Prosecution Insights
Last updated: September 26, 2026
Application No. 18/384,736

POSITIVE ELECTRODE ADDITIVE FOR A LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY, A METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME, AND A POSITIVE ELECTRODE FOR A LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 27, 2023
Priority
Dec 08, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0170886
Examiner
CARVALHO JR., ARMINDO
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Kyung Hee University Industry Cooperation Group
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
9m
Est. Remaining
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allowance Rate
99 granted / 198 resolved
-10.0% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
247
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
67.4%
+27.4% vs TC avg
§102
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 198 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-3 and 12-15) in the reply filed on September 1, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 4-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on September 1, 2026. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claims 1-2 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jiao et al. (CN110729451A). The English machine translation of Jiao et al. is attached and is referenced below. Regarding Claim 1, Jiao et al. teaches a positive electrode sheet comprising a lithium replenishment material (Para. [0006]) (i.e. a positive electrode additive used to prepare a positive electrode) for a lithium-ion battery (Para. [0028]), the lithium replenishment material comprises a core comprising lithium-ion compound and a coating layer on the surface of the core (i.e. a coating layer formed on a surface of the additive core) (Para. [0006]) wherein the lithium-ion compound is one or more of Li2NiO2 and Li2CuO2 (Para. [0010]) (i.e. a lithium (Li)-based additive core) and the coating layer comprises metal carbides (Para. [0006]) such as NbC (i.e. a coating layer of NbOxCy wherein x = 0 and y = 1). Regarding Claim 2, Jiao et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Jiao et al. further teaches the core comprising lithium-ion compound (Para. [0006]), wherein the lithium-ion compound is one or more of Li2NiO2 and Li2CuO2 (Para. [0010]) (i.e. the additive core is formed of Li2MO2 wherein M = Ni, Cu). Regarding Claim 12, Jiao et al. teaches a positive electrode sheet (i.e. a positive electrode) for a lithium-ion battery (Para. [0028]), comprising a lithium replenishment material (Para. [0006])(i.e. including a positive electrode additive) the lithium replenishment material comprises a core comprising lithium-ion compound and a coating layer on the surface of the core (i.e. a coating layer formed on a surface of the additive core) (Para. [0006]) wherein the lithium-ion compound is one or more of Li2NiO2 and Li2CuO2 (Para. [0010]) (i.e. a lithium (Li)-based additive core) and the coating layer comprises metal carbides (Para. [0006]) such as NbC (i.e. a coating layer of NbOxCy wherein x = 0 and y = 1). Regarding Claim 13, Jiao et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 12 as explained above. Jiao et al. further teaches at least one conductive agent and at least one binder (Para. [0069]) (i.e. further comprising a conductive material and a binder). Regarding Claim 14, Jiao et al. teaches all of the elements of the positive electrode in claim 12 as explained above. Jiao et al. further teaches a lithium-ion battery (i.e. a lithium secondary battery) comprising the positive electrode (Para. [0028]). Regarding Claim 15, Jiao et al. teaches all of the elements of the lithium secondary battery in claim 14 as explained above. Jiao et al. further teaches the lithium-ion battery (i.e. lithium secondary battery) includes a negative electrode (Para. [0083]) including negative electrode active material (Para. [0090]) and a non-aqueous electrolyte (i.e. electrolyte) (Para. [0083]). 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiao et al. (CN110729451A). The English machine translation of Jiao et al. is attached and is referenced below. Regarding Claim 3, Jiao et al. teaches all of the elements of the current invention in claim 1 as explained above. Jiao et al. further teaches the mass ratio of the lithium-ion compound (i.e. the additive core), the carbon in the coating layer, the metal carbide in the coating layer is 80-95:1-10:2-10 (i.e. the coating layer ranges from about 3 wt% based on 100 wt% of the additive core to about 25 wt% based on 100 wt% of the additive core, overlapping with 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, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).” See MPEP §2144.05(I). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARMINDO CARVALHO JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-5292. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a.m.-5p.m.. 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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571 272-1481. 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. /ARMINDO CARVALHO JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 27, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12738557
Battery Pack and Device Including the Same
5y 0m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12738514
METHOD FOR OPERATING A FUEL CELL SYSTEM, AND FUEL CELL SYSTEM
3y 7m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12731779
NEGATIVE ELECTRODE AND NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY INCLUDING THE SAME
4y 2m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12731788
POSITIVE ELECTRODE COMPOSITE MATERIAL FOR LITHIUM-ION SECONDARY BATTERY AND LITHIUM-ION SECONDARY BATTERY
3y 8m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12712239
DIMENSIONALLY-STABLE MICROPOROUS WEBS
5y 11m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
50%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+28.7%)
3y 8m (~9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 198 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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