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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2-27-2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10-13-2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The rejection of claim(s) 46 and 58-61 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 2012/0028120) because Huang et al. teaches specifically in claim 11, wherein the composite cathode material comprises LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2. [Thus teaching claim 46 (a) where the positive active material comprises the second active material comprising LiNib=1/3Coc=1/3Mn[(1-b-c)=1/3]O2 where b+c=2/3=0.6666]. Huang et al. teaches in claims 12-13, a lithium battery comprising an anode, an electrolyte and a cathode comprising a current collector and a cathode material layer comprising cathode composite material. In addition, Huang et al. teaches in Example 9, the cathode material comprises LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2. Therefore, the rejection remains.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 46, 48-54, 56 and 58-61 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 46 is rejected because it is unclear in b) and c) which layer is positioned on the current collector and which layer is positioned on the layer positioned on the current collector.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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(s) 46 and 58-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (US 2012/0028120). Huang et al. teaches specifically in claim 11, that the cathode material comprises LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2 [Thus teaching claim 46 (a) where the positive active material comprises the second active material comprising LiNib=1/3Coc=1/3Mn[(1-b-c)=1/3]O2 where b+c=2/3=0.6666]. Huang et al. teaches in claims 12-13, a lithium battery comprising an anode, an electrolyte and a cathode comprising a current collector and a cathode material layer comprising cathode composite material. In addition, Huang et al. teaches in Example 9, the cathode material comprises LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2. 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.
Claim(s) 56 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2012/0028120). Huang et al. teaches in claim 9, wherein the cathode composite material can comprise LixNicCodMneO2 where 0 < c < 1; 0 < d < 1; 0 < e < 1 and c+d+e=1 and specifically claim 11, that the cathode material comprises LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2. Huang et al. teaches in claims 12-13, a lithium battery comprising an anode, an electrolyte and a cathode comprising a current collector and a cathode material layer comprising cathode composite material. In addition, Huang et al. teaches in Example 9, the cathode material comprises LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2. Huang et al. teaches in Examples 1-4, that the cathode material comprises LiCoO2. Huang et al. teaches in Example 8, that the cathode material can be LiNib=0.8Coc=0.15Al[(1-b-c)=0.05]O2. Huang et al. teaches the claimed invention as explained above but does not teach in the examples that the cathode material comprises LiNib=0.8Coc=0.1Al[(1-b-c)=0.1]O2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use LiNib=0.8Coc=0.1Al[(1-b-c)=0.1]O2, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to set variable c to be equal 0.1, since it has been held that when the claimed range and the prior art range are very similarly the range of the prior art establishes prima facie obviousness because one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the similar ranges to have the same properties. See in re Peterson, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382, citing titanium Metals Corp. V. Banner, 227 USPQ 773, 779. Huang et al. teaches the claimed invention as explained above but does not teach in the examples that the cathode material comprises LiNib=0.8Coc=0.1Mn[(1-b-c)=0.1]O2. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Mn instead of Al in the cathode material because Huang et al. teaches that both these elements can be used in the cathode active material as explained above and one would expect therefore that these materials would function in a similar way and give similar results. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use LiNib=0.8Coc=0.1Mn[(1-b-c)=0.1]O2 because Huang et al. teaches that the cathode composite material can comprise LixNicCodMneO2 where 0 < c < 1; 0 < d < 1; 0 < e < 1 and c+d+e=1 and since it has been held that where general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use LiNib=0.8Coc=0.1Mn[(1-b-c)=0.1]O2, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use LiNib=0.8Coc=0.1Mn[(1-b-c)=0.1]O2, since it has been held that where there are overlapping ranges it would be prima facia obvious. In re Malagari, 182 USPQ 549.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 48-54 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Nakamura et al. (JP 2002-198050, machine translation) teaches a positive electrode comprising an active material comprising Li1-xA0<x<0.1Fe1-y-zM0<y<0.5Mez=0.3P1-mX0< m <0.3O4-nZ0<n<0.5 where A can be Na or K; M can be Mn; X at least one of S, Si, Ni, etc. and Z is at least one of F, Cl, Br, S, etc. and x+z+m+n >0. Nakamura et al. teaches in Example 13, the active material comprises Li0.95Na0.05Fe0.8Co0.2PO4 and teaches in Example 14, the active material comprises Li0.95K0.05Fe0.8Co0.2PO4 [Thus teaching LiaAx is known]. Nakamura et al. teaches in Example 9, the active material comprises LiFe0.8Co0.2P0.9Si01O4 and teaches in Example 10, the active material comprises LiFe0.8Co0.2P0.9N01O4 [Thus teaching P1-mXm is known]. Nakamura et al. teaches in Examples 3-5 and 7, the active material comprises LiFe0.8Co0.2PO3.9Z0.1 where Z can be F, Cl, Br and S [Thus teaching O4-nDn is known]. Nakamura et al. teaches that the positive electrode comprises the active material above; graphite as a conductive and a binder. Nakamura et al. teaches that the positive material was applied to a current collector. Ohira et al. (US 9,005,810) teaches a cathode active material having a composition represented by formula (1): LiMn1-xMxP1-ySiyO4where M = Zr, Sn, Y or Al where 0 < x < 0.5 and 0 < y < 0.5. Ohira et al. teaches specifically cathode active material in Table 1, comprising: Li(Mn0.9Sn0.1)(P0.8Si0,2)O4, Li(Mn0.95Zr0.05)(P0.9Si0,1)O4, or Li(Mn0.95Sn0.05)(P0.9Si0,1)O4. Wu (JP 6157563 B2, machine translation) teaches a lithium ion battery positive electrode material comprising the formula LiMnxFe1-xP1-aSibMcO4-dFd where M can be B, Cl or S). Wu (US 2016/0190584) teaches in claim 1, a Li-ion battery positive electrode material comprising LiMnxFe1-xP1-aSibMcO4-dFd where M is B or S and teaches in claim 3 that the positive active material contains a carbon coating layer. Natsui et al. (US 2023/0402594) teaches in Example 1, a lithium transition metal composite oxide comprising Li1.67Sb0.001Mn0.55Ni0.275P0.065O1.92F0.08. Ma et al. (US 2023/0335723) claims in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising Li1+xMn1-yAyP1-zRzO4 which is the exact same material of the instant positive electrode material. Ma et al. (US 2023/0343938) claims in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising LiaAxMn1-yByP1-zCzO4-nDn which is the exact same material of the instant positive electrode material. Jiang et al. (US 2023/0361296) claims in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising LiaAxMn1-yByP1-zCzO4-nDn which is the exact same material of the instant positive electrode material. Ohira et al. (US 2013/0209886) teaches a cathode comprising a cathode material comprising LiMn1-xMxP1-ySiyO4.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laura Weiner whose telephone number is (571)272-1294. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/LAURA S. WEINER/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/Laura Weiner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights