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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 13 are amended.
Claims 3, 4 are cancelled.
Claims 14-18 are new.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed on 6/25/2026 have been entered.
103 rejection from previous office action have been withdrawn in view of the arguments.
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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuya et al (US 201403776287 A1) in view of Hyun et al (US 20180006325 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, and Claim 13,
Furuya teaches a positive electrode material comprising: a positive electrode active material; and a granular solid electrolyte and a granular conduction aid both bonded to the surface of the positive electrode active substance (Paragraph 0022). Furthermore in Figure 2, it is shown that element 9; solid electrolyte, and element 10; conduction aid are surrounding the particle element 1; positive electrode active substance. In Figure 2, it is also seen that the coating layer is formed inside pores and a surface of the electrode active material (Figure 2, element 8; voids akin to pore). Similarly, in Figure 20 the positive electrode 101 has the granular solid electrolytes 105 and the granular conduction aids 106 in at least a portion of the space between mutually neighboring granular positive electrode active substances 104. Some of the solid electrolytes 105 and the conduction aids 106 adsorb to the surfaces of the positive electrode active substances 104.
PNG
media_image1.png
387
385
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
490
365
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Furuya teaches that the size of the conduction is appropriately determined depending on necessity. The size of the conduction aid particles can be greater than or equal to 5 nm and less than or equal to 100 um (Paragraph 0125). This range overlaps with the claimed range of the powder of an electrically conductive material having a particle diameter (D50) of 0.02 um to 2 um. Per MPEP 2144.05, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists.
Similarly, Furuya teaches that for the solid electrolyte, the average particle size is greater than or equal to 5 nm and less than or equal to 10 um (Paragraph 0123). This range overlaps with the claimed range of diameter (D50) from 0.3 um to 2 um.
Furuya teaches that the formation of the aggregate with the positive electrode particles causes the void to be generated in a portion of the inside of the mixed conductive layer, and that the volume of the void is small. Furuya teaches a void rate with respect to the volume of the whole positive electrode is less than or equal to 20%. Such a void rate is dependent on the size of the void (akin to the diameter of the pore). However, Furuya does not specifically teach that the positive electrode active material includes pores have a diameter of 0.5 um to 3 um.
However, Hyun teaches a cathode active material for a lithium secondary battery that comprises of interparticular pores, and these pores have an average diameter of 0.5 um or greater and 15 um or less. When an average diameter of the pore is less than 0.5 μm, the cathode active material may have a decreased ion conductivity and deteriorated rate characteristics. In contrast, when an average diameter of the pore is greater than 15 μm, the cathode active material may have a decreased energy density. This pore size range of Hyun overlaps with the claimed range and hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the overlapping pore size diameter from Hyun into the cathode material of Furuya in order to have proper ion conductivity, and energy density.
Furuya also teaches the method for forming the electrode particles by providing the electrode active material, and then coating that material with the particles as described above (Paragraph 0139-146).
Regarding Claim 2, and Claim 14,
Furuya teaches that the coating of the positive electrode active substance with the mixed conductive layer is based on dry particle compounding. This is akin to the coating layer being a dry coating layer.
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 6, Claim 15, and Claim 16,
Furuya teaches that the weight ratio, for example, the weight of the solid electrolyte 9 contained in the positive electrode 3 with respect to the whole positive electrode 3 is preferably greater than or equal to 3% and less than or equal to 15% (Paragraph 0122). Similarly, weight ratio, for example, the weight of the conduction aid 10 contained in the positive electrode 3 with respect to the weight of the whole positive electrode 3 is preferably greater than or equal to 3% and less than or equal to 15% (Paragraph 0124). Choosing values within the weight % provided above would result in values that overlap with the weight ratio of the electrically conductive material and the solid electrolyte contained in the coating composition being 0.2:9.8 to 6:4.
Similarly, choosing values within the weight % provided above would result in values that overlap with the combined weight of the electrically conductive material and the solid electrolyte in the coating layer being 2 to 50 parts by weight relative to 100 parts by weight of the composite for the positive electrode material. Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose weight % values from Furuya for solid electrolyte and conduction aid in order to form a secondary battery with higher rate properties, and low impedance (Paragraph 0014 -0016).
Regarding Claim 7, and Claim 17,
Furuya teaches that the positive electrode active material is at least one selected from the group consisting of LiCoO2, LiNiO2, LiMn2O4, LiCoPO4, LiFePO4 (Paragraph 0070).
Regarding Claim 8, and Claim 18,
Furuya teaches that the solid electrolyte is a sulfide solid electrolyte (Paragraph 0068).
Regarding Claim 9,
Furuya teaches a positive electrode for a secondary battery comprising the aggregate electrode particles including the granular electrode active substance coated with mixed conductive layer (Paragraph 0135).
Regarding Claim 10,
Since Furuya teaches that the solid electrolyte and the conduction aid can be atleast one selected from a list of compounds (Paragraph 0068, 0073), hence it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the positive electrode further comprises an additional electrically conductive material and an additional solid electrolyte. Such materials are appropriately selected depending on necessity.
Regarding Claim 11,
Furuya teaches the use of a liquid binder in the coating method (Paragraph 0150) which then becomes part of the positive electrode.
Regarding Claim 12,
Furuya teaches a lithium ion battery 20 has a structure in which a positive electrode 3 and a negative electrode 6 face each other through a solid electrolyte layer 21 (Paragraph 0241).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The amended claim feature of “inside pores” versus “on pores” necessitated further search and consideration.
Applicant argues that Inoue, Maeyama, Yura or VGCF, individually or in combination, fail to disclose or suggest a cathode active material in which a coating layer comprising a solid electrolyte and a conductive material is formed inside the pores of the cathode active material. Examiner agrees that the previously cited references do not address the newly amended claim 1 feature related to coating layer inside the pores of the active material. Although, previously the references when considered in combination do support the rejection related to coating layer formed on the pores of the active material. Inoue teaches the materials to be mixed similar to the claimed materials, and also provides non-limiting mixing methods similar to instant specification. Furthermore, Maeyama supports the formation of a coating layer on positive electrode material is formed in such a way that the solid electrolyte and the conductive aid cover the entire surface of each particle (Paragraph 0075). The prior art references of Furuya used in this office action provide a visual representation of the coating layer in Figure 2 and Figure 20, and support the amended feature of coating layer formed inside pores of the positive electrode active material.
Applicant argues that Yura and the pore diameter taught therein are entirely irrelevant to coating the interior of pores with a solid electrolyte and conductive material. Examiner points to rejection of amended Claim 1 above, but would also like to remind the applicant that the previous office action rejection of claim 3 was supported by Inoue having a porous cathode active material, and the ability to optimize and the influence the pore size of the active material. Furthermore, Yura provides a pore size range that includes the claimed range, albeit for a different advantage. The fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
References of Interest
Koo et al (US 20210013487 A1)
Yachi et al (US 20220359881 A1)
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 SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-6278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, Maria Veronica D. Ewald can be reached on 571-272-8519. 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.
/SUHANI JITENDRA PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 1783
/MARIA V EWALD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1783
Prosecution Insights