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 7 and 18-19 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 7 recites the limitation “the process for preparing the nickel oxide” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Thus, it is unclear what this limitation is referring to. For examination purposes, “the process for preparing the nickel oxide” in line 4 will be read as “a process for preparing the nickel oxide.”
Similar correction is required in claims 18 and 19.
Appropriate correction is required in order to overcome the indefiniteness rejections. Suggested corrections are bolded and underlined for emphasis only.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 8-13, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fang et al. (US 2016/0240842) (Fang) (of record).
Regarding claim 1, Fang discloses a method for preparing a composite material (title; abstract), wherein the method comprises the following steps: performing a first calcination treatment (sintering) on a mixture of a manganese source (MnSO4), a nickel source (NiSO4), a lithium source (LiOH·H2O), and a cobalt source (CoSO4) to obtain a cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate (Li1.07Ni0.1Co0.5Mn0.4O2) ([0044]; see also step 2 in [0035]); and performing a second calcination treatment (sintering) on a mixture of the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate and silicon dioxide (SiO2) ([0045]; see steps 2 and 3 and in [0036]-[0037]).
Regarding claim 4, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. In another embodiment, Fang discloses that the lithium source in the first calcination treatment can be lithium carbonate ([0060]), reading on the claimed feature (1). Thus, Fang reads on all of the required limitations in claim 4 because claim 4 only requires one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Regarding claim 8, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. In another embodiment, Fang discloses that a mass ratio of the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate to the silicon dioxide in the second calcination treatment is 0.0200:1 ([0085]), reading on the claimed range in feature (1). Thus, Fang reads on all of the required limitations in claim 8 because claim 8 only requires one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Regarding claim 9, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses that the first calcination treatment involves heating the mixture of the manganese source (MnSO4), the nickel source (NiSO4), the lithium source (LiOH·H2O), and the cobalt source (CoSO4) to a temperature of 900°C and keeping the temperature at 900°C for 10 hours ([0044]), reading on the claimed range of 800°C to 950°C in feature (1) and the claimed range of 10 hours to 12 hours in feature (2). Thus, Fang reads on all of the required limitations in claim 9 because claim 9 only requires one of the claimed features (1) to (4).
Regarding claim 10, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses that the mixture of the manganese source (MnSO4), the nickel source (NiSO4), the lithium source (LiOH·H2O), and the cobalt source (CoSO4) is fully mixed before subjecting the mixture to the first calcination treatment ([0044]), reading on the claimed feature (1). Thus, Fang reads on all of the required limitations in claim 10 because claim 10 only requires one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Regarding claim 11, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses another embodiment in which the second calcination treatment involves heating the mixture of the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate and the silicon dioxide to a temperature of 700°C and keeping the temperature at 700°C for 10 hours ([0097]), reading on the claimed range of 500°C to 700°C in feature (1) and the claimed range of 10 to 12 hours in feature (2). Thus, Fang reads on all of the required limitations in claim 11 because claim 11 only requires one of the claimed features (1) to (6).
Regarding claim 12, Fang discloses a composite material (positive active material including a core of Li1.07Ni0.1Co0.5Mn0.4O2 and a coating layer including SiO2) ([0045]) obtained by the method for preparing a composite material of claim 1 (see [0042]-[0045]).
Regarding claim 13, Fang discloses a positive electrode material for lithium-ion batteries (title; abstract), wherein the positive electrode material for lithium-ion batteries is mainly prepared from the composite material of claim 12 (see [0042]-[0045]; [0196]).
Regarding claim 20, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses that the lithium nickel manganate can be synthesized through solid phase calcination of oxides ([0035]; [0044]; [0060]; [0064]; [0068]; [0096]).
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.
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 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang et al. (US 2016/0240842) (Fang) (of record).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claims 1 and 4, respectively. Fang further discloses that the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate can have the general formula LixMyN1-yO2-αAβ, wherein the element represented by M can be nickel and the element represented by N can be cobalt and manganese, with y having the relationship 0.7
≤
y
≤
1.0 ([0018]). Thus, in this scenario, it is clear that the atomic molar ratio of the cobalt source to the nickel source can be anywhere from 0:1 (where y=1) to slightly less than 0.43:1 (where y=0.7), encompassing the claimed ratio of (0.03-0.06):1 in feature (2). A prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP §2144.05. Therefore, absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Fang to have satisfied the claimed ratio in feature (2) based on the encompassing ratio disclosed by Fang. Thus, Fang satisfies all of the required limitations in claims 6 and 16 because claims 6 and 16 only require one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Claims 2-3, 5, 14-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang et al. (US 2016/0240842) (Fang) (of record) in view of Nakai et al. (US 2006/0046143) (Nakai).
Regarding claim 2, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses that each of the source materials in creating the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate can be in the form of oxides, hydroxides, and carbonates ([0035]). Fang fails to explicitly disclose, however, that the manganese source comprises trimanganese tetroxide, as required in feature (1).
However, this is a common source of manganese in creating cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate. For instance, Nakai teaches a similar method for preparing a composite material for use in a positive electrode in a lithium battery (title), wherein the method involves obtaining a cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate (LiMn0.4Co0.2Ni0.4O2) by performing a heat treatment on a mixture of a manganese source, a nickel source, a lithium source, and a cobalt source ([0036]-[0037]). Nakai further teaches that the manganese source comprises trimanganese tetroxide (Mn3O4) ([0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used trimanganese tetroxide as the manganese source in the first calcination treatment disclosed by Fang because they would have had a reasonable expectation that it would be an effective source of manganese based on the teachings from Nakai. Thus, modified Fang satisfies all of the required limitations in claim 2 because claim 2 only requires one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Regarding claim 3, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses that each of the source materials in creating the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate can be in the form of oxides, hydroxides, and carbonates ([0035]). Fang fails to explicitly disclose, however, that the nickel source comprises nickel oxide, as required in feature (1).
However, this is a common source of nickel in creating cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate. For instance, Nakai teaches a similar method for preparing a composite material for use in a positive electrode in a lithium battery (title), wherein the method involves obtaining a cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate (LiMn0.4Co0.2Ni0.4O2) by performing a heat treatment on a mixture of a manganese source, a nickel source, a lithium source, and a cobalt source ([0036]-[0037]). Nakai further teaches that the nickel source comprises nickel oxide ([0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used nickel oxide as the nickel source in the first calcination treatment disclosed by Fang because they would have had a reasonable expectation that it would be an effective source of nickel based on the teachings from Nakai. Thus, modified Fang satisfies all of the required limitations in claim 3 because claim 3 only requires one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Regarding claim 5, Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claim 1. Fang further discloses that each of the source materials in creating the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate can be in the form of oxides, hydroxides, and carbonates ([0035]). Fang fails to explicitly disclose, however, that the cobalt source comprises cobalt hydroxide and/or cobalt oxide, as required by claim 5.
However, this is a common source of cobalt in creating cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate. For instance, Nakai teaches a similar method for preparing a composite material for use in a positive electrode in a lithium battery (title), wherein the method involves obtaining a cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate (LiMn0.4Co0.2Ni0.4O2) by performing a heat treatment on a mixture of a manganese source, a nickel source, a lithium source, and a cobalt source ([0036]-[0037]). Nakai further teaches that the cobalt source comprises cobalt hydroxide (Co(OH)2) ([0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used cobalt hydroxide as the cobalt source in the first calcination treatment disclosed by Fang because they would have had a reasonable expectation that it would be an effective source of cobalt based on the teachings from Nakai. Thus, modified Fang satisfies all of the limitations in claim 5.
Regarding claims 14, 15, and 17, modified Fang discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claims 2, 3, and 5, respectively. Modified Fang further discloses that the cobalt-doped lithium nickel manganate can have the general formula LixMyN1-yO2-αAβ, wherein the element represented by M can be nickel and the element represented by N can be cobalt and manganese, with y having the relationship 0.7
≤
y
≤
1.0 (Fang: [0018]). Thus, in this scenario, it is clear that the atomic molar ratio of the cobalt source to the nickel source can be anywhere from 0:1 (where y=1) to slightly less than 0.43:1 (where y=0.7), encompassing the claimed ratio of (0.03-0.06):1 in feature (2). A prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness. See MPEP §2144.05. Therefore, absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for modified Fang to have satisfied the claimed ratio in feature (2) based on the encompassing ratio disclosed by modified Fang. Thus, modified Fang satisfies all of the required limitations in claims 14, 15, and 17 because claims 14, 15, and 17 only require one of the claimed features (1) and (2).
Claims 7 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fang et al. (US 2016/0240842) (Fang) (of record) in view of Nakai et al. (US 2006/0046143) (Nakai) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Yonesato (JP 2011042541 with English Machine Translation).
Regarding claims 7, 18, and 19, Fang in view of Nakai discloses all of the limitations as set forth above for claims 1, 2, and 3, respectively. As set forth above, modified Fang discloses that the nickel source can be nickel oxide (Fang: [0035]; Nakai: [0037]). Modified Fang fails to disclose a process of manufacturing the nickel oxide that satisfies at least one of the features (1) to (3).
However, common processes of manufacturing nickel oxide are known in the art. For instance, Yonesato teaches a method of producing nickel oxide fine powder (title), wherein the process includes grinding a suspension of nickel oxide ([0015]-[0017]; [0020]; [0031]-[0038]; [0048]), wherein a solid content of the nickel oxide is in a range of from 10% to 30% ([0037]), overlapping the claimed range of 25% to 35% in feature (2). In the case where the claimed range overlaps the range disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP §2144.05. Yonesato further teaches that nickel oxide powder produced by this method has a low impurity content and is suitable for use in electronic components ([0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used nickel oxide produced by a method that satisfies claimed feature (2), as taught by Yonesato, because they would have had a reasonable expectation that doing so would lead to a lower impurity content. Thus, modified Fang satisfies all of the required limitations in claims 7, 17, and 18 because these claims only require one of the features (1) to (3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fang (CN 105990563) discloses a method for preparing a composite material used in a positive electrode of a lithium battery (title; abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENDON C DARBY whose telephone number is (571)272-1225. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Katelyn Smith can be reached at (571) 270-5545. 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.
/B.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1749
/KATELYN W SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1749
Prosecution Insights