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 .
The Applicant has amended dependent claim 2; and added new claims 10-18. The pending claims are claims 1-18.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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)(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) 1, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tan et al., US 20140170476.
Regarding claim 1, Tan et al., teaches a process of producing a pre-lithiated electrode (0012; 0057 ) comprising:
contacting an electrode active material to an electrolyte (0057), the electrolyte (0012; 0080) further contacting a counter electrode lithium source (0101); and applying an electric potential (0057; 0104) or current (0062; 0104) to the electrode active material (0011-0012; 0057) and the counter electrode lithium source (0057; 0071) to increase a lithium content of the electrode active material (0057) thereby pre-lithiating the electrode active material with lithium to form a pre-lithiated cathode active material (0057-0058).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Tan et al., teaches the counter electrode lithium source is selected from the group consisting of Li2MnO3 (0074; 0191), or Li metal (0104; 0108).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Tan et al., teaches further comprising rinsing the pre-lithiated electrode active material (0120-0121).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Tan et al., teaches comprising drying the pre-lithiated electrode active material (0123; claim 25).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Tan et al., teaches the pre-lithiated electrode (0012; 0057-0058) is characterized by a first charge capacity (0101) greater than a control otherwise identical non-prelithiated electrode (0074; 0191).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Tan et al., teaches wherein the electrode active material comprises a chemical formula: Li1+aMxOy where 0<a<1,0<x, 2<y<6, and M is one or more elements selected from the group consisting of one or more transition metals, Al (0099; 0119; 0195), and combinations thereof (0208; 0216).
Regarding claim 10, Tan et al., teaches wherein the step of contacting is performed with a lithium containing cathode active material (0074; 0191).
Thus, the claims are anticipated.
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) 2, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al., US 20140170476, in view of Olsen et al., US 5595837.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Tan et al., does not teach step of contacting is performed by a reel-to-reel process comprising drawing a web of cathode active material coated onto a conducting substrate through an electrolyte bath at a pre-lithiation speed.
Olsen et al., US 5595837, teaches step of contacting is performed by a reel-to-reel process comprising drawing a web of cathode active material (col. 6, lines 54-67 and col. 7, lines 1-2) coated onto a conducting substrate (col. 6, lines 54-67 and col. 7, lines 1-2) through an electrolyte bath (col. 6, lines 54-67 and col. 7, lines 1-2) at a pre-lithiation speed (col. 7, lines 3-14).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Olsen et al., into the teachings of Tan et al.,
because Olsen et al., teaches that “The power supply will either be maintained at a constant potential between the web (i.e., carbon anode) and the counter electrode (e.g., lithium) by adjusting the current (potentiostatic mode), or it will be maintained at a constant current that is sufficient to fully discharge the carbon anode during the residence time in the reactor (galvanostatic mode).” (col. 7, lines 14-20).
Claim(s) 4, 8, 13, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al., US 20140170476, in view of Kren et al., US 20130260254.
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Tan et al., does not teach a current density of the step of applying is 0.2-20 mA/cm2, optionally 10 mA/cm2.
Kren et al., teaches a current density of the step of applying is 0.240 mA (0074; 0080).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Kren et al., into the teachings of Tan et al., because Kren et al., teaches “capacity of the at least one negative electrode for taking up lithium is higher than that of the at least one positive electrode, the at least one negative electrode has a higher capacity than required for taking up
the entire mobile lithium contained in the cell, and the mobile lithium is
contained in the cell in an amount which exceeds the capacity of the at least
one positive electrode for taking up lithium.” (0012).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Tan et al., does not teach wherein the first charge capacity is 10 mAh/g or greater relative to the control.
Kren et al., teaches the first charge capacity is 10 mAh/g or greater relative to the control (1070 mAh/g) (0074; 0080).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to insert the teachings of Kren et al., into the teachings of Tan et al., because Kren et al., teaches a capacity within the claimed range would provide “capacity of the at least one negative electrode for taking up lithium is higher than that of the at least one positive electrode, the at least one negative electrode has a higher capacity than required for taking up the entire mobile lithium contained in the cell, and the mobile lithium is contained in the cell in an amount which exceeds the capacity of the at least one positive electrode for taking up lithium.” (abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “The Office alleges that Tan teaches arrives at the "pre-lithiated cathode active material" of claim 1, yet Tan's contemplated pre-lithiated electrode materials are fundamentally different from those in claim 1 and the present specification. That is, while claim 1 is directed to pre-lithiating cathode active materials, Tan only addresses anode materials. Applicant respectfully asserts that distinguishing between the two is foundational to the rejection.”
However, Tan et al., teaches pre-lithiating as seen in paragraphs [0057-0058] . Although Tan teaches pre-lithiating the cathode, the pre-lithiation process can be used in the cathode and the anode, as Tan et al., teaches that:
[0070] To perform well at the high charge/discharge rates, a mass ratio of electrode active materials at negative electrode 202 to positive electrode 206 should be based on the high rate performance of the two electrodes. It is preferred that both electrodes perform similarly at high rates.
Additionally, ”the term "lithiated" refers to a state in which an electrode active material is inserted with lithium. The term "pre-lithiated material" refers to a material that is treated with a lithiation process before it is operated as an electrode active material in an energy storage device,” (0058).
Thus, the process can be used in claim 1, in both the cathode and the anode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1288. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-4pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 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.
ANGELA J. MARTIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/ANGELA J MARTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights