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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group V, claims 18-22, in the reply filed on 6/1/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-12, 15-17, 23-27 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/1/2026.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 18-19, 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN106252621A, refer to English machine translation) in view of Tian et al. (CN112259730A, refer to English equivalent US 2023/0227321A1).
Regarding claim 18, Li discloses a negative electrode for a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery (see Title, Abstract), the negative electrode comprising a negative electrode active material and an iron cyanide complex (Prussian blue derivative and carbon material, see Abstract).
However, Li does not disclose particles of the iron cyanide complex have an average particle size of 1 μm or more and 50 μm or less.
Tian discloses a Prussian blue-like transition metal cyanide incorporated in an electrode plate, the Prussian blue-like transition metal cyanide comprising secondary particles which comprise a plurality of primary particles, wherein the primary particles may have a spherical or spherical-like morphology having an average particle size greater than or equal to 1 µm, optionally 2-50 µm (see Title, Abstract, [0011]). Tian further teaches an appropriate particle size range is beneficial to the increase of the compacted density of the electrode plate, and therefore it is helpful to improve the energy density and rate performance of a battery ([0011]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the Prussian blue derivative particle diameter in order to arrive at a desired compacted density of the electrode plate and energy density and rate performance of the battery (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 19, modified Li discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Li further discloses the iron cyanide complex is at least one selected from the group consisting of ferrocyanide and ferricyanide (Prussian blue derivative structure [0009]).
Regarding claim 21, modified Li discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Li further discloses a negative electrode mixture layer including the negative electrode active material (slurry [0033]), a negative electrode current collecting sheet supporting the negative electrode mixture layer (slurry coated on a current collector [0033]), and the iron cyanide complex attached to a surface of the negative electrode mixture layer at an opposite side to a surface supported by the negative electrode current collecting sheet (composite of Prussian blue derivative and carbon material [0033], and thus is necessarily ‘coated’ with the Prussian blue derivative).
Regarding claim 22, modified Li discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Although Li does not expressly disclose the surface of the negative electrode mixture layer is covered by the iron cyanide complex with a coverage of 5% or more and 95% or less, Examples 1-5 of Li discloses varying amounts of carbon and cyanogen salt, wherein the specific capacity and rate performance of the material can be improved, giving the lithium-ion battery good cycle stability ([0007], [0027]-[0031]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the ratio of carbon and cyanogen salt, and thereby the surface coverage of the Prussian blue derivative on carbon, in order to arrive at a desired specific capacity and rate performance of the material, and to obtain good battery cycle stability (MPEP 2144.05).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN106252621A, refer to English machine translation) in view of Tian et al. (CN112259730A, refer to English equivalent US 2023/0227321A1), as applied to claims 18-19, 21-22 above, and further in view of Tang et al. (CN108172896A, refer to English machine translation).
Regarding claim 20, modified Li discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Although Li further discloses the Prussian blue derivative has the general formula AdNe[M(CN)6]f(H2O), wherein N, M are transition gold Belonging to, N and M can be same class transition metal, the one or two kinds of in Fe, Co, Ni, Mn, V, Cr, and wherein N is preferably One or more in Fe, Ni, Co, M is preferably Fe, Co mono-kind, more preferably Fe.A is alkali metal, in K or Na A kind of；D, e, f are stoichiometric number, 0≤d < 0.5,1≤e, f≤4, the reference does not expressly disclose the iron cyanide complex is at least one selected from the group consisting of potassium ferrocyanide, sodium ferrocyanide, calcium ferrocyanide, ammonium ferrocyanide, potassium ferricyanide, sodium ferricyanide, calcium ferricyanide, and ammonium ferricyanide.
Tang discloses a negative electrode active material is selected from one or more of carbon materials, Prussian blue and its analogs, etc., wherein preferably the Prussian blue and its analogues are selected from potassium ferrocyanide (see Title, Abstract, [0018], [0020]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select potassium ferrocyanide as the Prussian blue derivative to be used along a carbon material because it would amount to nothing more than a use of a known Prussian blue derivative for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9AM - 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, NICOLE BUIE-HATCHER can be reached at (571)270-3879. 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.
/James Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 6/26/2026
Prosecution Insights