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 .
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.
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wen et al. (CN 108899517 B) in view of Ise et al. (US 20140295231 A1). It is noted that the disclosures of Wen et al. are based on a machine translation of the reference included with this action.
Regarding claims 1 and 4-5:
Wen et al. teaches a lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide/silicon composite anode material which includes a silicon active center and a lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide mixed shell uniformly coated on the surface of the silicon active center (0012).
Wen et al. also teaches a molar ratio of lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide is 0.5:1 to 5:1 (0023) and a mass ratio of the silicon active center to the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide mixed shell is 1:0.1 to 1:2 (0022).
However, Wen et al. does not teach a niobium-titanium oxide wherein the niobium-titanium oxide comprises a niobium element, a titanium element and an oxygen element.
Ise et al. teaches a composite oxide TiNb2O7 (0009), i.e. niobium-titanium oxide, used as a negative electrode active material (0128) to obtain a high capacity (0009).
In light of the motivation for using TiNb2O7 disclosed by Ise et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use TiNb2O7 as the niobium oxide in the anode material of Wen et al. in order to obtain a high capacity.
Using the molar ratio of lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide is 0.5:1 to 5:1, the molecular weight of lithium niobate, i.e.
M
M
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
, and the molecular weight of TiNb2O7, i.e.
M
M
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
, it is therefore calculated as shown below, that the weight ratio of TiNb2O7, i.e. Ptn, to the weight ratio of the silicon active center, i.e. Ps, is 0.36 to 2.48, meeting the claimed relational expression.
M
M
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
=
147.84
g
m
o
l
M
M
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
=
345.68
g
m
o
l
m
o
l
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
1
6
=
33
%
t
o
m
o
l
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
5
6
=
83
%
m
o
l
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
100
%
-
83
%
=
17
%
t
o
m
o
l
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
100
%
-
33
%
=
67
%
m
a
s
s
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
=
M
M
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
×
m
o
l
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
48.79
g
t
o
122.71
g
m
a
s
s
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
=
M
M
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
×
m
o
l
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
58.77
g
t
o
231.61
g
m
a
s
s
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
48.79
g
48.79
g
+
231.61
g
=
17.4
%
t
o
122.71
g
58.77
g
+
122.71
g
=
67.6
%
P
t
n
=
m
a
s
s
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
231.61
g
48.79
g
+
231.61
g
=
82.6
%
t
o
58.77
g
58.77
g
+
122.71
g
=
32.4
%
P
t
n
=
m
a
s
s
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
P
s
=
m
a
s
s
s
i
l
i
c
o
n
%
=
82.6
%
1
(
1
+
2
)
x
100
=
2.48
t
o
32.4
%
1
(
1
+
0.1
)
x
100
=
0.36
Regarding claims 2-3:
Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Further, Ise et al. teaches the Ti element in the compound TiNb2O7 can be partially substituted, i.e. doped, with Ta or P, and since they are pentavalent, the electronic conductivity of TiNb2O7, capacity, and rapid charge can be improved. Hexavalent elements like Mo or W can substitute a part of the Nb element, which improves electron conductivity, and Na can partially substitute Ti so that the capacity is improved (0071).
In light of the motivation for partially substituting TiNb2O7 with Ta, P, Mo, W, or Na disclosed by Ise et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to partially substitute TiNb2O7 with Ta, P, Mo, W, or Na in the anode material of Wen et al. in order to improve electronic conductivity, capacity, and rapid charge.
Regarding claims 6-8:
Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Wen et al. also discloses the silicon active centers are silicon powder with a particle size of 20-100 nanometers (0013), i.e. sD50.
Further, Wen et al. discloses the thickness of the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide hybrid shell is 5-50 nanometers (0015), i.e. tnD50.
It is therefore calculated that tnD50/sD50 is 5/100=0.05 and 50/20= 2.5, where 0.05 ≤ tnD50/sD50 ≤ 2.5, meeting the claimed relational expression 0.01 ≤ tnD50/sD50 ≤ 20.0.
Regarding claim 9:
Wen et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Further, Wen et al discloses a mixture of lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide/silicon composite anode material (active material), acetylene black (conductive agent), i.e. carbon material, and carboxymethyl cellulose, i.e. organic compound, solution was prepared (0051).
Regarding claim 10:
Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Further, Wen et al. discloses a mass ratio of active material:conductive agent, i.e. Pc,:binder of 60:25:15 (0051).
As calculated above, the amount of TiNb2O7 is 32.4% to 82.6% while the mass ratio of the silicon active center to the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide mixed shell is 1:0.1 to 1:2 from which it is calculated there is 33% to 91% silicon (1/3 – 1/1.1). Given that the composition comprises 60% active material, there is present 19.44% to 49.56% TiNb2O7 [0.6*(32.4-82.6)] and 19.8 to 54.6% silicon [0.6*(33%-91%)]. It is therefore calculated that:
P
t
n
(
P
s
+
P
c
)
=
19.44
%
54.6
%
+
25
%
=
0.24
P
t
n
(
P
s
+
P
c
)
=
49.56
%
19.8
%
+
25
%
=
1.1
0.092
≤
P
t
n
(
P
s
+
P
c
)
≤
3.45
meets the claimed relational expression
0.01
≤
P
t
n
P
s
+
P
c
≤
25.0
.
Regarding claims 11-12:
Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Further, Wen et al. teaches the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide/silicon composite anode material can be used as a lithium-ion battery anode material (0002).
Regarding claim 13:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a maximum among discharge volumetric capacities of a first cycle to a fifteen cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2VMax would inherently meet 100 mAh/cm3 ≤ C2VMax ≤ 800 mAh/cm3.
Regarding claim 14:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a discharge volumetric capacity of a sixtieth cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V60 would inherently meet 100 mAh/cm3 ≤ C2V60 ≤ 800 mAh/cm3.
Regarding claim 15:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a maximum among discharge volumetric capacities of a first cycle to a fifteen cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2VMax would inherently meet 100 mAh/cm3 ≤ C2VMax ≤ 800 mAh/cm3.
Regarding claim 16:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a discharge volumetric capacity of a fifth cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V5, a discharge volumetric capacity of a twentieth cycle of the battery with the current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V20 would inherently meet 0.60 ≤ C2V20/C2V5.
Regarding claim 17:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a total number of Coulombic efficiency would inherently be greater than 85% and smaller than 110% in first fifteen cycles of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is n85C2E15, and the following condition is satisfied: 10 ≤ n85C2E15 ≤ 15.
Regarding claim 18:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a total number of Coulombic efficiency would inherently be greater than 85% and smaller than 110% in first fifty cycles of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is n85C2E50, and the following condition is satisfied: 40 ≤ n85C2E50 ≤ 50.
Regarding claim 19:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that an average of Coulombic efficiencies in first fifteen cycles of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is aC2E15 would inherently satisfy 80% ≤ aC2E15 ≤ 110%.
Regarding claim 20:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that an average of Coulombic efficiencies in first fifty cycles of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is aC2E50 would inherently satisfy 75% ≤ aC2E50 ≤ 110%.
Regarding claim 21:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a discharge volumetric capacity of a first cycle of the battery with a current of 1C for charging and discharging is C1V1, a discharge volumetric capacity of a first cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V1 would inherently satisfy 0.50 ≤ C2V1/C1V1.
Claims 22-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wen et al. (CN 108899517 B) in view of Ise et al. (US 20140295231 A1).
Regarding claims 22-24:
Wen et al. teaches a lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide/silicon composite anode material which includes a silicon active center and a lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide mixed shell uniformly coated on the surface of the silicon active center (0012).
Wen et al. also teaches a molar ratio of lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide is 0.5:1 to 5:1 (0023) and a mass ratio of the silicon active center to the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide mixed shell is 1:0.1 to 1:2 (0022).
However, Wen et al. does not teach a niobium-titanium oxide wherein the niobium-titanium oxide is a doped niobium-titanium oxide and wherein the niobium-titanium oxide comprises a niobium element, a titanium element and an oxygen element.
Ise et al. teaches a composite oxide TiNb2O7 (0009), i.e. niobium-titanium oxide, used as a negative electrode active material (0128) to obtain a high capacity (0009).
Further, Ise et al. teaches the Ti element in the compound TiNb2O7 can be partially substituted, i.e. doped, with Ta or P, and since they are pentavalent, the electronic conductivity of TiNb2O7, capacity, and rapid charge can be improved. Hexavalent elements like Mo or W can substitute a part of the Nb element, which improves electron conductivity, and Na can partially substitute Ti so that the capacity is improved (0071).
In light of the motivation for using TiNb2O7 and partially substituting TiNb2O7 with Ta, P, Mo, W, or Na disclosed by Ise et al. as set forth above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use TiNb2O7 substituted with Ta, P, Mo, W, or Na as the niobium oxide in the anode material of Wen et al. in order to obtain a high capacity and improve electronic conductivity, capacity, and rapid charge.
Using the molar ratio of lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide is 0.5:1 to 5:1, the molecular weight of lithium niobate, i.e.
M
M
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
, and the molecular weight of TiNb2O7, i.e.
M
M
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
, it is therefore calculated as shown below, that the weight ratio of TiNb2O7, i.e. Ptn, to the weight ratio of the silicon active center, i.e. Ps, is 0.36 to 2.48, meeting the claimed relational expression.
M
M
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
=
147.84
g
m
o
l
M
M
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
=
345.68
g
m
o
l
m
o
l
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
1
6
=
33
%
t
o
m
o
l
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
5
6
=
83
%
m
o
l
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
100
%
-
83
%
=
17
%
t
o
m
o
l
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
100
%
-
33
%
=
67
%
m
a
s
s
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
=
M
M
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
×
m
o
l
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
48.79
g
t
o
122.71
g
m
a
s
s
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
=
M
M
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
×
m
o
l
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
58.77
g
t
o
231.61
g
m
a
s
s
l
i
t
h
i
u
m
n
i
o
b
a
t
e
%
=
48.79
g
48.79
g
+
231.61
g
=
17.4
%
t
o
122.71
g
58.77
g
+
122.71
g
=
67.6
%
P
t
n
=
m
a
s
s
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
=
231.61
g
48.79
g
+
231.61
g
=
82.6
%
t
o
58.77
g
58.77
g
+
122.71
g
=
32.4
%
P
t
n
=
m
a
s
s
T
i
N
b
2
O
7
%
P
s
=
m
a
s
s
s
i
l
i
c
o
n
%
=
82.6
%
1
1
+
2
x
100
=
2.48
t
o
32.4
%
1
(
1
+
0.1
)
x
100
=
0.36
Regarding claims 25-26:
Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Wen et al. also discloses the silicon active centers are silicon powder with a particle size of 20-100 nanometers (0013), i.e. sD50.
Further, Wen et al. discloses the thickness of the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide hybrid shell is 5-50 nanometers (0015), i.e. tnD50.
It is therefore calculated that tnD50/sD50 is 5/100=0.05 and 50/20= 2.5, where 0.05 ≤ tnD50/sD50 ≤ 2.5, meeting the claimed relational expression 0.01 ≤ tnD50/sD50 ≤ 20.0.
Regarding claims 27-28:
Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. teaches an anode material as set forth above.
Further, Wen et al. teaches the lithium niobate/niobium-based oxide/silicon composite anode material can be used as a lithium-ion battery anode material (0002).
Regarding claim 29:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a maximum among discharge gravimetric capacities of a first cycle to a fifteen cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2GMax would inherently meet 100 mAh/g ≤ C2GMax ≤ 800 mAh/g.
Regarding claim 30:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a discharge gravimetric capacity of a sixtieth cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2G60 would inherently meet 100 mAh/g ≤ C2G60 ≤ 800 mAh/g.
Regarding claim 31:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a discharge volumetric capacity of a fifth cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V5, a discharge volumetric capacity of a sixtieth cycle of the battery with the current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V60 would inherently meet 0.50 ≤ C2V60/C2V5.
Regarding claim 32:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a total number of Coulombic efficiency would inherently be greater than 90% and smaller than 110% in first first fifteen cycles of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is n90C2E15, and the following condition is satisfied: 8 ≤ n90C2E15 ≤ 15..
Regarding claim 33:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a total number of Coulombic efficiency would inherently be greater than 90% and smaller than 110% in first fifty cycles of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is n90C2E50, and the following condition is satisfied: 30 ≤ n90C2E50 ≤ 50.
Regarding claim 34:
Given that Wen et al. in view of Ise et al. discloses a silicon-niobium oxide/titanium oxide composition as presently claimed including amounts of niobium-titanium oxide and silicon active material that overlap that presently claimed, within the overlapping ranges, it is clear that a discharge volumetric capacity of a first cycle of the battery with a current of 2C for charging and discharging is C2V1, a discharge volumetric capacity of a first cycle of the battery with a current of 4C for charging and discharging is C4V1 would inherently satisfy 0.50 ≤ C4V1/C2V1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON E. BROWN whose telephone number is (571)775-5984. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm.
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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 5712721123. 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.
/MADISON ELIZABETH BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 1787
/CALLIE E SHOSHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights