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 I (Claims 1-3) in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 4-6 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 03/11/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 3, the recitation “a lithium ion battery” (line 1) should read “the lithium ion battery”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Maenishi (JP2018195559A; see machine translation).
Regarding Claim 1, Maenishi teaches a negative electrode active material (negative electrode active material, [0012]) for a lithium ion battery (lithium-ion secondary battery 100, [0035] & Figure 1) the negative electrode active material (negative electrode active material) comprising a carbon material (boron-containing graphite, [0012]) and a carbon film (stable graphite surface, [0018]) that covers the carbon material (boron-containing graphite), wherein: the carbon material (boron-containing graphite) includes carbon and boron (see [0012] & [0013];
a content of boron in the carbon material is 0.2 atomic% or more and less than 3.5 atomic%; (boron content of 0.29% by mass, see [0077] or 0.31 atomic% - see analysis below for conversion to atomic%).
Assuming carbon material comprises of graphite and boron; the relative moles of each is calculated as follows:
B
o
r
o
n
=
29
g
10.81
g
/
m
o
l
=
2.68
m
o
l
e
s
G
r
a
p
h
i
t
e
=
71
g
12.01
g
/
m
o
l
=
5.91
m
o
l
e
s
T
o
t
a
l
m
o
l
e
s
=
2.68
m
o
l
e
s
+
5.91
m
o
l
e
s
=
8.59
m
o
l
e
s
A
t
o
m
i
c
%
o
f
B
o
r
o
n
=
2.68
m
o
l
e
s
8.59
m
o
l
e
s
=
0.31
Assuming, arguendo, that the mass conversion does not read on the atomic range, the reference is obvious for the following reason:
Maenishi teaches that the boron-containing graphite is preferably 0.01% by mass or more and preferably 5% by mass or less (see [0021]) and further teaches a boron content of 0.29% by mass (see [0077]).
A result-effective variable is a variable which achieves a recognized result. The determination of the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable is routine experimentation and therefore obvious (MPEP § 2144.05.II). In the instant case, the atomic% is a variable that achieves the recognized result of affecting the formation of by-products that do not participate in the intercalation and release of lithium ions and the feasibility of side reactions occurring, as disclosed by Maenishi (see [0021] which teaches that when the boron content is between 0.01% and 5%, the formation of by-products that do not participate in the intercalation and release of lithium ions is suppressed thus resulting in a high discharge capacity density), thus making the atomic% of the boron content a result-effective variable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the percent by mass of the boron content of Maenishi such that the boron content is 0.2 atomic% or more and less than 3.5 atomic%; via routine experimentation, for the purpose of suppressing the formation of by-products that do not participate in the intercalation and release of lithium ions and thus result in a high discharge capacity density.
the negative electrode active material (negative electrode active material) has an R value of 0.35 or more and 0.85 or less and the R value is a ratio of a D band with respect to a G band in a Raman spectrum of the negative electrode active material (see [0018]-[0019] which gives a Raman intensity ratio R of the D band to G band of the boron-containing graphite as 0.45 or greater and within the range of 0.53 or less).
Regarding Claim 2, Maenishi teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches wherein the carbon material (boron—containing graphite) includes artificial graphite (see [0029] which describes that graphite could be artificial graphite).
Regarding Claim 3, Maenishi teaches all of the limitations as set forth above and further teaches a lithium ion battery (lithium-ion secondary battery 100, [0035] & Figure 1) comprising a negative electrode (negative electrode 20, [0037]) including the negative electrode active material (negative electrode active material, [0012]), a positive electrode (positive electrode 10, [0037]), a separator (separator 30, [0037]), and an electrolytic solution (non-aqueous electrolyte, [0032]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FIKI V OWHOSO whose telephone number is (571)272-3418. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 5712725453. 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.
/F.V.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/CHRISTOPHER P DOMONE/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
April 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights