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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-6 and 20 in the reply filed on 06/22/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 7-19 are withdrawn as being drawn to a non-elected group.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/08/2023 and 07/02/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 nonobviousness.
Claim 1-6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michot (US 20200274161 A1) in view of Nagakane et al. (US 20120267566 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 4-6 and 20, Michot discloses a lithium iron phosphate positive electrode material, of instant claim 1, and a lithium ion battery comprising a lithium iron phosphate positive electrode material, of instant claim 20 (cathode material in a lithium secondary battery where the active material is LiFePO4 [abstract, Para. 0030]), having an expression formula of LiFe1-xMxPO4/C, in which 0<x≤0.5; and M is at least one element selected from Mg, Al, Zr, Ti, Co, V, Mn, W, Sn, Nb, and Mo, of instant claim 1, and where M is at least one element selected from Ti, V and Nb, of instant claim 5 (the alkali metal oxyanion cathode material is a olivine structure with nominal formula LiMPO4 where M is preferably at least 97%, 98%, or 99% Fe (II) and the balance is one or more other metals including Mg, Al, Zr, Co, V, W, Sn, Nb, Mo [Para. 0050; examples given in Para. 0307]),
wherein the lithium iron phosphate positive electrode material has a particle size distribution meeting (D90-D10)/D50 = 1-2.17, of instant claim 1, and 1-1.55, of instant claim 6 (particle size distribution of the nanomilled materials are less than 2.5 [Paras. 0105, 0187; Table 8 shows a PSD of 2.13 and 1.42 in Paras. 0328 and 0409]).
Michot teaches that the magnetic impurities should be minimized to a content of preferably less than 300 ppm [Para. 0149-0150, 0213-0214].
Michot therefore fails to expressly teach wherein a magnetic material content in the lithium iron phosphate positive electrode material is 850 ppm – 900 ppm (w/w), of instant claim 1, or 850 ppm – 885 ppm (w/w), of instant claim 4.
Nagakane discloses a doped lithium iron phosphate active material for a lithium ion secondary battery [abstract] wherein it was discovered that dendrites form in the electrolytic solution due to repeated charge and discharge caused by magnetic particles contained as impurities in the positive electrode material of the LiMxFe1-xPO4 crystal [Para. 0023]. Nagakane further teaches that based upon the findings, if the content of magnetic particles is restricted to 1,000 ppm or less in the positive electrode material, dendrites are not formed even when charge and discharge is repeated and the occurrence of short circuit caused by the dendrite can be suppressed to the greatest extent possible [Para. 0027].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form with lithium iron phosphate cathode material disclosed by Michot with a magnetic material content of less than 1000 ppm, including those amounts that are within the claimed range (i.e., 850-900 ppm or 850-885 ppm), because Nagakane teaches that any magnetic impurity level below 1000 ppm would provide the obvious and predictable benefit of limiting dendrite formation in the electrolyte material and thus leading to the lowest likelihood of a short circuit [Para. 0027]. It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art [See MPEP 2144.05 (I)]. Furthermore, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results (MPEP 2143(A)).
Regarding claims 2-3, Michot further discloses wherein based on a total weight of the lithium iron phosphate positive electrode material, a carbon content in the lithium iron phosphate positive electrode material is 1 wt%-3.5wt%, of instant claim 2, and 1.4 wt% - 3.2 wt%, of instant claim 3 (carbon deposit content is less than 2.5 wt% [Para. 0016]; Various tables provide specific carbon wt% within the claimed range). It has been held that obviousness exists where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art [See MPEP 2144.05 (I)].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xu et al. (CN 106816600 A, machine translation) discloses a magnetic impurity of LiFePO4 within a range of 750-1100 ppm.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3176. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-4:30pm ET Mon-Thurs, 7:30am-11:30pm Fri.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-2450. 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.
/JOSHUA L ALLEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights