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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US2021/0376328).
As to Claim 1 Wang et al. discloses a lithium secondary battery, comprising (see e.g. lithium ion secondary battery in Par. 0307):
an anode comprising an anode active material that includes carbon-based active material particles having a Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) specific surface area of 3.0 m2/g to 5.0 m2/g (see e.g. anode mixture layer includes a carbon material in Par. 0007, wherein carbon material has a specific surface area (BET) of less than 5.0 m2/g in Par. 0079);
and an average particle diameter (D50) of 5 µm to 7.5 µm (see e.g. a median particle size (D50) of 5 µm to 30 µm in Par. 0080);
a cathode facing the anode (see e.g. a separator is generally disposed between the cathode and the anode in Par. 0287); and
a non-aqueous electrolyte solution comprising a non-aqueous organic solvent that includes a propionate-based organic solvent (see e.g. electrolyte includes non-aqueous solvent in Par. 0193-194. Non-aqueous electrolyte secondary batteries in Par. 0230. The electrolyte includes at least one of the following compounds: a propionate in Par. 0164-0165) and
a lithium salt (see e.g. a lithium salt in Par. 0224),
wherein a content of the propionate-based organic solvent relative to a total volume of the non-aqueous organic solvent is 55 vol% or more (see e.g. equation (2).
As discussed above, Wang et al. overlapping range of (BET) specific surface area, D50 as the instant application. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists per MPEP2144.05
As to Claim 2 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the cathode comprises: a cathode current collector; and a cathode active material layer disposed on at least one surface of the cathode current collector (see e.g. cathode includes current collector and a cathode mixture layer disposed on one or two surfaces of the cathode current collector in Par. 0232),
wherein the cathode active material layer comprises lithium-transition metal oxide particles having an average particle diameter (D50) of 2.5 µm to 3.5 µm (see e.g. Cathode active material can be lithium metal oxide in Par. 0236. The median particle size (D50) of the cathode active material particles is greater than 0.3 µm and less than 30 µm in Par. 0252).
As to Claim 3. Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 2, wherein the lithium-transition metal oxide particles have a BET specific surface area of 1.0 m2/g to 1.7 m2/g (see e.g. the specific surface area (BET) of the cathode active material is greater than of 0.1 m2/g and less than 50 m2/g in Par. 0258).
As to Claim 5 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 2, wherein the lithium-transition metal oxide particles include nickel (see e.g. transition metal in the lithium transition metal composite oxide includes Ni in Par 0236).
As to Claim 6 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the carbon-based active material particles include at least one of artificial graphite, natural graphite, or hard carbon (see e.g. the carbon material includes at least one of artificial graphite, natural graphite and hard carbon in Par. 0076).
As to Claim 7 Wang et al. does not disclose the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the content of the propionate-based organic solvent relative to the total volume of the non-aqueous organic solvent is in a range from 55 vol% to 80 vol%.
Wang et al. does disclose the content of the propionate to be 10 – 65 weight % based on total weight of the electrolyte (see e.g. Par 0181 It is corresponding to (see e.g. using ethyl propionate, equation (1) lower limit, equation (2) upper limit).
v
o
l
u
m
e
%
=
w
e
i
g
h
t
%
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
(
g
m
L
)
=
10
%
0.888
g
/
m
L
=
11.26
%
v
o
l
u
m
e
%
=
w
e
i
g
h
t
%
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
(
g
m
L
)
=
65
%
0.888
g
/
m
L
=
73.20
%
11.26vol% to 73.20 vol% in Wang et al. overlaps with claimed 55 vol% to 80 vol% range.
As to Claim 8 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the propionate-based organic solvent includes at least one selected from the group consisting of methyl propionate, ethyl propionate and propyl propionate (see e.g. propionate includes methyl propionate, ethyl propionate, propyl propionate in Par. 0180).
As to Claim 9 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the non-aqueous organic solvent further includes at least one of a carbonate-based solvent, an ester-based solvent, an ether-based solvent, a ketone-based solvent, an alcohol-based solvent, or an aprotic solvent (see e.g. the non-aqueous solvent includes cyclic carbonate, chain carbonate, cyclic ether, and chain ether in Par. 0194).
As to Claim 10 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the lithium salt includes at least one of lithium tetrafluoroborate (LiBF4), lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6), or lithium difluorophosphate (LiPO2F2) (see e.g. electrolyte may include inorganic lithium salts such as LiPF6, LiBF4 in Par. 0224).
As to Claim 11 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte solution further comprises an additive including at least one of an alkyl sultone-based compound or an alkenyl sultone-based compound (see e.g. additive may include carbon-carbon double bond containing ethylene carbonate, and sulfur-oxygen double bond-containing compound in Par. 0207. The additive includes sulfur-oxygen double bond containing compounds such as cyclic sulfonate in Par. 0214; examples of the cyclic sulfonate may include 1,3-propane sultone and 1-propene-1,3-sultone in Par. 0218).
As to Claim 12 Wang et al. discloses the lithium secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the additive further includes at least one of polyethylene sulfide, vinylene carbonate, vinylethylene carbonate, or ethylene sulfate (see e.g. the additive includes carbon-carbon double bond-containing ethylene carbonates such as vinylene carbonate in Par. 0213).
Claims 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US2021/0376328), in view of Sonobe et al. (US2018/0258202).
As to Claim 4 Wang et al. does not disclose the lithium secondary battery according to claim 2, wherein the cathode active material layer further comprises maleic acid, and a content of maleic acid relative to a total weight of the cathode active material layer is in a range from 0.02 wt% to 0.05 wt%.
Sonobe et al. does disclose a positive electrode active material including a lithium-nickel oxide (see Par. 0084) and a binder containing a water-soluble polymer which further includes an acid group-containing monomer unit, such as maleic acid (see Par. 0042-0043). The preferred amount of binder composition contained in the slurry composition is 0.01 – 5.0 mass %, maintaining the amount of water-soluble polymer within this range improves the high-temperature cycle and rate characteristics in the non-aqueous secondary battery electrode (see Par. 0110).
Both Wang et al. in view of Sonobe et al. are analogous in the field of lithium secondary batteries, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the cathode active layer of Wang et al. to include maleic acid at a range of 0.02 – 0.05 wt % into the cathode active material layer as taught by Sonobe et al. in order to improve the high-temperature cycle and rate characteristics in the non-aqueous secondary battery electrode as suggested by Sonobe et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CINDY BAGNAL whose telephone number is (571)270-1080. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am-4:00 pm.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/C.B./
Cindy BagnalExaminer, Art Unit 1788
06/23/2026
/TONG GUO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights