DETAILED ACTION
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on December 4, 2023 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2022/0315436, hereinafter Ahn in view of Adv. Energy Mater. 13, 2300221, hereinafter Ahn 2.
Regarding claim 1, Ahn teaches a cathode active material comprising a lithium oxide configured to enable intercalation and deintercalation of lithium. The lithium oxide has a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure and is represented by the general formula Li1+x(MM’)zO2-yFy, wherein 0.05 ≤ x ≤ 0.4, 0.6 ≤ z ≤ 0.95, 0.2 ≤ y ≤ 0.4 (paragraph [0010]).
In the compound, M may be Mn and M’ may be one or more of Ti, Nb or Mo (paragraph [0011]).
Ahn’s range overlaps the instantly claimed range for the content of Li when Ahn’s x = 0.05. This corresponds to the instantly claimed x = 0 and results in a Li content of 1.05.
Ahn’s range similarly overlaps the instantly claimed range for the content of Mn and M together when Ahn’s z = 0.95.
Ahn’s range anticipates the instantly claimed range for the content of O and F.
Ahn does not explicitly teach the relative content of M and M’ (that is, Ahn does not specify a value for instant y).
Ahn 2 shares authors with Ahn and reports on a phase transformation that occurs in Mn-rich DRX cathodes during cycling. Specifically, Ahn reports the instantly claimed phase transformation to a spinel-like δ-phase, which occurs reversibly during cycling of the electrode (Section 2.4, 1st paragraph; Section 2.3, 4th paragraph). Ahn 2 teaches that this results in improved capacity of the electrode and is characteristic of DRX Mn-rich lithium oxides with Mn content of about 0.6 and greater (abstract and Section 2.4, last paragraph).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a Mn content of 0.6 or greater in Ahn’s material for the purpose of taking advantage of the phase transformation and thus achieving the improved performance taught by Ahn 2.
Given that the content of M’ is z minus the content of M, in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2, M’ is in the range 0 to 0.35. This range anticipates the instantly claimed range for y.
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li and the combined content of Mn and M. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 2, Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that increasing the amount of Mn increases the degree of phase transformation (Section 2.4, last paragraph).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, a diffraction peak at a diffraction angle 2θ of 18° to 19° is characteristic of the spinel phase. Therefore, it is expected to be present in the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 upon cycling.
Regarding claim 5, Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
The optimum range for the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum range of 0.19 or less. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 6-8, the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 has the instantly claimed structure and undergoes the claimed phase transformation and is therefore expected to be capable of the claimed performance.
Regarding claim 9, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti (paragraph [0011]). Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35. Ahn teaches that O may have a content of 1.8 and F may have a content of 0.2 (paragraph [0011]).
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li, Mn and Ti. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 10, Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
The optimum range for the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum range of 0.05 or less. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 11-13, the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 has the instantly claimed structure and undergoes the claimed phase transformation and is therefore expected to be capable of the claimed performance.
Regarding claim 14, Ahn 2 reports flattening of the electrochemical curve near 3V (Section 2.2 and figure 2).
It is expected that under the claimed conditions, the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 would be capable of the claimed behavior.
Regarding claim 15, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti (paragraph [0011]). Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35. Ahn teaches that O may have a content of 1.8 and F may have a content of 0.2 (paragraph [0011]).
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li, Mn and Ti. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 16, Ahn teaches a cathode comprising a cathode active material (paragraph [0054]).
The cathode active material comprises a lithium oxide configured to enable intercalation and deintercalation of lithium. The lithium oxide has a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure and is represented by the general formula Li1+x(MM’)zO2-yFy, wherein 0.05 ≤ x ≤ 0.4, 0.6 ≤ z ≤ 0.95, 0.2 ≤ y ≤ 0.4 (paragraph [0010]).
In the compound, M may be Mn and M’ may be one or more of Ti, Nb Mo (paragraph [0011]).
Ahn’s range overlaps the instantly claimed range for the content of Li when Ahn’s x = 0.05. This corresponds to the instantly claimed x = 0 and results in a Li content of 1.05.
Ahn’s range similarly overlaps the instantly claimed range for the content of Mn and M together when Ahn’s z = 0.95.
Ahn’s range anticipates the instantly claimed range for the content of O and F.
Ahn does not explicitly teach the relative content of M and M’ (that is, Ahn does not specify a value for instant y).
Ahn 2 shares authors with Ahn and reports on a phase transformation that occurs in Mn-rich DRX cathodes during cycling. Specifically, Ahn reports the instantly claimed phase transformation to a spinel-like δ-phase, which occurs reversibly during cycling of the electrode (Section 2.4, 1st paragraph; Section 2.3, 4th paragraph). Ahn 2 teaches that this results in improved capacity of the electrode and is characteristic of DRX Mn-rich lithium oxides with Mn content of about 0.6 and greater (abstract and Section 2.4, last paragraph).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a Mn content of 0.6 or greater in Ahn’s material for the purpose of taking advantage of the phase transformation and thus achieving the improved performance taught by Ahn 2.
Given that the content of M’ is z minus the content of M, in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2, M’ is in the range 0 to 0.35. This range anticipates the instantly claimed range for y.
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li and the combined content of Mn and M. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 17, Ahn teaches a lithium secondary battery comprising an anode, a cathode comprising a cathode active material and an electrolyte interposed between the anode and the cathode (paragraphs [0013, 0043]).
The cathode active material comprises a lithium oxide configured to enable intercalation and deintercalation of lithium. The lithium oxide has a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure and is represented by the general formula Li1+x(MM’)zO2-yFy, wherein 0.05 ≤ x ≤ 0.4, 0.6 ≤ z ≤ 0.95, 0.2 ≤ y ≤ 0.4 (paragraph [0010]).
In the compound, M may be Mn and M’ may be one or more of Ti, Nb Mo (paragraph [0011]).
Ahn’s range overlaps the instantly claimed range for the content of Li when Ahn’s x = 0.05. This corresponds to the instantly claimed x = 0 and results in a Li content of 1.05.
Ahn’s range similarly overlaps the instantly claimed range for the content of Mn and M together when Ahn’s z = 0.95.
Ahn’s range anticipates the instantly claimed range for the content of O and F.
Ahn does not explicitly teach the relative content of M and M’ (that is, Ahn does not specify a value for instant y).
Ahn 2 shares authors with Ahn and reports on a phase transformation that occurs in Mn-rich DRX cathodes during cycling. Specifically, Ahn reports the instantly claimed phase transformation to a spinel-like δ-phase, which occurs reversibly during cycling of the electrode (Section 2.4, 1st paragraph; Section 2.3, 4th paragraph). Ahn 2 teaches that this results in improved capacity of the electrode and is characteristic of DRX Mn-rich lithium oxides with Mn content of about 0.6 and greater (abstract and Section 2.4, last paragraph).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a Mn content of 0.6 or greater in Ahn’s material for the purpose of taking advantage of the phase transformation and thus achieving the improved performance taught by Ahn 2.
Given that the content of M’ is z minus the content of M, in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2, M’ is in the range 0 to 0.35. This range anticipates the instantly claimed range for y.
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li and the combined content of Mn and M. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 18, Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
The optimum range for the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum range of 0.19 or less. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 19, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti (paragraph [0011]). Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35. Ahn teaches that O may have a content of 1.8 and F may have a content of 0.2 (paragraph [0011]).
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li, Mn and Ti. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 20, Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
The optimum range for the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) in the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum range of 0.05 or less. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Claims 5-8, 10-15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2022/0315436, hereinafter Ahn in view of Adv. Energy Mater. 13, 2300221, hereinafter Ahn 2 as applied to claims 1 and 17 above and further in view of U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2023/0335728, hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 5, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti. Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 does not explicitly teach including Ti at a content of 0.19 or less.
Zhang teaches a closely related lithium oxide with a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure (paragraphs [0011, 0017-0019]). In Zhang’s compound, the equivalent metal to Ahn’s M’ is Ti and is present at a content in the range 0 < c ≤ 0.15 (paragraph [0019]). Zhang teaches that Ti at this content improves the capacity of the material (paragraph [0012]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Ti at a concentration of 0 < c ≤ 0.15 for the purpose of improving the capacity of the material as taught by Zhang.
Regarding claims 6-8, the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 and Zhang has the instantly claimed structure, the required Ti content and undergoes the claimed phase transformation and is therefore expected to be capable of the claimed performance.
Regarding claim 10, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti. Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 does not explicitly teach including Ti at a content of 0.05 or less.
Zhang teaches a closely related lithium oxide with a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure (paragraphs [0011, 0017-0019]). In Zhang’s compound, the equivalent metal to Ahn’s M’ is Ti and is present at a content in the range 0.025 ≤ c ≤ 0.075 (paragraph [0019]). In a specific example, Zhang selects Ti content of 0.05 (paragraph [0076]). Zhang teaches that Ti at this content improves the capacity of the material (paragraph [0012]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Ti at a concentration of 0.05 for the purpose of improving the capacity of the material as taught by Zhang.
Regarding claims 11-13, the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 and Zhang has the instantly claimed structure, the instantly claimed Ti content and undergoes the claimed phase transformation and is therefore expected to be capable of the claimed performance.
Regarding claim 14, Ahn 2 reports flattening of the electrochemical curve near 3V (Section 2.2 and figure 2).
It is expected that under the claimed conditions, the material of Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 and Zhang would be capable of the claimed behavior.
Regarding claim 15, Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 and Zhang teaches a Ti content of 0.05. Ahn teaches that O may have a content of 1.8 and F may have a content of 0.2 (paragraph [0011]).
The optimum range of the combination of Ahn and Ahn 2 overlaps the instant application's optimum ranges for the content of Li and Mn. It has been held that in the case where claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 18, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti. Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 does not explicitly teach including Ti at a content of 0.19 or less.
Zhang teaches a closely related lithium oxide with a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure (paragraphs [0011, 0017-0019]). In Zhang’s compound, the equivalent metal to Ahn’s M’ is Ti and is present at a content in the range 0 < c ≤ 0.15 (paragraph [0019]). Zhang teaches that Ti at this content improves the capacity of the material (paragraph [0012]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Ti at a concentration of 0 < c ≤ 0.15 for the purpose of improving the capacity of the material as taught by Zhang.
Regarding claim 20, Ahn teaches that M’ may be Ti. Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 teaches that the content of M’ (instantly claimed y) is in the range 0 to 0.35.
Ahn as modified by Ahn 2 does not explicitly teach including Ti at a content of 0.05 or less.
Zhang teaches a closely related lithium oxide with a disordered rocksalt (DRX) structure (paragraphs [0011, 0017-0019]). In Zhang’s compound, the equivalent metal to Ahn’s M’ is Ti and is present at a content in the range 0.025 ≤ c ≤ 0.075 (paragraph [0019]). In a specific example, Zhang selects Ti content of 0.05 (paragraph [0076]). Zhang teaches that Ti at this content improves the capacity of the material (paragraph [0012]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artist before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include Ti at a concentration of 0.05 for the purpose of improving the capacity of the material as taught by Zhang.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Phys. Rev. Mater., 9, 105404.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LILIA V NEDIALKOVA whose telephone number is (571)270-1538. The examiner can normally be reached 8.30 - 5.00 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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at 571-270-5256. 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.
/STEWART A FRASER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1724
LILIA V. NEDIALKOVA
Examiner
Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights