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 § 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.
Claims 3, 7, and 11 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.
Each of claims 3, 7, and 11 requires a = 0.1. However, the respective independent claims of dependent claims 3, 7, and 11 requires 0 ≤ a ≤ 0.02 which excludes a = 0.1. It is unclear “a” should be in these claims. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang (US 2010/0279172).
Regarding claims 1-3, 5-7, and 9-11, Hwang et al. teaches a rechargeable lithium battery comprising a positive active material including a compound represented by:
LiaE1-bXbO2-cDc [Formula 2]
0.9 ≤ a ≤ 1.8,
0 ≤ b ≤ 0.5
0 ≤ c ≤ 0.05
E is selected from Co, Mn, or combinations thereof.
X is selected from Al, Ni, Co, Mn, Cr, Fe, Mg, Sr, V, a rare earth element, or combinations thereof.
D is selected from O, F, S P, or combinations thereof.
See paragraphs [0028]-[0032], title, abstract.
While Hwang does not exactly recite formula 1 of claim 1, the resulting chemical formula required by claims 1-3 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because Hwang teaches Formula 2 with the claimed elements and stoichiometric portions which includes the claimed formulas.
Regarding claims 13-14, FIG. 2 teaches a rechargeable lithium battery including negative electrodes 2, positive electrodes 3, and separators 4.
Regarding claim 15, Hwang’s battery cell is expected to satisfy the claimed specific capacity range of 150mAh/g because Hwang teaches a rechargeable lithium battery comprising a compound which substantially corresponds to the instant application and it has been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or are produced by identical or a substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness will be considered to have been established over functional limitations that stem from the claimed structure. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977), In re Spada, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 ( Fed. Cir. 1990). The prima facie case can be rebutted by evidence showing that the prior art products do not necessarily possess the characteristics of the claimed products. In re Best, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Claims 4, 8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang (US 2010/0279172) in view of Lee et al. (US 2017/0141393).
Regarding claims 4, 8, and 12, Hwang is silent to the average oxidation state of Mn is between 3.8 and 4.0. However, in the same field of endeavor a positive active material for a rechargeable lithium battery, Lee discloses using Mn having an oxidation number of +3 and an oxidation number of +4 wherein the amount of oxidation number of +3 may up to 37 wt. % for the benefit of efficiently suppressing voltage decreasing after repeated charges and discharges [0043]-[0046]. Accordingly, providing the rechargeable lithium ion battery of Hwang with an average oxidation state of Mn between 3.8 to 4.0 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention since Lee et al. provides ample motivation to use Mn having an oxidation number of +3 and an oxidation number of +4 wherein the oxidation number +3 may be up to 37% to obtain the known and predictable benefits of suppressing voltage decreasing across charge and discharge cycles thereby improving cycle-life characteristics of the rechargeable lithium battery.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENDRA LY whose telephone number is (571)270-7060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00-5:00PM.
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, Katelyn B Smith can be reached at 571-270-5545. 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.
/KENDRA LY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights