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 Invention I in the reply filed on 7/21/26 is acknowledged.
Claim 7 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 7/21/26.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Table 1, in the composition formula column, for Examples 1 and 2, cobalt is written as CO, not Co, which creates confusion on if it should mean carbonate or cobalt. The procedure for Example 1 reads “Co” [0081] so the examiner is assuming this is the intended meaning.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US-20210119207-A1 (S) in view of US-20200044249-A1 (N).
Regarding claim 1, S teaches a positive electrode active material [0048], comprising a lithium complex oxide [0053] having an O2 structure [0048], wherein, when a total content of metals other than Li and Na is 1 ([0053] “l+m+n=1”), a content of Li is from 0.90 to 1.04 ([0053] “0<b+c≤1”).
S further teaches an O3 structure which is a crystal structure R-3m. S further teaches the O2 structure is P63mc.
S is silent to the ratio of a minimum value Imin~ to a maximum value Imax of luminances at focal maximums of three consecutive peaks in one-dimensional luminance spectra calculated in a total of 75 cases.
S does not teach motivation to influence these properties.
N teaches that in a positive electrode active material containing an R-3m crystal structure, the Li occupancy in the “transition metal layer” must be controlled in order to balance thermodynamic stability with availability of three-dimensional diffusion paths of Li in order to achieve sufficient capacity [0018-19]. N teaches that excessively high and excessively low Li occupancy in the “transition metal layer” result in reduced capacity [0018-19].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the instant invention to optimize the Li occupancy in the transition metal layer of the O3 structure (R-3m) of S because N teaches that this value must be optimized to improve the capacity of the resulting positive active material.
The instant teaches that the ratio of Imin to Imax is determined by Li occupancy in the transition metal layer, with high Li occupancy resulting in a low ratio ([0018] “The ratio of the minimum value Imia to the maximum value Imax of luminances at local maximums of three consecutive peaks is smaller in a case in which there is a site including a high amount of Li among the sites corresponding to the three peaks, and the ratio is larger in a case in which there is not.”).
Therefore, in the result of the optimization of the Li occupancy in the transition metal layer of the O3 structure of S, the ratio of Imin to Imax of luminances at focal maximums of three consecutive peaks in one-dimensional luminance spectra calculated in a total of 75 cases would necessarily produce a rate of less than 2 cases in 75 where the minimum value of the ratio is 0.3 or less. This would happen because N teaches that excessive Li occupancy produces a reduced capacity and the instant teaches that the result of low Li occupancy is a higher ratio of Imin to Imax. The raising of this ratio in the material of S would then produce less cases where the Imin to Imax is less than 0.3, so the end result would then fall within the claimed range of the instant claim 1.
The instant further teaches that the O6 structure is R-3m and that the O2 structure is P63mc [0015]. This means that the O2 of S corresponds to the O2 of the instant and that the O3 structure of S corresponds to the O6 structure of the instant.
Therefore, the positive electrode active material of S, optimized as motivated by N, teaches the requirements of the instant claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, S teaches the positive active material has a formula:
PNG
media_image1.png
166
703
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This means that the range of subscripts of Li and Na overlap with the claimed ranges of the instant claim 2. This means that the range of subscripts for Mn, Ni, Co overlap with the ranges of the instant because they add up to 1. This means that the range of subscripts for M2, which may be Al or Mo, which are two of the metals listed by the instant as options for M, is completely encompassed by the claimed range of the instant. This means that S teaches a positive active material with a formula that meets the requirements of the instant claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, S teaches that in Fig. 3, the peak labeled “O2” is between 17 to 19 degrees and the peak labeled “O3” is between 16.5 to 18.5 degrees [0051]. Taking the peak labeled O3 to be equivalent to the claimed peak ILo and the peak labeled O2 to be IHi, the ratio of ILo to IHi is clearly less than 5 as seen in the graph (Fig. 3). It is proper to draw equivalency between these peaks taught by S and the peaks of the instant claim 3 because the ranges of 2theta angles overlap.
Therefore, the positive active material of S meets the requirements of the instant claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, S teaches a positive active material comprising the positive active material [0048].
Regarding claim 5, S teaches a positive active material layer (10, see Fig. 2) comprising the positive active material.
Regarding claim 6, S teaches a solid electrolyte [0071]. S further teaches solid anodes and cathodes [0084], [0063]. This means S teaches an all solid state battery comprising the positive active material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUISE JAMES IANNUCCI whose telephone number is (571)272-6917. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303) 297-4684. 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.
/LOUISE JAMES IANNUCCI/Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights