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 claims 1, 2, 9, 11, 16. The pending claims are claims 1-16.
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, 7-11, 13, 14, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yun et al., US 2021/0234165.
Regarding claim 1, Yun et al., teaches a ternary positive electrode material precursor (abstract), comprising: a core layer (abstract; 0008-0009); an intermediate layer (abstract; 0008-0009) covering the core layer (0008-0009); and a shell layer (abstract) covering the intermediate layer (0008-0009), wherein porosities of the core layer (0008; 0029), the intermediate layer (0037), and the shell layer increase sequentially (0036), and wherein a porosity of the shell layer ranges from 15% to 20% (0032).
Regarding claim 7, Yun et al., teaches wherein the ternary positive electrode material precursor has a chemical general formula of NixCoyMnzMe(1-x-y-z)(OH)2, where 0.6 ≤ x ≤ 1, 0 < y ≤ 1, 0 < z ≤ 1, and x+y+z ≤ 1 (0039-0040); and Me represents a doped element, and the doped element comprises one or more of Al, Ti, V, W, Zr, Mg, Ce, Nb, and La (0040).
Regarding claim 8, Yun et al., teaches wherein a content of the doped element in mass percent ranges from 0.01% to 10% (0.01 to 10 wt%) (0093).
Regarding claim 9, Yun et al., teaches comprising: pre-mixing a nickel source (0068-0069), a cobalt source (0065-0066), and a manganese source (0065-0066) to obtain a ternary metal salt solution; mixing water, a precipitating agent (0054; 0128), and a complexing agent (0009-0010; 0044-0045) to obtain a reaction base solution; introducing the ternary metal salt solution (0122; 0153), the complexing agent (0009-0010; 0044-0045), and the precipitating agent (0053; pH regulator; 0053-0054) into the reaction base solution (0128); and obtaining the ternary positive electrode material precursor (0027-0031; 0040; 0069) through a reaction of solution coprecipitation method (0054).
Regarding claim 10, Yun et al., teaches wherein the nickel source comprises nickel sulfate (0066), the cobalt source comprises cobalt sulfate (0066), the manganese source comprises manganese sulfate (0066), the precipitating agent comprises one or more of sodium hydroxide (0053), sodium carbonate (0053), and the complexing agent (0009) comprises one or more of aqueous ammonia (0044; 0049; 0054), sodium citrate (citric acid; 0054), and oxalic acid (oxalate) (0053).
Regarding claim 11, Yun et al., teaches wherein a concentration of the ternary metal salt solution (0122) ranges from 100 g/L to 130 g/L (0049), and wherein a pH of the substrate liquid is 11-12 (pH 10-12) (0048) and a protective gas is introduced into a reaction system (inert gas) (0071).
Regarding claim 13, Yun et al., teaches wherein the raw materials further comprise a doped element solution, wherein a doped element in the doped element solution comprises one or more of Al (0083), Ti (0083), V (0083), Zr (0083), Mg (0083), Ce (0083), the doped element is W (tungsten; 0078-0079).
Regarding claim 14, Yun et al., teaches further comprising postprocessing (0137; 0144), which comprises alkali wash (0044), water wash (0144), and drying (0137).
Regarding claim 16, Yun et al., teaches a positive electrode material (0018) comprising the ternary positive electrode material precursor according to claim 1 as a raw material., wherein the electrode comprises an inner core (0018); an intermediate region (0018) covering the inner core (0018); and an outer shell (0018) covering the intermediate region covering the inner core (0018); and an outer shell covering the intermediate region (0018), wherein porosities of inner core (0029; 0032), intermediate region (0018), and outer shell increase sequentially (0029).
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) 2-6, 12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun et al., US 2021/0234165.
Regarding claim 2, Yun et al., teaches wherein a porosity of the core layer ranges from 15% to 20% (0032) and a porosity of the intermediate layer ranges from 10% to 15% (0037).
Yun does not teach a porosity of the shell layer ranges from 9% to 20.1%.
However, An obviousness rejection based on similarity in chemical structure and function entails the motivation of one skilled in the art to make a claimed compound, in the expectation that compounds similar in structure will have similar properties." In re Payne, 606 F.2d 303, 313, 203 USPQ 245, 254 (CCPA 1979). See In re Papesch, 315 F.2d 381, 137 USPQ 43 (CCPA 1963). Therefore, the porosity of the shell layer would be within the claimed range of the porosity of the core layer and the intermediate layer.
Regarding claim 3, Yun et al., teaches the porosity of the intermediate layer ranges from 10% to 15% (0037).
Yun does not teach the porosity of the core layer ranges from 7.03% to 12.74%, and the porosity of the shell layer ranges from 14.8% to 16.3%.
However, An obviousness rejection based on similarity in chemical structure and function entails the motivation of one skilled in the art to make a claimed compound, in the expectation that compounds similar in structure will have similar properties." In re Payne, 606 F.2d 303, 313, 203 USPQ 245, 254 (CCPA 1979). See In re Papesch, 315 F.2d 381, 137 USPQ 43 (CCPA 1963). Therefore, the porosity of the shell layer would be within the claimed range of the porosity of the core layer and the intermediate layer.
Regarding claim 4, Yun et al., teaches, wherein a radius of the core layer accounts for 25%-30% of an overall radius, a thickness of the intermediate layer accounts for 50%-58.8% of the overall radius, and a thickness of the shell layer accounts for 11.2%-25% of the overall radius.
However, An obviousness rejection based on similarity in chemical structure and function entails the motivation of one skilled in the art to make a claimed compound, in the expectation that compounds similar in structure will have similar properties." In re Payne, 606 F.2d 303, 313, 203 USPQ 245, 254 (CCPA 1979). See In re Papesch, 315 F.2d 381, 137 USPQ 43 (CCPA 1963). Therefore, the radius of the core layer, the intermediate layer and the shell layer would be relative to each other, with the radius expanding from the core layer, to the intermediate layer, and to the shell layer.
Regarding claim 5, Yun et al., teaches, wherein a D50 of the ternary positive electrode material precursor ranges from 7 to 15 μm (5 to 25 um) (0041).
Yun does not teach (D90-D10)/D50 = 0.6-0.8.
However, since Yun teaches precursor ranges within the claimed range, Yun would also teach the relative particle sizes.
Regarding claim 6, Yun et al., does not teach wherein a half-peak width of a (101) crystal facet of the ternary positive electrode material precursor ranges from 0.4 to 0.88°, and a half-peak width of a （101） crystal facet ranges from 0.25 to 0.61°, an FWHM (I001-I101)/I101 ratio range is 0.1-0.9, and a BET/TD ratio of the ternary positive electrode material precursor ranges from 3.90 to 6.66.
However, When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02.
Regarding claim 12, Yun et al., teaches wherein during a reaction process (0048), a pH of a system is 10-12 (0048), , wherein a reaction temperature ranges from 40°C to 70°C (50 deg. C; 0130), and wherein a stirring speed of the reaction ranges from 100 r/min to 600 r/min (90 ml/min and 10 ml/min) (1.5 kW/m3) (0130).
Yun does not teach a range of nickel content in a supernatant is controlled at 0-500 ppm, wherein during the reaction process, the pH of the system gradually decreases from 11.9 to a range of 10.8-10.3m.
When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02.
Regarding claim 15, Yun et al., does not teach wherein a volume ratio of the alkali wash to the water wash is as follows: Vwater wash:Valkali wash = (2-8):1, wherein temperatures for the alkali wash and the water wash are each independently 30-70°C, and wherein a drying temperature ranges from 100°C to 180°C, and a moisture content is less than or equal to 0.4%.
When the reference discloses all the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention but has basis for shifting the burden of proof to applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP § 2112- 2112.02. Therefore, Yun would have a volume ratio within the claimed volume ratio above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that “Yun does not disclose or suggest, and in fact teaches away from, the limitation that "porosities of the core layer, the intermediate layer, and the shell layer increase sequentially" (i.e. the porosity of the core layer < the porosity of the intermediate layer < the porosity of the shell layer).”
However, Yun et al., teaches “[0012] A nickel-based active material precursor for a lithium secondary battery according to an example embodiment has a density gradient from a core to a shell, and thus resistance to lithium diffusion is reduced.” (0012) (0029).
Therefore, Yun teaches that the active material is formed in a gradient from core to shell, although it does not teach the direction of the gradient from core to shell. One of ordinary skill in the art could adjust the gradient into the direction of choice. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
The Applicant argues that “Yun discloses a nickel-based active material precursor for a lithium secondary battery, comprising a core, an intermediate layer located on the core, and a shell located on the intermediate layer. Yun definitely teaches that a porosity of the nickel-based active material precursor gradually decreases in the order of the core, the intermediate layer, and the shell, that is, the porosity of the core > the porosity of the intermediate layer > the porosity of the shell (see claim 1, Paragraphs [0008] and [0029] of Yun).
However, Yun teaches a density gradient from a core to a shell (0012; 0029), wherein the gradient is not specified in what direction the gradient is, from core to shell or from shell to core.
Additionally, Yun teaches “Porosity gradually decreases from the core 10 toward the shell 12, and density gradually increases in the order of the core 10, the intermediate layer 11, and the shell 12. The nickel-based active material precursor according to the embodiment has porosity gradually decreasing from an inner portion to an outer portion.” (0029). Thus, in this embodiment, Yun teaches porosities of the core layer, the intermediate layer, and the shell layer increase sequentially (0035-0037).
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