DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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.
3. Claims 1 and 2-9 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 “before and after ultrasonic treatment” which is not clear as to which materials are intended to be characterized by the recited D99a and D99b values. The purpose of the ultrasonic treatment has not been defined and it is noted that ultrasonic treatments (e.g., for obtaining a dispersion) may be applied at any time during preparation of an electrode material. In case such a treatment is applied during preparation of the electrode, one could arbitrarily define a time before and after said treatment.
4. Claims 2-9 are rejected as depending from claim 1.
5. Claims 10 and 11-18 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 10 recites the limitation “before and after ultrasonic treatment” which is not clear as to which materials are intended to be characterized by the recited D99a and D99b values. The purpose of the ultrasonic treatment has not been defined and it is noted that ultrasonic treatments (e.g., for obtaining a dispersion) may be applied at any time during preparation of an electrode material. In case such a treatment is applied during preparation of the electrode, one could arbitrarily define a time before and after said treatment.
6. Claims 11-18 are rejected as depending from claim 10.
7. Claims 19 and 20 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 19 recites the limitation “before and after ultrasonic treatment” which is not clear as to which materials are intended to be characterized by the recited D99a and D99b values. The purpose of the ultrasonic treatment has not been defined and it is noted that ultrasonic treatments (e.g., for obtaining a dispersion) may be applied at any time during preparation of an electrode material. In case such a treatment is applied during preparation of the electrode, one could arbitrarily define a time before and after said treatment.
8. Claim 20 is rejected as depending from claim 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. CN110416511A as cited in IDS dated 6/26/23 with citations from equivalent US 2021/0367236 in view of Yamada et al. CN107112536A as cited in IDS dated 6/26/23 with citations from equivalent US 2018/0013146, further in view of Ikeda et al. (US 2013/0260243).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Liu discloses a positive electrode material (first lithium containing transition metal oxide([0050]-[0052]), comprising: at least one of element Al or element Zr([0051]-[0052]); the cathode material including first particles formed from third particles and second particles formed from fourth particles ([0034]). Liu discloses the first particle may include a first lithium containing transition metal oxide, a surface of the first lithium containing transition metal oxide may include a first coating element selected from at least one of Al, La, Y, Zr, Ti, Ce, or F ([0050]-[0052]), and the second particles may include a second lithium containing transition metal oxide may have the general formula of LinNiaCobM2cN2dO2, wherein 0.95≤n≤1.05, 0.5≤a<1, 0<b<0.4, 0<c<0.4, 0≤d≤0.02, and a+b+c+d=1, M2 is selected from at least one of Mn and Al, and N2 is selected from at least one of Mg, Ti, Zr, Nb, Y, Cr, V, Ge, Mo or Sr([0053]). Liu discloses the electrochemical device including the cathode material is significantly improved in the aspects of energy density, capacity attenuation and service life (abstract) but does not explicitly disclose particles of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.01≤(Dv99a-Dv99b)/Dv99b≤0.5, wherein Dv99a and Dv99b are Dv99 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 1) and 0.01≤(Dv50a-Dv50b)/Dv50b≤0.30, wherein Dv50a and Dv50b are Dv50 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 2).
Yamada teaches a carbon material and a non-aqueous secondary battery using the carbon material([0002]). Yamada teaches the volume-based average particle size (average particle size d50) of the composite carbon material after the ultrasonic treatment is preferably 0.8 μm or greater, more preferably 1.0 μm or greater, and is preferably 12 μm or less, and particularly preferably 10 μm or less ([0250]-[0255]). Yamada teaches in the case where the variation amount is excessively small, a void in particles decreases, and diffusion of Li ions into particles is poor, and thus deterioration of output characteristics is caused([0255]). Yamada teaches in the case where the variation amount is excessively great, the strength of an electrode plate becomes weak, and this may lead to deterioration of productivity when manufacturing a battery([0255]). Yamada teaches the Dv50 before ultrasonic treatment in example C2 is 18.7 µm, the Dv50 after the ultrasonic treatment is 15.6 µm (Tables C4 and C5) which results in (Dv50a – Dv50b)/Dv50b is 0.2.
Ikeda teaches negative electrode and lithium ion secondary battery (title). Ikeda teaches as for the adjustment of the particle size distribution of the negative electrode active material, the value of the particle size distribution D99 of the negative electrode active material and the value of the ratio (D99/D50) of D99 to the particle size distribution D50 can be adjusted by air classification, an ultrasonic sieving, or the like([0028]). Ikeda teaches the particle size distribution of the negative electrode active material can be measured by a laser diffraction and scattering type measurement device([0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the positive electrode material of Liu with particles of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.01≤(Dv99a-Dv99b)/Dv99b≤0.5, wherein Dv99a and Dv99b are Dv99 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively and 0.01≤(Dv50a-Dv50b)/Dv50b≤0.30, wherein Dv50a and Dv50b are Dv50 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively in order to balance output characteristics and productivity of battery manufacturing as taught by Yamada, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make an adjustment of the particle size distribution of the electrode active material, the value of the particle size distribution D99 of the electrode active material and the value of the ratio (D99/D50) of D99 to the particle size distribution D50 can be adjusted by, an ultrasonic sieving as taught by Ikeda.
Regarding claim 3, modified Liu discloses the positive electrode material satisfies at least one of the following conditions (a), (c) and (d): (a) 2 µm≤Dv50a≤17 µm; wherein Dv50a is a Dv50 value of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before ultrasonic treatment (Liu, 5 µm to about 20 µm ([0037]); (c) a specific surface area BET of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.1 m2/g≤BET≤0.9 m2/g (Liu, 0.1 m2/g to about 1.50 m2/g [0044]); and
(d) the positive electrode material comprises primary particles, and an average particle size A of the primary particles satisfies 200 nm≤A≤4 µm(Liu, 200 nm to about 700 nm [0036]).
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 4, modified Liu discloses the positive electrode material satisfies at least one of conditions (e), (g), and (i): (e) 3 µm≤Dv50a≤6 µm; wherein Dv50a is a Dv50 value of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before ultrasonic treatment(Liu, 5 µm to about 20 µm ([0037]); (g) a specific surface area BET of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.5 m2/g≤BET≤0.8 m2/g (Liu, 0.1 m2/g to about 1.50 m2/g [0044]); and (i) a mass percentage of element Al in the positive electrode material ranges from 0.05% to 0.5% (Liu, 0.3% in Example 1).
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 5, modified Liu discloses the positive electrode material comprises first particles and second particles(Liu, second lithium containing transition metal oxide ([0050], [0053]), a particle size of the first particle is D1(Liu [0037]), a particle size of the second particle is D2 (Li [0041]), and D2<D1 (Liu [0037], [0041]).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, modified Liu does not explicitly disclose the first particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (j) and (k): (j) 0.01≤(Dv50a1-Dv50b1)/Dv50b1≤0.1; and (k) 0.01≤(Dv99a1-Dv99b1)/Dv99b1≤0.25, wherein Dv50a1 and Dv50b1 are Dv50 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a1 and Dv99b1 are Dv99 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 6) and the second particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (l) and (m): (l) 0.05≤(Dv50a2-Dv50b2)/Dv50b2≤0.3; and (m) 0.2≤(Dv99a2-Dv99b2)/Dv99b2≤1,
wherein Dv50a2 and Dv50b2 are Dv50 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a2 and Dv99b2 are Dv99 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively(claim 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the positive electrode material of modified Liu with the first particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (j) and (k): (j) 0.01≤(Dv50a1-Dv50b1)/Dv50b1≤0.1; and (k) 0.01≤(Dv99a1-Dv99b1)/Dv99b1≤0.25, wherein Dv50a1 and Dv50b1 are Dv50 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a1 and Dv99b1 are Dv99 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively and the second particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (l) and (m): (l) 0.05≤(Dv50a2-Dv50b2)/Dv50b2≤0.3; and (m) 0.2≤(Dv99a2-Dv99b2)/Dv99b2≤1, wherein Dv50a2 and Dv50b2 are Dv50 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a2 and Dv99b2 are Dv99 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively in order to balance output characteristics and productivity of battery manufacturing as taught by Yamada, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 8, modified Liu discloses the first particles and the second particles satisfy at least one of conditions (n) to (p):
(n) 7 µm≤Dv50a1≤15 µm(Liu, 5 µm to about 20 µm ([0037]);
(o) 2 µm≤Dv50a2≤8 µm (Liu, 3 µm to about 5 µm [0041]); and
(p) 1.5≤Dv50a1/Dv50a2≤5.5 (1.67≤Dv50a1/Dv50a2≤4, see Calculation A below),
5 µm/ 3µm ≈ 1.67
20 µm/ 5 µm ≈ 4 Calculation A
wherein Dv50a1 and Dv50a2 are Dv50 values of the first particles and the second particles measured before ultrasonic treatment respectively.
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 9, modified Liu discloses the first particles comprise primary particles, and an average particle size A1 of the primary particles in the first particles satisfies 300 nm≤A1≤800 nm (Liu 200 nm to about 700 nm [0036]); and/or the second particles comprises primary particles, and an average particle size A2 of the primary particles in the second particles satisfies 0.2 µm≤A2≤4 µm (Liu, 800 nm to about 5 µm [0040]).
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Liu discloses an electrochemical apparatus([0066]), comprising: a positive electrode([0067]); a negative electrode([0067]); and a separator disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode([0067]), wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active substance layer disposed on the positive electrode current collector([0067]), and the positive electrode active substance layer comprises a positive electrode material([0067]), the positive electrode material comprises at least one of element Al or element Zr(first lithium containing transition metal oxide([0050]-[0052]); the cathode material including first particles formed from third particles and second particles formed from fourth particles ([0034]). Liu discloses the first particle may include a first lithium containing transition metal oxide, a surface of the first lithium containing transition metal oxide may include a first coating element selected from at least one of Al, La, Y, Zr, Ti, Ce, or F ([0050]-[0052]), and the second particles may include a second lithium containing transition metal oxide may have the general formula of LinNiaCobM2cN2dO2, wherein 0.95≤n≤1.05, 0.5≤a<1, 0<b<0.4, 0<c<0.4, 0≤d≤0.02, and a+b+c+d=1, M2 is selected from at least one of Mn and Al, and N2 is selected from at least one of Mg, Ti, Zr, Nb, Y, Cr, V, Ge, Mo or Sr([0053]). Liu discloses the electrochemical device including the cathode material is significantly improved in the aspects of energy density, capacity attenuation and service life (abstract) but does not explicitly disclose particles of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.01≤(Dv99a-Dv99b)/Dv99b≤0.5, wherein Dv99a and Dv99b are Dv99 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 10) and 0.01≤(Dv50a-Dv50b)/Dv50b≤0.30, wherein Dv50a and Dv50b are Dv50 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 11).
Yamada teaches a carbon material and a non-aqueous secondary battery using the carbon material([0002]). Yamada teaches the volume-based average particle size (average particle size d50) of the composite carbon material after the ultrasonic treatment is preferably 0.8 μm or greater, more preferably 1.0 μm or greater, and is preferably 12 μm or less, and particularly preferably 10 μm or less ([0250]-[0255]). Yamada teaches in the case where the variation amount is excessively small, a void in particles decreases, and diffusion of Li ions into particles is poor, and thus deterioration of output characteristics is caused([0255]). Yamada teaches in the case where the variation amount is excessively great, the strength of an electrode plate becomes weak, and this may lead to deterioration of productivity when manufacturing a battery([0255]). Yamada teaches the Dv50 before ultrasonic treatment in example C2 is 18.7 µm, the Dv50 after the ultrasonic treatment is 15.6 µm (Tables C4 and C5) which results in (Dv50a – Dv50b)/Dv50b is 0.2.
Ikeda teaches negative electrode and lithium ion secondary battery (title). Ikeda teaches as for the adjustment of the particle size distribution of the negative electrode active material, the value of the particle size distribution D99 of the negative electrode active material and the value of the ratio (D99/D50) of D99 to the particle size distribution D50 can be adjusted by air classification, an ultrasonic sieving, or the like([0028]). Ikeda teaches the particle size distribution of the negative electrode active material can be measured by a laser diffraction and scattering type measurement device([0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the positive electrode material of Liu with particles of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.01≤(Dv99a-Dv99b)/Dv99b≤0.5, wherein Dv99a and Dv99b are Dv99 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively and 0.01≤(Dv50a-Dv50b)/Dv50b≤0.30, wherein Dv50a and Dv50b are Dv50 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively in order to balance output characteristics and productivity of battery manufacturing as taught by Yamada, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make an adjustment of the particle size distribution of the electrode active material, the value of the particle size distribution D99 of the electrode active material and the value of the ratio (D99/D50) of D99 to the particle size distribution D50 can be adjusted by, an ultrasonic sieving as taught by Ikeda.
Regarding claim 12, modified Liu discloses the positive electrode material satisfies at least one of the following conditions (a), (c) and (d): (a) 2 µm≤Dv50a≤17 µm; wherein Dv50a is a Dv50 value of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before ultrasonic treatment (Liu, 5 µm to about 20 µm ([0037]); (c) a specific surface area BET of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.1 m2/g≤BET≤0.9 m2/g (Liu, 0.1 m2/g to about 1.50 m2/g [0044]); and (d) the positive electrode material comprises primary particles, and an average particle size A of the primary particles satisfies 200 nm≤A≤4 µm(Liu, 200 nm to about 700 nm [0036]).
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 13, modified Liu discloses the positive electrode material satisfies at least one of conditions (e), (g), and (i): (e) 3 µm≤Dv50a≤6 µm; wherein Dv50a is a Dv50 value of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before ultrasonic treatment(Liu, 5 µm to about 20 µm ([0037]); (g) a specific surface area BET of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.5 m2/g≤BET≤0.8 m2/g (Liu, 0.1 m2/g to about 1.50 m2/g [0044]); and (i) a mass percentage of element Al in the positive electrode material ranges from 0.05% to 0.5% (Liu, 0.3% in Example 1).
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 14, modified Liu discloses the positive electrode material comprises first particles and second particles(Liu, second lithium containing transition metal oxide ([0050], [0053]), a particle size of the first particle is D1(Liu [0037]), a particle size of the second particle is D2 (Li [0041]), and D2<D1 (Liu [0037], [0041]).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, modified Liu does not explicitly disclose the first particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (j) and (k): (j) 0.01≤(Dv50a1-Dv50b1)/Dv50b1≤0.1; and (k) 0.01≤(Dv99a1-Dv99b1)/Dv99b1≤0.25, wherein Dv50a1 and Dv50b1 are Dv50 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a1 and Dv99b1 are Dv99 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 6) and the second particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (l) and (m): (l) 0.05≤(Dv50a2-Dv50b2)/Dv50b2≤0.3; and (m) 0.2≤(Dv99a2-Dv99b2)/Dv99b2≤1,
wherein Dv50a2 and Dv50b2 are Dv50 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a2 and Dv99b2 are Dv99 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively(claim 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the positive electrode material of modified Liu with the first particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (j) and (k): (j) 0.01≤(Dv50a1-Dv50b1)/Dv50b1≤0.1; and (k) 0.01≤(Dv99a1-Dv99b1)/Dv99b1≤0.25, wherein Dv50a1 and Dv50b1 are Dv50 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a1 and Dv99b1 are Dv99 values of the first particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively and the second particles satisfies at least one of the following conditions (l) and (m): (l) 0.05≤(Dv50a2-Dv50b2)/Dv50b2≤0.3; and (m) 0.2≤(Dv99a2-Dv99b2)/Dv99b2≤1, wherein Dv50a2 and Dv50b2 are Dv50 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively, and Dv99a2 and Dv99b2 are Dv99 values of the second particles measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively in order to balance output characteristics and productivity of battery manufacturing as taught by Yamada, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A).
Regarding claim 17, modified Liu discloses the first particles and the second particles satisfy at least one of conditions (n) to (p):
(n) 7 µm≤Dv50a1≤15 µm(Liu, 5 µm to about 20 µm ([0037]);
(o) 2 µm≤Dv50a2≤8 µm (Liu, 3 µm to about 5 µm [0041]); and
(p) 1.5≤Dv50a1/Dv50a2≤5.5 (1.67≤Dv50a1/Dv50a2≤4, see Calculation B below),
5 µm/ 3µm ≈ 1.67
20 µm/ 5 µm ≈ 4 Calculation B
wherein Dv50a1 and Dv50a2 are Dv50 values of the first particles and the second particles measured before ultrasonic treatment respectively.
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 18, modified Liu discloses the first particles comprise primary particles, and an average particle size A1 of the primary particles in the first particles satisfies 300 nm≤A1≤800 nm (Liu 200 nm to about 700 nm [0036]); and/or the second particles comprises primary particles, and an average particle size A2 of the primary particles in the second particles satisfies 0.2 µm≤A2≤4 µm (Liu, 800 nm to about 5 µm [0040]).
Modified Liu is explicitly silent to the claim ranges however “in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Liu discloses an electronic apparatus([0003]), comprising an electrochemical apparatus([0066]), the electrochemical apparatus comprises: a positive electrode ([0067]); a negative electrode([0067]); and a separator disposed between the positive electrode and the negative electrode([0067]), wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive electrode current collector and a positive electrode active substance layer disposed on the positive electrode current collector([0067]), and the positive electrode active substance layer comprises a positive electrode material([0067]), the positive electrode material comprises at least one of element Al or element Zr(first lithium containing transition metal oxide([0050]-[0052]); the cathode material including first particles formed from third particles and second particles formed from fourth particles ([0034]). Liu discloses the first particle may include a first lithium containing transition metal oxide, a surface of the first lithium containing transition metal oxide may include a first coating element selected from at least one of Al, La, Y, Zr, Ti, Ce, or F ([0050]-[0052]), and the second particles may include a second lithium containing transition metal oxide may have the general formula of LinNiaCobM2cN2dO2, wherein 0.95≤n≤1.05, 0.5≤a<1, 0<b<0.4, 0<c<0.4, 0≤d≤0.02, and a+b+c+d=1, M2 is selected from at least one of Mn and Al, and N2 is selected from at least one of Mg, Ti, Zr, Nb, Y, Cr, V, Ge, Mo or Sr([0053]). Liu discloses the electrochemical device including the cathode material is significantly improved in the aspects of energy density, capacity attenuation and service life (abstract) but does not explicitly disclose particles of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.01≤(Dv99a-Dv99b)/Dv99b≤0.5, wherein Dv99a and Dv99b are Dv99 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 19) and 0.01≤(Dv50a-Dv50b)/Dv50b≤0.30, wherein Dv50a and Dv50b are Dv50 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively (claim 20).
Yamada teaches a carbon material and a non-aqueous secondary battery using the carbon material([0002]). Yamada teaches the volume-based average particle size (average particle size d50) of the composite carbon material after the ultrasonic treatment is preferably 0.8 μm or greater, more preferably 1.0 μm or greater, and is preferably 12 μm or less, and particularly preferably 10 μm or less ([0250]-[0255]). Yamada teaches in the case where the variation amount is excessively small, a void in particles decreases, and diffusion of Li ions into particles is poor, and thus deterioration of output characteristics is caused([0255]). Yamada teaches in the case where the variation amount is excessively great, the strength of an electrode plate becomes weak, and this may lead to deterioration of productivity when manufacturing a battery([0255]). Yamada teaches the Dv50 before ultrasonic treatment in example C2 is 18.7 µm, the Dv50 after the ultrasonic treatment is 15.6 µm (Tables C4 and C5) which results in (Dv50a – Dv50b)/Dv50b is 0.2.
Ikeda teaches negative electrode and lithium ion secondary battery (title). Ikeda teaches as for the adjustment of the particle size distribution of the negative electrode active material, the value of the particle size distribution D99 of the negative electrode active material and the value of the ratio (D99/D50) of D99 to the particle size distribution D50 can be adjusted by air classification, an ultrasonic sieving, or the like([0028]). Ikeda teaches the particle size distribution of the negative electrode active material can be measured by a laser diffraction and scattering type measurement device([0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the positive electrode material of Liu with particles of the positive electrode material satisfies 0.01≤(Dv99a-Dv99b)/Dv99b≤0.5, wherein Dv99a and Dv99b are Dv99 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively and 0.01≤(Dv50a-Dv50b)/Dv50b≤0.30, wherein Dv50a and Dv50b are Dv50 values of the particles of the positive electrode material measured before and after ultrasonic treatment respectively in order to balance output characteristics and productivity of battery manufacturing as taught by Yamada, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05 (II-A). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make an adjustment of the particle size distribution of the electrode active material, the value of the particle size distribution D99 of the electrode active material and the value of the ratio (D99/D50) of D99 to the particle size distribution D50 can be adjusted by, an ultrasonic sieving as taught by Ikeda.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA HOM LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-0489. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST M-F.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/VICTORIA H LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724