DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/24/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 6, 7, and 9-13 are currently pending. Claims 2-5 and 8 are cancelled. The amended claim 1 does overcome the previously stated 103 rejections based on Choi et al. However, the amended claim 1 does not overcome the previously stated 103 rejection based on Yamada et al. Therefore, upon further consideration, claims 1, 6, 7, and 9-13 are rejected under the following 103 rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada et al (US 2002/0076619) in view of Han et al (WO 2017/055282 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 6, 7, and 11-13, Yamada et al discloses a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery comprising: a cathode (positive electrode) capable of absorbing and releasing metal ions; 5an anode (negative electrode) capable of absorbing and releasing metal ions; and
a nonaqueous electrolytic solution comprising:
a nonaqueous solvent;
an electrolyte dissolved in the nonaqueous solvent; and
a silicon compound having an unsaturated bond as represented by formula (I), wherein the silicon compound includes Compound 20 (compound represented by the following Formula (A), wherein, R1 to R3 each independently represent a methyl group and X represents a vinyl group) ([0009],[0016],[0018],[0081]).
However, Yamada et al does not expressly teach a negative electrode active material of the negative electrode comprising a graphite and a metal compound-based material containing Si or Si metal oxide and a content of the metal compound-based material is 0.1 to 50% by mass with respect to a total amount of the negative electrode active material (claim 1); wherein the negative electrode active material is a composite and/or a mixture of a metal compound based material and the graphite (claim 6); wherein a content of the metal compound-based material is 0.1 to 25% by mass with respect to a total amount of the negative electrode active material (claim 7); wherein the positive electrode comprises a transition metal oxide which is capable of absorbing and releasing metal ions and contains not less than 50% by mole of Ni and Co (claim 11); wherein the transition metal oxide is of formula (5): 10Lia1Nib1Coc1Md1O2 (5) wherein a1, b1, c1 and d1 represent numerical values of 0.9≤a1≤ 1.1, 0.3≤b1≤0.9, 0.1≤c1≤0.5 and 0.0≤d1≤0.5, satisfying b1+c1+d1=1; and M represents at least one element selected from the group consisting of Mn, Al, Mg, Zr, Fe, Ti, and Er (claim 12); wherein the transition metal oxide is of formula27018PO1005US) (OP-18382-PC-US) (6): Lia2Nib2Coc2Md2O2 (6) wherein, a2, b2, c2 and d2 represent numerical values of 0.9≤a2≤1.1, 0.5≤b2≤0.9, 0.1≤c2≤0.2 and 0.0≤d2≤0.3, satisfying b2+c25+d2=1; and M represents at least one element selected from the group consisting of Mn, Al, Mg, Zr, Fe, Ti, and Er (claim 13).
Han et al discloses an anode active material (negative electrode active material) that is a silicon containing compound such as silicon/graphite composite and a cathode active material (positive electrode active material) such as LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 (composition formula (5), wherein a1=1, b1=0.8, c1=0.1, d1=0.1, 0.9<b1+c1, b1+c1+d1=1, and M=Mn / composition formula (6), wherein a2=1, b2=0.8, c2=0.1, d2=0.1, c2<b2, 0.9<b2+c2, b2+c2+d2=1, and M=Mn / transition metal oxide which is capable of absorbing and releasing metal ions and contains not less than 50% by mole of Ni and Co) (pg. 13, lines 21-24 and pg. 14, lines 34-41).
Therefore, the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made because the disclosure of Han et al indicates that silicon/graphite composite is a suitable material for use as a negative electrode active material and LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2 is a suitable material for use as positive electrode active material. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use has generally been held to be prima facie obvious (MPEP §2144.07). As such, it would be obvious to use silicon/graphite composite and LiNi0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2. In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Yamada/Han anode active material to include a content of the silicon that is 0.1 to 50% by mass or 0.1 to 25% by mass with respect to a total amount of the negative electrode active material because it has been held that the discovery of an optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). The content of the silicon in the negative electrode active material is a result effective variable of improving the capacity of the battery, while minimizing the volume expansion of the anode active material during charging and discharging ([0004],[0005]). Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454. 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)). There is no evidence of criticality of the claimed content of the silicon.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Han et al also discloses an electrolyte composite (nonaqueous electrolyte solution) comprising difluorophosphate, and a conducting salt such as LiN(SO2F)2 (salt having a bis-fluorosulfonylimide structure), wherein the concentration of the conducting salt is 0.5 to 2 mol/l based on the entire electrolyte composition (pg. 2, lines 6-7 and pg. 6, lines 14-21). In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the Yamada/Han nonaqueous electrolytic solution to include a content of at least one compound selected from difluorophosphate and LiN(SO2F)2 that is from 0.001% by mass to 10% by mass with respect to a total amount of the nonaqueous electrolytic solution because it has been held that the discovery of an optimum value of a result effective variable in a known process is ordinarily within the skill of the art. In re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). The amount of difluorophosphate or LiN(SO2F)2 is a result effective variable of decreasing the amount of gassing of the electrolyte solution while showing good capacity retention (pg. 2, lines 22-23). Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454. 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)). There is no evidence of criticality of the claimed content of the difluorophosphate or salt having a bis-fluorosulfonylimide structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that “the compound of Formula (A) as now recited in Claim 1 is not disclosed by any of Yamada, Han, Choi, or Rao”.
In response, the Office first point out that the present amendment of claim 1 only requires an “optionally substituted methyl group”. As previously stated in the 103 rejection, Yamada discloses a Compound No. 20 that reads on the compound of Formula (A), where R1 to R3 is a methyl group and X is a vinyl group. Therefore, the Office maintains the contention that Yamada still reads on the present amendment of claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY S CHUO whose telephone number is (571)272-0717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:30pm.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached on 571-270-1292. 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.
/T.S.C/Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 7/14/2026
Prosecution Insights