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 § 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) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (US 2013/0040203 A1) in view of Nishimura et al. (US 2015/0125752 A1) . As to claim s 1 and 2 , 11-13 . Yoon et al. discloses An electrochemical device, comprising a negative electrode plate [0055, 0046]; the negative electrode plate comprising a negative current collector (foil) and a negative active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the negative current collector [0055, 0046]; the negative active material layer comprising a composite material; a graphite particle (100) , wherein a surface of the graphite particle is provided with a first region and a second region, the first region is made of graphite (see figure 1 and 100) , the second region comprises a hard carbon layer (200, 300-coating layer) . Yoon et al. discloses in Figure 3 that the coating covers the particle thus overlapping the claimed range (A1=0) (applies to claim 4) . However Yoon et al. does not disclose the thickness of the hard carbon layer as is instantly claimed. Nishimura et al. discloses a core of graphite and a coating layer of hard carbon [0015]. The coating has a thickness of 1-200nm (as applied to claim 1 and 2 , 13 ) and teaches t he thickness of the covering layer influences diffusibility of lithium ions and thus needs to be within an appropriate range , the thickness of the covering layer is 1 nm to 200 nm [0088]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of the art at the time application was filed to include the coating layer of a thickness of 1-200nm because this influences the diffusibility of the lithium ions. As to claim s 3 and 14 . Modified Yoon et al. discloses t he composite material according to claim 1, but is silent to an X-ray diffraction pattern of the composite material comprises a hard carbon characteristic diffraction peak in a range of 18° to 30°, and a half-width of the hard carbon characteristic diffraction peak is 4° to 12°; and the X-ray diffraction pattern of the composite material further comprises a graphite characteristic diffraction peak in a range of 26° to 27°. However, w hen the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02. In this case, the material is made is a similar manner as that of the applicant. Method of making the material includes mixing a precursor pitch material and a graphite to form a mixed system [0055]; heat-treating the mixed system at a first temperature ([0055],150 C), so that the precursor pitch material is melted and coats an outer surface of the graphite to form a composite precursor; heat-treating the composite precursor at a second temperature, so that the composite precursor is oxidatively cross-linked to form a cross-linked precursor [0055] (raised to 600C); and carbonizing the cross-linked precursor to obtain the composite material [0055] (held at 1000C). Therefore it is expected to obtain similar diffraction peaks. As to claim 4 and 15 . Yoon et al. discloses t he composite material according to claim 1, wherein a Raman spectrum of the composite material comprises a characteristic peak D and a characteristic peak E, a peak intensity of the characteristic peak D is denoted as ID, a peak intensity of the characteristic peak E is denoted as IG, and an ID/IG ratio satisfies 0.05 ≤ I D / IG ≤ 1.4. [0029] (0.3 or higher which overlaps the claimed range) 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As to claim 5 and 16 . Yoon et al. discloses t he composite material according to claim 1, wherein a specific surface area BET of the composite material is denoted as S m2/g, 0.5 ≤ S ≤ 8. (surface area between about 5-20m2/g [0007] ) 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As to claim 6 . A method for preparing the composite material of claim 1, Yoon et al. discloses the method comprising: mixing a precursor pitch material and a graphite to form a mixed system [0055] ; heat-treating the mixed system at a first temperature ([0055],150 C) , so that the precursor pitch material is melted and coats an outer surface of the graphite to form a composite precursor; heat-treating the composite precursor at a second temperature, so that the composite precursor is oxidatively cross-linked to form a cross-linked precursor [0055] (raised to 600C) ; and carbonizing the cross-linked precursor to obtain the composite material [0055] (held at 1000C) . As to claim 7. Yoon et al. discloses t he method according to claim 6, a volume median particle size Dv50 of the graphite is 8 μm to 14 μm (particle size of the graphite is 5-20micrometers [0006] . 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As to claim 8 . Yoon et al. discloses t he method according to claim 6, wherein a mass percent of the precursor pitch material relative to the mixed system is denoted as M1 wt. % (4% [0055] ; a mass percent of the graphite relative to the mixed system is denoted as M2 wt. % (96%) ; and 0.01 ≤ M1/M2 ≤ 1 thus falling in the range [0055] . As to claim 9 , Yoon et al. discloses t he method according to claim 6, wherein the precursor pitch material comprises one or more of petroleum asphalt, mesophase pitch, or modified pitch [0021] While not the preferred embodiment, pitch is known to make the covering layer . It is noted that while Yoon does not specifically teach pitch as the precursor , it has been held that the mere fact that a prior art reference suggests a multitude of possible combinations does not in and of itself make any one of those combinations less obvious (MPEP 2123). As to claim 10. The method according to claim 9, wherein the precursor pitch material satisfies one or more of the following conditions (1) to (3): (1) a softening point of the precursor pitch material is 150° C. to 320° C (petroleum pitch has a softening point of 60-350C) as evidence by Kugatov et al. (Express Method of Determining the Softening Point of Petroleum Pitch page 81) As to claim 17 . Modified Yoon et al. discloses t he electrochemical device according to claim 11, and further teaches a compacted density of the negative active material layer ranges from 1.45 g/cm3 to 1.7 g/cm3 ([0102]; 1.5g/cm3). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MARIA J LAIOS whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9808 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday 10am-6pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Barbara Gilliam can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /Maria Laios/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727