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 .
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2023-020478, filed on February 14 2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim one is phrased thusly: “the positive electrode includes a positive electrode active material layer, the positive electrode active material layer includes a positive electrode active material having a layered structure”. Here the term layered structure can mean both that the crystal structure of the material is ‘layered’ (lower dimensional crystal structure, i.e. 2D or 1D) or could be referring to the engineering of the active material being in layers. Both of these interpretations read on the claimed invention and thusly form the rejection. Claims 2-4, which are dependent on claim 1, are also rejected.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneda US20220238874A1.
Regarding claims 1 and 4; Kaneda teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery, comprising a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and ‘includes the same components as a common lithium-ion battery’ (paragraph 208) such as a separator (paragraph 219). The positive electrode having an active material (paragraph 209 & 210) that uses materials with a layered crystal structure (examples of Li2NiO3, LiNi1/3Co1/3Mn1/3O2 as common secondary battery materials given in paragraph 5, example materials being those of layered crystal structure; example target compound(s) which are lithium complex oxides; as well as the claimed material of the patent (paragraphs 196-97) LixNiaMnbZrcMdO2+β whose structure(s) is described in paragraph 60, 90, 240 as “hexagonal layered structure”(s);) whose particle size is at least 8 μm (paragraph 96,97), has DBP values ranging from 0.13-0.21 mL/g (paragraph 117) and BET values ranging from 0.1-0.5 m2/g (paragraph 104). Since the claimed range, ‘values to which DBP/BET is greater than or equal to 0.3 or more’, "overlap[s] or lie[s] 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).
Regarding claim 3; Kaneda teaches of using primary particles (paragraph 49, using Li2ZrO3 as a primary particle; paragraph 95, having the positive active material include secondary particles in which the primary particles are agglomerated) and that “The mixing ratio of each material in the positive-electrode composite material is a factor that determines the performance of the lithium-ion secondary battery. The mixing ratio can be adjusted depending on the application. The mixing ratio of the materials may be the same as that of convention lithium-ion secondary batteries. For example, when the total mass of the solid content of the positive-electrode composite material, excluding the solvent, is 100% by mass, the positive-electrode composite material may include the positive electrode active material in a ratio of 60% by mass or more and 95% by mass or less, the conductive material in a ratio of 1% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less, and the binding agent in a ratio of 1% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less.” (paragraph 211) This range provided includes the applicants claim for a ‘minimum of 50% composition of the active material’.
Regarding claim 4; As clarified before, the prior art of Kaneda teaches that the common parameters of secondary batteries is to have DBP and BET values that can easily identified as having a ratio such that when the DBP value is divided by the BET value one would get the claimed value of 0.5 or greater.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaneda US20220238874A1 and further in view of Kawakita WIPO patent no. 2023032482 A1 (For citations, please refer to the English Equivalent version, US 2024/0429370.
Kaneda teaches all the claimed limitations of claim 2 but does not specifically teach that the positive active material layer has a thickness of 80 µm or more.
Kawakita teaches in paragraph 35 of a secondary battery to which “The basis weight of the positive electrode mixture layer [32] may be 400 g/m2 or less. The thickness of the positive electrode mixture layer [32] is, for example, 10 μm to 150 μm on one side of the positive electrode current collector [30].” Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the thickness of the positive active material layer of Kandeda to be 10 μm to 150 μm as taught by Kawakita, because such thickness its known to be suitable for the positive electrode layer in non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKIL JALIL MONDIE whose telephone number is (571)270-7804. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. 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.
/AKIL J MONDIE/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights