeds while continuously (see Fig. 1) increasing feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal solution, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1) and the ammonium cationic complexing agent (NH4OH, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the increasing feed rates for adding the metal-containing raw materials during the second and third act; and the increasing feed rates for adding the ammonia water during the second and third act as taught by Yun et al. to be continuously increasing as taught by Park because such control of a supply rate of a metal salt leads to an increase in particle size during a co-precipitation reaction, thereby improving battery characteristics (see Park [020]).
Regarding claim 2, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the feed rates (feed rate, see Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) for the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are continuously increased (see rejection of claim 1 above) until the feed rates (1.15 L/hr for the third act, see Yun et al. [0106]) for the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are 2 times to 10 times (2.2 times, see 1.15/0.53 = 2.2) feed rates (0.53 L/hr for the first act, see Yun et al. [0104]) of the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, [0104]) to grow the precursor seeds (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, [0103]-[0104]).
Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the feed rates (feed rate, see Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) for the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are continuously increased (see rejection of claim 1 above) until the feed rates (8.50 L/hr for the third act, see Yun et al. [0105]) for the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) is 1.7 (8.50 / 5.0) times feed rates (5.0 L/hr for the first act, see Yun et al. [0103]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, see Yun et al. [0104]) to grow the precursor seeds (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, Yun et al. [0103]-[0104]).
Yun et al. in view of Park does not teach wherein the feed rates for the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles are continuously increased until the feed rates for the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles are 2 times to 10 times feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor seeds.
Yun et al. in general (see [0050] and [0051]), teaches wherein the feed rates (The growth rate of the precursor particles in the third act, see [0051]) for the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw material, see [0050] and [0051]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, see [0050] and [0051]) are increased until the feed rates (The growth rate of the precursor particles in the third act, see [0051]) for the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw material, see [0050] and [0051]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, see [0050] and [0051]) are 2 times to 10 times (2.4 times to 5 times; note: rate in second act is 1.2 to 2.5 times of that in first act, rate in third act is 2 times or more than (take 2 times for mapping) that in second act, see [0050] and [0051]) feed rates (the feed rate of the metal-containing raw material in the first act, see [0050]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw material, see [0050] and [0051]) to grow the precursor seeds (first act, see [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to change the 8.50 L/hr feed rate of the metal-contain raw material for the third act taught by Yun et al. in view of Park to be between 12.0 and 25.0 L/hr (2.4 to 5 times of the 5.0 L/hr feed rate for the first act taught by Yun et al. in view of Park), which is 2.4 times to 5 times of the feed rate in the first act as taught by Yun et al. to have reaction conditions changed and adjusted to further grow the precursor seed formed by the first act. (see Yun et al. [0050]). Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 3, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the feed rates (feed rate, see Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) of the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are continuously increased (see rejection of claim 1 above) until the feed rates (1.15 L/hr for the third act, see Yun et al. [0106]) of the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are 2 times to 5 times (2.2 times, see 1.15/0.53 = 2.2) feed rates (0.53 L/hr for the first act, see Yun et al. [0104]) of the ammonium cationic complexing agent (ammonia water, [0104]) to grow the precursor seeds (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, [0103]-[0104]).
Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the feed rates (feed rate, see Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, Yun et al. [0105]-[0106]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are continuously increased (see rejection of claim 1 above) until the feed rates (8.50 L/hr for the third act, see Yun et al. [0105]) of the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) are 1.7 times (8.50 / 5.0) feed rates (5.0 L/hr for the first act, see Yun et al. [0103]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw materials, see Yun et al. [0104]) to grow the precursor seeds (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, Yun et al. [0103]-[0104]).
Yun et al. in view of Park does not teach wherein the feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles are continuously increased until the feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor particles are 2 times to 5 times feed rates of the transition metal aqueous solution to grow the precursor seeds.
Yun et al. in general (see [0050] and [0051]), teaches wherein the feed rates (The growth rate of the precursor particles in the third act, see [0051]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw material, see [0050] and [0051]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, see [0050] and [0051]) are increased until the feed rates (The growth rate of the precursor particles in the third act, see [0051]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw material, see [0050] and [0051]) to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, see [0050] and [0051]) are 2 times to 10 times (2.4 times to 5 times; note: rate in second act is 1.2 to 2.5 times of that in first act, rate in third act is 2 times or more than (take 2 times for mapping) that in second act, see [0050] and [0051]) feed rates (the feed rate of the metal-containing raw material in the first act, see [0050]) of the transition metal aqueous solution (metal-containing raw material, see [0050] and [0051]) to grow the precursor seeds (first act, see [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to change the 8.50 L/hr feed rate of the metal-contain raw material for the third act taught by Yun et al. in view of Park to be between 12.0 and 25.0 L/hr (2.4 to 5 times of the 5.0 L/hr feed rate for the first act taught by Yun et al. in view of Park), which is 2.4 times to 5 times of the feed rate in the first act as taught by Yun et al. to have reaction conditions changed and adjusted to further grow the precursor seed formed by the first act. (see Yun et al. [0050]). Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein, to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]), a feed rate increase rate (1.3 (8.50/6.50); see Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]; note: “a feed rate increase rate” has been interpreted as: how much the final feed rate at the end of the step increases compared to the initial feed rate at the beginning of the step) of the transition metal aqueous solution (feed rate of metal-containing materials increases from 6.50 L/hr (second act) to 8.50 L/hr (third act); see Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) and a feed rate increase rate (1.5 (1.15/0.77); see Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]) of the ammonium cationic complexing agent (feed rate of ammonia water increases from 0.77 L/hr (second act) to 1.15 L/hr (third act); see Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]).
However, Yun et al. in view of Park does not teach the two feed rate increase rates are equal.
In a different embodiment (Preparation Example 1: Preparation of Nickel-Based Active Material Precursor (6:2:2): Three-Act Method, see [0098]), Yun et al. teaches wherein, to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0100]-[0102]), a feed rate increase rate (1.3 (8.5/6.5); see Yun et al. [0100]-[0102]; note: “a feed rate increase rate” has been interpreted as: how much the final feed rate at the end of the step increases compared to the initial feed rate at the beginning of the step) of the transition metal aqueous solution (feed rate of metal-containing materials increases from 6.5 L/hr (second act) to 8.50 L/hr (third act); see Yun et al. [0100]-[0102]) and a feed rate increase rate (1.3 (1.03/0.77); see Yun et al. [0100]-[0102]) of the ammonium cationic complexing agent (feed rate of ammonia water increases from 0.77 L/hr (second act) to 1.03 L/hr (third act); see Yun et al. [0100]-[0102]) are equal (1.3 = 1.3, see mapping above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to change the feed rate of the ammonia water (1.15 L/hr) in the third act in the embodiment of the preparation example 2 taught by Yun et al. in view of Park to be 1.03 L/hr, which is the feed rate of the ammonia water in the embodiment of the preparation example 1 taught by Yun et al. because the complexing agent (the ammonia water) controls the precipitation rate in a co-precipitation reaction (see Yun et al. [0059]). Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 5, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the co-precipitation reaction to grow the precursor seed (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, Yun et al. [0103]-[0104]) is performed for 1 hour to 8 hours (6 hours, see Yun et al. [0104]).
Regarding claim 6, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the transition metal aqueous solution comprises nickel, cobalt, and manganese elements (nickel (II) sulfate hexahydrate (NiSO4.6H2O), cobalt (II) sulfate heptahydrate (COSO4.7H2O), and manganese (II) sulfate monohydrate (MnSO4.H2O) in a molar ratio of 7:1.5:1.5, see Yun et al. [0103]), and comprises nickel among total transition metal elements in an amount of 30 mol % or more (70 mol%, Ni:Co:Mn = 7:1.5:1.5; see Yun et al. [0103]).
Regarding claim 7, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein the transition metal aqueous solution comprises the nickel among the total transition metal elements in an amount of 70 mol % or more (70 mol%, see mapping above, Ni:Co:Mn = 7:1.5:1.5).
Regarding claim 8, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein, to grow the precursor seed (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, Yun et al. [0103]-[0104]), the basic compound (NaOH, Yun et al. [0104]) is added in an amount such that a pH of the reaction solution is maintained at 11.0 to 12.5 (pH of 11.0 to 11.5, Yun et al. [0103] and [0104]).
Regarding claim 9, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein, to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]), the basic compound (NaOH, Yun et al. [0106]) is added in an amount such that a pH of the reaction solution is maintained at 10.5 to 11.7 (pH of 10.5 to 11.0, see Yun et al. [0104] and [0105]).
Regarding claim 10, Yun et al. in view of Park teaches wherein a temperature of the reaction solution is in a range of 40° C. to 65° C. (50 oC.; temperature was maintained at 50° C. throughout the first act, the second act and the third act, see Yun et al. [0103]-[0106]) to grow the precursor seeds (interpreted as forming precursor seeds; first act, Yun et al. [0103]-[0104]) and to grow the precursor particles (second act and third act, Yun et al. [0104]-[0106]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(Won) US-20190355979-A1: example 1, [0113]-[0117]
(Lee) US-20250062336-A1: example 1, [0084]-[0086]
(Choi) US-20190214628-A1: equation 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1163. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM - 4:30 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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/NING CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights