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 .
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.
Specification
The specification and drawings have been reviewed and no clear informalities or objections have been noted.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 13, 14, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gong (“In Situ Atomic-Scale Observation of Electrochemical Delithiation Induced Structure Evolution of LiCoO2 Cathode in a Working All-Solid-State Battery”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 4274−4277).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 18, Gong discloses an electronic device (such as electric vehicles, see page 4274 left hand column), comprising an electrochemical device (such as a lithium ion battery, see page 4274 left hand column), wherein the electrochemical device comprises a positive electrode plate (cathode, see page 4274 left hand column near the top) , wherein the positive electrode plate comprises a positive material layer, the positive material layer comprises a positive active material (material is LiCoO2, and the positive active material comprises
a lithium transition metal composite oxide, comprising a twin crystal structure (see Fig. 2 which illustrates a twinned crystal structure);
the twin crystal structure comprises a first crystalline region and a second crystalline region, a grain boundary exists between the first crystalline region and the second crystalline region (see Fig. 2B which illustrates a boundary between two regions of crystalline material) the first crystalline region comprises a first region located within 20 nm from the grain boundary, and the second crystalline region comprises a second region located within 20 nm from the grain boundary (Fig. 2B illustrates a regions of the crystal that are present within 20nm of the boundary), and an angle between a first transition metal layer in the first region and a second transition metal layer in the second region is 65° to 80° (Fig. 2B illustrates an angle of 112 degrees between the first and second layers which also produces an angle of 68 degrees as a supplementary angle).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 19, Gong further discloses the transition metal in the first region is cobalt (see description of Fig. 2 which indicates the presence of cobalt in the layers).
Regarding claim 5, without defining the cross-section plane location or the size of the cross section in the claim, Gong does indeed teach a range of area that can indeed present the claimed area percent. As Applicant is claiming any location and any size of the cross-section plate, Gong does indeed teach a configuration for which a cross-section plane can be sized such that it contains 50% of the second region (see Fig. 2A which illustrates the second region (green region for example) where a plane can be constructure such that it contains 50% second region relative to the whole area of the plane).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Gong teaches LiCoO2 twin boundary structures and shows that upon delithiation/high-voltage charging, the twin-boundary angle changes from 109.5 to 112 degrees (see page 4275 which discloses the change from pristine LiCoO2 to delithiated LiCoO2 resulting in a 2.5-degree difference, or if taken with the supplementary angles, the angle changes from 70.5 to 68) which is within the claimed |β-α|≤5° and wherein β is 70.5).
Claim(s) 1, 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by YanLing (“Characteristics of twins in Li(Ni0.67Co0.33)O2 as a cathode material for lithium-ion batteries”, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 791 (2019) 1167-1175).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 18, YanLing discloses an electrochemical device (lithium ion battery, see abstract), comprising a positive electrode plate (cathode), wherein the positive electrode plate comprises a positive material layer, the positive material layer comprises a positive active material (see section 2.3 which discloses depositing a layer of cathode material on an aluminum collector), and the positive active material comprises a lithium transition metal composite oxide (LiMnxCoyO2, see section 2.3), wherein the lithium transition metal composite oxide comprises a twin crystal structure (see section 4.2 which discloses the twinned crystal structure); the twin crystal structure comprises a first crystalline region and a second crystalline region, a grain boundary exists between the first crystalline region and the second crystalline region, the first crystalline region comprises a first region located within 20 nm from the grain boundary (see Fig 5A which illustrates multiple regions within a few nanometers from the grain boundary), and the second crystalline region comprises a second region located within 20 nm from the grain boundary (see Fig 5A which illustrates multiple regions within a few nanometers from the grain boundary), and an angle between a first transition metal layer in the first region and a second transition metal layer in the second region is 65° to 80° (see section 4.2 which discloses that the angle between the twin subgrains in 70.8 degrees).
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) 6, 7, 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gong (“In Situ Atomic-Scale Observation of Electrochemical Delithiation Induced Structure Evolution of LiCoO2 Cathode in a Working All-Solid-State Battery”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 4274−4277) in view of Mane (US 2019/0109320).
Regarding claims 6, 7, 12 and 20, Gong is silent regarding a layer in the claimed thickness comprising a metal fluoride on a substrate of the lithium transition metal composite oxide.
Mane also discloses a lithium-ion battery (see abstract).
Mane teaches a cathode material comprising a lithium composite oxide similar to that of Gong (see abstract which discloses a lithium cobalt oxide, similar to that of Gong). Mane goes on to teach a coating on the composite oxide that comprises a metal fluoride layer (see abstract) at a thickness of 1nm (paragraph 27). Mane goes on to teach that such a material and thickness is beneficial in that it facilitates diffusion of lithium and protects the underlying electrode (paragraph 27).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add the metal fluoride layer of Mane to the lithium composite oxide of Gong in order to facilitate diffusion of lithium and protects the underlying electrode.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YanLing (“Characteristics of twins in Li(Ni0.67Co0.33)O2 as a cathode material for lithium-ion batteries”, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 791 (2019) 1167-1175) in view of Cho (US 2015/0072247).
Regarding claims 16-17, YanLing teaches a liquid electrolyte with the disclosed lithium-ion battery, but is silent regarding the claimed fluorocarbonate compound in the claimed amount.
Cho also discloses a lithium-ion battery (see abstract).
Cho teaches a lithium-ion battery that comprises a non-aqueous electrolyte (see abstract). Cho teaches that the liquid electrolyte preferably contains a fluorocarbonate compound (see paragraph 37 which discloses many of the claimed fluorocarbonate compounds) in an amount of between 1-30 vol.% (paragraph 41). Cho teaches including such a fluorocarbonate compound as it improves the solubility of the lithium salt and improves the ion conductivity (paragraph 41).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add the fluorocarbonate compound of Cho to the electrolyte of YanLing in order to improve the solubility of the lithium salt and improve the ion conductivity. Furthermore, while modified YanLing does not explicitly disclose the claimed range of fluorocarbonate concentration, it does teach a range the overlaps the claimed range. As such, arriving at the claimed range would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (see MPEP §2144.05(I)).
Relevant Prior Art
JP 2004002141 A – Discloses a cathode material with a lithium composite oxide exhibiting a twin plane (see Fig. 4) resulting in a twinned crystal structure and teaches an angle between the twins of 70 degrees, similar to the claimed invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 10-11 and 15, 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art, Gong, teaches a cathode material for a lithium-ion battery that comprises a twinned crystal structure and a grain boundary that produces an angle between the two regions within the claimed range. However, the prior art neither teaches nor suggests the claimed molar ratio of element A in the third region relative to the fourth region. There is nothing in the prior art that teaches or suggests such a feature and therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated to modify Gong to arrive at such a ratio. Furthermore, there is nothing in Gong or the prior art that teaches the claimed percentage of twinned structure particles relative to the total particles of the positive electrode material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J MERKLING whose telephone number is (571)272-9813. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8am-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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/MATTHEW J MERKLING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights