Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/355,289

HIGH-PERFORMANCE LITHIUM-ION BATTERY CELL DESIGNS WITH LITHIATED SILICON OXIDE (LSO) ANODES

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 19, 2023
Examiner
ERWIN, JAMES M
Art Unit
1725
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
GM Global Technology Operations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
478 granted / 583 resolved
+17.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
603
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
42.2%
+2.2% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 583 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has complied with all of the conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/19/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings received on 07/19/2023 were reviewed and are acceptable. Specification The specification filed on 07/19/2023 was reviewed and is acceptable. Claim Objections Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “greater than or equal to about at 90” in line 3 should be replaced with --greater than or equal to about 90--. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “greater than or equal to about at 90” in line 5 should be replaced with --greater than or equal to about 90--. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “greater than or equal to about at 1” in line 7 should be replaced with --greater than or equal to about 1--. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “greater than or equal to about at 0.05” in line 10 should be replaced with --greater than or equal to about 0.05--. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “greater than or equal to about at 1” in line 13 should be replaced with --greater than or equal to about 1--. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim(s) 1-11 and 15 is/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 “an electroactive material layer disposed on the current collector that comprises…” in lines 4-5. It is unclear whether “that comprises” and the remaining limitations limit the electroactive material layer, or limit the current collector. For purposes of this Office Action, it will be assumed that “that comprises…” is intended to limit the electroactive material layer, consistent with the recitation of “negative electroactive material”, which implies limiting the electroactive material layer because they are both electroactive. Claim 2 recites the limitation “the lithiated silicon oxide (LSO)” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 3 recites the limitation “the carbonaceous electroactive material” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 9 recites the limitation “the lithiated silicon oxide (LSO)” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the lithiated silicon oxide (LSO)” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 recites the limitation “the lithiated silicon oxide (LSO)” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 recites the limitation “the carbonaceous electroactive material” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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) 1-10, 12, and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2023/0034212 A1; hereinafter “Wang”). Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a negative electrode for an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions (Title; [0003]), the negative electrode comprising: a current collector (1); and an electroactive material layer (2) disposed on the current collector (as shown in Fig 1) that comprises: a lithiated silicon oxide (LSO) negative electroactive material ([0045]); and a carbonaceous negative electroactive material (carbon material, e.g. graphite, [0032]). Wang discloses that the LSO material should be included in an amount between 5 to 96% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 10 weight % to less than or equal to about 30 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. Wang is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely negative electrode for lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (5 to 96% significantly overlaps 10 to 30%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the LSO [negative electroactive material] is represented by MySiOx where 0≤y≤4, 0≤x≤4, and M = Li ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose 0<y<1 and 0<x<2. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (0 to 4 significantly overlaps 0 to 1 and 1 to 2) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the carbonaceous [negative] electroactive material comprises graphite ([0032]) in an amount between 5 to 90% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 70 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (5 to 90% significantly overlaps 70% or more) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Regarding claims 4 and 5, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the electroactive material layer further comprises an electrically conductive particle, specifically carbon, specifically graphene (conductive agent, e.g. graphene, [0032]). Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the electroactive material layer further comprises a polymeric binder, specifically styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (binder, e.g. polymerized styrene butadiene rubber, [0032]). Regarding claim 7, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the electroactive material layer is a porous composite layer (not explicitly disclosed as porous, but necessarily porous in order to facilitate ionic mobility, as indicated by the use of the electrode in a lithium ion battery, [0041]) that comprises the LSO negative electroactive material and the carbonaceous negative electroactive material distributed in a matrix of polymeric bonder ([0034]). Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the polymeric binder is styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (e.g. polymerized styrene butadiene rubber, [0032]). Regarding claim 9, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the electroactive material layer comprises a cumulative amount of the LSO [negative electroactive material and the carbonaceous negative electroactive material in an amount between 10 to 96% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 90 weight % to less than or equal to about 98 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (10 to 96% significantly overlaps 90 to 98%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the carbonaceous negative electroactive material comprises graphite (e.g. graphite, [0032]) and the electroactive material layer comprises: a cumulative amount of the LSO [negative electroactive material and the carbonaceous negative electroactive material in an amount between 10 to 96% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 90 weight % to less than or equal to about 98 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (10 to 96% significantly overlaps 90 to 98%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Wang further discloses a polymeric binder (binder, [0032]) in an amount between 0.5 to 10% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 1 weight % to less than or equal to about 10 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (0.5 to 10% significantly overlaps 1 to 10%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Wang further discloses a plurality of electrically conductive particles comprising carbon (conductive agent, [0032]) including a single walled carbon nanotube (SWCNT) (carbon nanotubes, [0032]) and other electrically conductive particles comprising carbon (e.g. carbon black, [0032]) in a cumulative amount between 0.5 to 10% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 0.05 weight % to less than or equal to about 1 weight % for the SWCNT and greater than or equal to about 1 weight % to less than or equal to about 5 weight % for the other electrically conductive particles. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (0.5 to 10% significantly overlaps 0.05 to 1% and 1 to 5%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Regarding claim 12, Wang discloses an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions (Title; [0003]), the electrochemical cell comprising: a first electrode (12) comprising a first current collector (1) having a porous (not explicitly disclosed as porous, but necessarily porous in order to facilitate ionic mobility, as indicated by the use of the electrode in a lithium ion battery, [0041]) negative active material layer (2) disposed thereon (as shown in Fig 1) that comprises: a lithiated silicon oxide (LSO) negative electroactive material ([0045]); and a carbonaceous negative electroactive material (carbon material, e.g. graphite, [0032]). Wang discloses that the LSO material should be included in an amount between 5 to 96% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 10 weight % to less than or equal to about 30 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. Wang is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely negative electrodes for lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (5 to 96% significantly overlaps 10 to 30%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Wang further discloses a second electrode (10) comprising a porous (not explicitly disclosed as porous, but necessarily porous in order to facilitate ionic mobility, as indicated by the use of the electrode in a lithium ion battery, [0041]) positive active material layer comprising a positive lithium containing, nickel rich electroactive material (positive electrode active material, e.g. lithium nickelate, [0035]); a porous separating layer (11) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode ([0035]), and an electrolyte disposed in pores of the separating layer ([0040-0041]). Regarding claim 15, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the LSO [negative electroactive material] is represented by MySiOx where 0≤y≤4, 0≤x≤4, and M = Li ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose 0<y<1 and 0<x<2. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (0 to 4 significantly overlaps 0 to 1 and 1 to 2) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Wang further discloses that the carbonaceous [negative] electroactive material comprises graphite ([0032]) in an amount between 5 to 90% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 70 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (5 to 90% significantly overlaps 70% or more) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Regarding claim 16, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the porous negative active material layer further comprises an electrically conductive particle, specifically carbon, specifically graphene (conductive agent, e.g. graphene, [0032]). Regarding claim 17, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the porous negative active material layer and the porous positive active material layer each further comprises a polymeric binder, specifically styrene butadiene rubber (SBR) (binder, e.g. polymerized styrene butadiene rubber, [0032, 0035]). Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2023/0034212 A1; hereinafter “Wang”), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Song et al. (US 2019/0280286 A1; hereinafter “Song”) and Sheng et al. (US 2020/0006754 A1; hereinafter “Sheng”). Regarding claim 11, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang discloses the electroactive material layer on one side of the current collector (as shown in Fig 1), but does appear to be concerned with the particulars of the electroactive material layer, and therefore does not explicitly disclose a capacity loading of a total amount of negative active materials at greater than or equal to about 3.3 mAh/cm2 for a 0.1C rate at 21°C, nor that the electroactive material has a press density of greater than or equal to about 1.4 g/cm3, nor a porosity of greater than or equal to about 25%. Song teaches negative electrodes for secondary batteries (Title). Song teaches an example of making the negative electrode using a negative active material of graphite and SiO having a base charging capacity of 4.56 mAh/cm2 and a base discharging capacity of 3.66 mAh/cm2 ([0063]). Song is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely negative electrodes for lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the negative electrode of Wang must necessarily have some capacity loading, and would thus find the base capacities of Song appropriate, as suggested by Song. Furthermore, although Song does not explicitly disclose a 0.1C rate at 21°C, the skilled artisan would reasonably appear to understand the disclosed capacities at least overlap the recited open ended range, and would thus find it obvious to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (4.56 mAh/cm2 and 3.66 mAh/cm2 reasonably appear to overlap 3.3 mAh/cm2 or more for a 0.1C rate at 21°C) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Sheng teaches negative electrodes for electrochemical devices (Title). Sheng teaches an example of making the negative electrode using a negative active material of graphite and SiO having a porosity of 51% and a compact density of 1.7 g/cm3 (Example 13, Table 1). Sheng is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely negative electrodes for lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the negative electrode of Wang must necessarily have some certain porosity and compact density, i.e. press density, and would thus find the porosity and compact density of Sheng appropriate, as suggested by Sheng, and which each fall within the recited ranges. Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2023/0034212 A1; hereinafter “Wang”), as applied to claim 12 above, in view of Han et al. (US 2021/0367222 A1; hereinafter “Han”). Regarding claims 13 and 14, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang discloses the positive material (as noted above), but does not explicitly disclose the recited lithium nickel manganese cobalt aluminum oxide. Han teaches Ni rich electrode active materials for lithium ion secondary batteries having excellent electrochemical properties ([0006-0007, 0010]). Han teaches that the active material is represented by the general formula Li1+xTM1-xO2, where x is between -0.05 and 0.2 ([0019]), and in one embodiment, TM is represented by the general formula (NiaCobMnc)1-dM1d, where a is in the range of 0.75 to 0.95 and M1 is e.g. Al ([0091]). Han is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely electrodes for lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize the active material of Han as the positive electrode active material of Wang with the reasonable expectation that such a material provides excellent electrochemical properties, as suggested by Han. It would have been further obvious to the skilled artisan to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2023/0034212 A1; hereinafter “Wang”), as applied to claim 12 above, in view of Sheng et al. (US 2020/0006754 A1; hereinafter “Sheng”). Regarding claim 18, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang further discloses that the electrolyte comprises at least one lithium salt and at least one organic solvent, specifically linear carbonates (e.g. DMC and a lithium salt, [0040]). However, Wang does not disclose what an appropriate lithium salt is. Sheng teaches electrochemical devices (Title). Sheng teaches that the electrolyte comprises an organic solvent, e.g. DMC ([0095]) and a lithium salt, e.g. LiPF6 ([0096]). Sheng is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the electrolyte should comprise a particular lithium salt, and would thus find it obvious to utilize the lithium salt of Sheng, as doing so would amount to nothing more than to use a known material for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely predictable result. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2023/0034212 A1; hereinafter “Wang”), as applied to claim 12 above, in view of Kwon et al. (US 2021/0384491 A1; hereinafter “Kwon”). Regarding claim 19, Wang discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Wang discloses the electrochemical cell (as noted above), but does not disclose a capacity ratio of first electrode (N) to second electrode (P) (N/P ratio) of greater than or equal to about 1 to less than or equal to about 1.2. Kwon teaches a lithium secondary battery (Title). Kwon teaches that the amounts of positive and negative electrode active materials are adjusted such that the N/P ratio is 1.1 ([0096]). Kwon is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the battery of Wang must necessarily have some certain N/P ratio, and would thus find a ratio of 1.1 an appropriate N/P ratio, as suggested by Kwon, and which falls within the recited range. Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2023/0034212 A1; hereinafter “Wang”) in view of Han et al. (US 2021/0367222 A1; hereinafter “Han”) and Yang et al. (US 2022/0002158 A1; hereinafter “Yang”). Regarding claim 20, Wang discloses an electrochemical cell that cycles lithium ions (Title; [0003]), the electrochemical cell comprising: a first electrode (12) comprising a first current collector (1) having a porous (not explicitly disclosed as porous, but necessarily porous in order to facilitate ionic mobility, as indicated by the use of the electrode in a lithium ion battery, [0041]) negative active material layer (2) disposed thereon (as shown in Fig 1) that comprises a cumulative amount of the LSO [negative electroactive material and the carbonaceous negative electroactive material in an amount between 10 to 96% by mass of the active material layer ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 90 weight % to less than or equal to about 98 weight % of a total weight of the electroactive material layer. Wang is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely negative electrodes for lithium ion batteries. However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (10 to 96% significantly overlaps 90 to 98%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Wang further discloses that the negative electroactive materials comprise: a lithiated silicon oxide (LSO) negative electroactive material ([0045]); and graphite (carbon material, e.g. graphite, [0032]). Wang discloses that the LSO material should be included in an amount between 5 to 96% by mass of the active material layer, and the carbon material should be included in an amount between 5 to 90% by mass ([0034]), and therefore does not explicitly disclose greater than or equal to about 10 weight % to less than or equal to about 30 weight % of a total weight of the porous electroactive material layer, nor greater than or equal to about 70 weight % to less that or equal to about 90 weight % of a total weight of the porous electroactive material layer However, before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges (5 to 96% significantly overlaps 10 to 30%, and 5 to 90% significantly overlaps with 70 to 90%) because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Wang further discloses a second electrode (10) comprising a porous (not explicitly disclosed as porous, but necessarily porous in order to facilitate ionic mobility, as indicated by the use of the electrode in a lithium ion battery, [0041]) positive active material layer comprising a positive electroactive material (positive electrode active material, [0035]); a porous separating layer (11) disposed between the first electrode and the second electrode ([0035]), and an electrolyte disposed in pores of the separating layer ([0040-0041]). Wang discloses the positive material (as noted above), but does not explicitly disclose the recited lithium nickel manganese cobalt aluminum oxide. Han teaches Ni rich electrode active materials for lithium ion secondary batteries having excellent electrochemical properties ([0006-0007, 0010]). Han teaches that the active material is represented by the general formula Li1+xTM1-xO2, where x is between -0.05 and 0.2 ([0019]), and in one embodiment, TM is represented by the general formula (NiaCobMnc)1-dM1d, where a is in the range of 0.75 to 0.95 and M1 is e.g. Al ([0091]). Han is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely electrodes for lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize the active material of Han as the positive electrode active material of Wang with the reasonable expectation that such a material provides excellent electrochemical properties, as suggested by Han. It would have been further obvious to the skilled artisan to routinely select the overlapping portions of the disclosed ranges because selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Modified Wang discloses the electrochemical cell (as noted above), but does not disclose an energy density of the battery, and therefore does not explicitly disclose an energy density of greater than or equal to about 290 Wh/kg. Yang teaches lithium secondary batteries (Title). Yang teaches that, among secondary batteries, a lithium ion battery has an energy density of approximately 570 Wh/kg ([0007]). Yang is analogous prior art to the current invention because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely lithium ion batteries. Before the effective filing date of the current invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the battery of modified Wang must necessarily have some certain energy density, and would thus find an energy density of ~570 Wh/kg an appropriate energy density, as suggested by Yang, and which falls within the recited range. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M ERWIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3101. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 6am-3pm PDT. 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 M ERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 03/06/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597619
FUEL CELL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597618
FUEL CELL VEHICLE, METHOD OF CONTROLLING STARTUP THEREOF, AND RECORDING MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM TO EXECUTE THE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592382
ELECTROCHEMICAL CELLS WITH LITHIUM ALLOY ANODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586800
A Hydrogen Generation Electricity System for Producing Electricity from Hydrogen Using a Hydrogen Carrier Substance and a Method for Operating the Hydrogen Generation Electricity System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580285
SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+6.1%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 583 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month