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 § 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 1-20 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 "the ratio" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As claims 2-20 depend either directly or indirectly from claim 1 they are rejected for the same reason.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the total molar amount" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As claims 2-20 depend either directly or indirectly from claim 1 they are rejected for the same reason.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the molar ratio" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 5-8 and 14-17, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the pH value" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 8, lines 10-11, does the phrase “the stirring condition” refer to “a stirring is performed” as established in claim 7, lines 5-6, or is this different? For the purposes of examination, the Examiner will be treating this phrase with the former interpretation.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the molar ratio" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the pH value" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claim 17, lines 9-10, does the phrase “the stirring condition” refer to “a stirring is performed” as established in claim 16, line 5, or is this different? For the purposes of examination, the Examiner will be treating this phrase with the former interpretation.
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.
Claim(s) 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uemura et al. (US 2002/0012830, hereinafter “Uemura”; listed in the IDS filed 7 July 2025).
Regarding claim 9, Uemura teaches an iron-manganese-based positive electrode material (see [0035], where M can be Fe (see [0049])).
Regarding the limitation “prepared by the method for preparing an iron-manganese-based positive electrode material of claim 1”, Applicant is reminded that the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. See MPEP §2113.
Regarding claim 10, Uemura teaches a lithium ion battery (see Fig. 1 and [0051]), comprising an electrolyte (see [0051]), a positive electrode material (see [0051]) and a negative electrode material (see [0051]), the positive electrode material comprises an iron-manganese-based positive electrode material (see [0035], where M can be Fe (see [0049])), wherein the iron-manganese-based positive electrode material is the iron-manganese-based positive electrode material of claim 9 (see rejection for claim 9 above).
Regarding claims 11-20, Applicant is reminded that the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. See MPEP §2113.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Endo et al. (US 2023/0130712, hereinafter “Endo”). Endo teaches preparing a Fe0.5Mn0.5(OH)2 precursor. Next, the prepared Fe0.5Mn0.5(OH)2 precursor was solid-phase mixed with LiH2PO4 and sucrose powder. Then, the positive active material LiFe0.5Mn0.5PO4 (equated to the claimed intermediate product) having an olivine-type crystal structure was prepared by firing at a firing temperature shown in Table 1 under a nitrogen atmosphere (see [0107]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN HA whose telephone number is (571)270-5934. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458 . 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.
/S.S.H/Examiner, Art Unit 1735 17 June 2026
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights