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 the claims: Claim 1 has been amended, and Claim 2 has been cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-5 are pending.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims, filed 04 June, 2026, is supported by the original specification.
Response to Arguments/Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3-5 have been considered but are moot because the previous ground of rejection over Miki et al. in view of Miki #2 has been reconsidered and replaced with a rejection over Miki et al.
The subject matter previously regarded as allowable has been reconsidered and rejected below as part of claim 1.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miki et al. (US Patent No. 10,243,209).
Regarding Claims 1 and 5, Miki et al. teach a positive electrode for an all-solid-state battery, comprising:
a sulfide-based solid electrolyte (col 10 line 32-35); and
a covered active material (oxide type active material -col. 5 lines 34, coat layer-col. 5 lines 60-62)), wherein
the covered active material includes a positive electrode active material particle (oxide active material) and a coating film (coat layer) covering at least part of a surface of the positive electrode active material particle,
the coating film includes a lithium-ion-conductive oxide (col. 6 lines 19-25).
Miki et al. do not disclose an NOx content at the surface of the coating film is from 1050 ppm to 1500 ppm. Nonetheless, there is sufficient factual basis to find that the materials of Miki et al. will inherently include NOx at the surface of the coating film in an amount range that overlaps with the recited range, thereby rendering this feature obvious.
In particular, like the instant application, Miki et al. disclose a method of making a coated active material that is substantially similar to the method disclosed by Applicant. Miki et al. disclose preparing a precursor solution comprising a lithium source, a niobium source, peroxide, and ammonia water. Finally, like the instant Application, Miki et al. disclose then adding powdered active material to this solution, spray drying, and then heat treating the resulting material.
Additionally, as Applicant notes in the Background section of the as-filed disclosure, Miki et al. produce coated active material particles having an N/Nb ratio at the surface of the coating film ranging from 0.08 to 0.53. Applicant’s own examples show a range of N/Nb ranging from 0.15 to 0.51, with values at 0.15 and 0.32 corresponding to materials having a claimed amount of NOx. Thus, in addition to disclosing a substantially similar method of making coated active materials, Miki et al. further disclose that the method results in materials that have a nitrogen-related property at the surface of the coating film that is the same as that found in the inventive materials of the instant application. Accordingly, based on the substantially similar method of Miki et al. resulting in identical related property to that of instant examples having NOx content falling in the claimed range, the Office finds that the method of Miki et al. also results in materials having an NOx content falling in the claimed range.
Further regarding claims 3 and 4, the heat treatment of Miki et al. is taught to preferably range from 1 to 20 hours at a temperature ranging from 200 to 400 C, where Applicant discloses that heat treatment at 200 C for 5 hours is sufficient to result in an H2O/NOx ratio of 1.23 to 1.9. Thus, because Miki et al. disclose heat treating at similar or slightly higher temperatures for similar or slightly longer times, the Office finds that its H2O/NOx will be in that range or slightly lower, thus falling within the ranges recited in claims 3 and 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW N KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-9169. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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.
/ANDREW KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights