DETAILED ACTION
Introductory Notes
Any paragraph citation of the instant is in reference to the U.S. published patent application.
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 .
Joint Inventors
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 6/17/2026 is acknowledged. Species A is notably Embodiment 1 as shown in Fig. 1 per the Restriction of 4/23/2026.
Claims 8-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/17/2026.
Regarding Claims 8-11 it is noted that Claim 8 states “the coating layer includes a first coating layer containing the first coating material and a second coating layer containing a second coating material”. This embodiment is captured in Fig. 4 of the instant wherein 111 is the first coating layer and 112 is the second coating layer. Per the Restriction of 4/23/2026, Fig. 4 relates to Species B, which was not elected. Claims 9-11 depend from Claim 8.
Regarding claims 12-14 it is noted that Claim 12 states “the coated active material according to claim 1; and a solid electrolyte”. This embodiment is captured in Figs. 5 and 6 of the instant wherein 100 is the solid electrolyte. Per the Restriction of 4/23/2026, Figs. 5 and 6 relate to Species C, which was not elected. Claims 13 and 14 depend from Claim 12.
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.
Claims 1-7 are 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 1 recites the limitation "a coarse powder and a fine powder" in line 5. It is unclear what constitutes either a coarse or a fine powder. The instant notes that a coarse powder is “large particles” [0053] and that a fine powder is “small particles” [0053], however the instant gives no means of distinguishing between these two sizes. It is unclear to what extent a particle must be large(r) to be coarse or small(er) to be fine.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a coarse powder and a fine powder included in a powder of the coated active material" in line 5. It is unclear if the coarse and the fine powder together constitute the whole of the powder of the coated active material, the coarse and the fine powders are a subset of the powder of the coated active material wherein there is powder between coarse and fine. Furthermore, it is unclear if the powder of the coated active material is the entirety of the coated active material of the preamble or merely a subset of the coated active material.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "R1 represents a mass content ratio of the first coating material in the coarse powder" in line 7. It is unclear in what manner the mass content ratio is determined. For example, the ratio could be first coating material / active material OR first coating material / total mass.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "R2 represents a mass content ratio of the first coating material in the fine powder" in line 8. It is unclear in what manner the mass content ratio is determined. For example, the mass content ratio could be first coating material / active material OR first coating material / total mass.
The remaining claims are rejected due to dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SASAKI (WO 2019135322 A1, with US 20200328467 A1 used as translation and for citations).
Regarding claim 1, SASAKI discloses a coated active material (Abstract) comprising:
an active material (“a positive electrode active material”, Claim 1);
and a coating layer coating at least a part of a surface of the active material (“the coating material is located on a surface of the positive electrode active material” per Claim 1),
wherein the coating layer contains a first coating material (“coating layer 111 is a layer including a coating material” [0115] as well as “the coating material may be an oxide solid electrolyte” [0108]).
Regarding further limitations of claim 1, these limitations rely on the statement “when a coarse powder and a fine powder included in a powder of the coated active material are classified by airflow classification such that a mass ratio of the coarse powder and the fine powder is 9:1” and are therefore contingent on the optional situation of “when”. SASAKI does not disclose the precise experimental setup of coarse and fine powders and therefore SASAKI does not have to meet the optional limitations that rely on this when statement.
Regarding claim 2, SASAKI discloses the active material is a positive electrode active material (“positive electrode active material”, Abstract).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, these claims modify optional limitations of Claim 1 therefore it is not required that SASAKI meet these further limitations.
Regarding claim 5, SASAKI discloses the first coating material includes Li, M1, and X1 (“LiαMβXγ Formula (1)” [0023]),
wherein M1 is at least one selected from the group consisting of metal elements excluding Li and metalloid elements (“M includes at least one of metalloid elements and metal elements other than Li” [0025]),
and X1 is at least one selected from the group consisting of F, Cl, Br, and I (“X is one or more kinds of elements selected from the group consisting of CI, Br and I” [0026] as well as Table 1 with Examples 1-6).
Regarding claim 6, SASAKI discloses the first coating material is represented by a following Formula (1): Liα1M1β1X1γ1 (1) (“LiαMβXγ Formula (1)” [0023]) where α1, β1, and γ1 are each independently a value greater than 0 (“where, α, β and γ are values larger than 0” [0024]).
Regarding claim 7, SASAKI discloses M1 includes yttrium (“M may include Y (=yttrium)” [0036], as well as Table 1 with Examples 1-6 each including yttrium) .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SASAKI.
This rejection, wherein the optional limitation of Claim 1 is considered, is being made of the record in the interest of compact prosecution.
Regarding claims 1 and 3-4, SASAKI discloses a coated active material (Abstract) comprising:
an active material (“a positive electrode active material”, Claim 1);
and a coating layer coating at least a part of a surface of the active material (“the coating material is located on a surface of the positive electrode active material” per Claim 1),
wherein the coating layer contains a first coating material (“coating layer 111 is a layer including a coating material” [0115] as well as “the coating material may be an oxide solid electrolyte” [0108]).
SASAKI does not expressly teach an airflow classification of precisely 9:1 that defines coarse and fine powders then further defining a ratio of mass content of the respective coating material. However, SASAKI provides Examples 1-6 with compounds and preparation mirroring that of the instant. Notably as discusses in Example 1 a Li and Y containing coating is produced where “milling processing was performed at 600 rpm rpm for 25 hours using a planetary ball mill” [0184], mirroring the same procedure in the Instant [0170]. Next the coating was applied to an active material where in a “ tumbling fluidized bed granulating-coating machine (manufactured by Powrex Corp., FD-MP-01E) … amount of charge of the positive electrode active material, the number of rotations of stirring, and the liquid transfer rate were 1 kg, 400 rpm, and 6.59 g/min, respectively” [0187], mirroring the same procedure in the Instant [0172]. Examiner notes no special methods are apparent in the instant disclosure that would make any properties and/or structures unique relative to SASAKI.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that similar compounds produced in the similar manner would have corresponding similar mass content ratios following airflow classification.
Therefore, SASAKI teaches when a coarse powder and a fine powder included in a powder of the coated active material are classified by airflow classification such that a mass ratio of the coarse powder and the fine powder is 9:1, a value of R2/R1 is less than 7.1 [and less than or equal to 4.9 as in instant Claim 3, as well as greater than or equal to 3.7 as in instant Claim 4], where R1 represents a mass content ratio of the first coating material in the coarse powder, and R2 represents a mass content ratio of the first coating material in the fine powder (by virtue of sharing similar compounds and methodologies).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
OSHIMA (US 20200343554 A1) directed to an electrode material includes an electrode active material, a first solid electrolyte material, and a coating material (including ytrrium per [0026]); thus reading on claim 1.
SASAKI (US 20200350623 A1) directed to a first positive electrode layer that includes a first positive electrode active material, a first solid electrolyte material, and a coating material (including ytrrium per [0040]); thus reading on claim 1.
MATSUMURA (US 20200350626 A1) directed to a cathode material including a cathode active material; a coating layer which coats at least a part of a surface of the cathode active material, and which includes a first solid electrolyte material (including ytrrium per [0042]); thus reading on claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS L MARTIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm ET.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.L.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721
Prosecution Insights