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
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.
Claims 1 and 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2019/0044135A1 (Du).
Regarding claims 1, 3-8 and 10, Du teaches a lithium ion battery comprises a positive electrode , a negative electrode, a separator and a non-aqueous electrolyte ([0040]-[0046]).
Du teaches that the positive electrode comprises a modified positive electrode active material comprising a positive electrode active material substrate, and an oxide layer containing boron oxide coated on the surface of the positive electrode active material substrate([0005], Fig. 1, [0021], [0024] , [0051] and Table 1), wherein the positive electrode active material substrate is exemplified as LiNi0.8 Co0.1Mn0.1O2 ([0050]), which meets the claimed nickel amount and formula 1 of claim 8 wherein a is 1, x is 0.8, y is 0.1, M1 is Mn, z is 0.1 and w is 0.
Du further teaches that the positive electrode active material substrate comprises secondary particles formed by agglomeration of the primary particles([0027] and Fig. 2), wherein the coating is distributed on a surface of some of primary particles (Fig. 4).
Du exemplified the boron in an amount of 0.2% ([0021], [0024], [0051] and Table 1), i.e., 2000ppm, which meets the claimed range of boron content A of claims 5-7.
Du exemplifies the non aqueous electrolyte comprises LiPF6 ([0057]) , thus no boron containing lithium salt.
Du does not teach the nonaqueous electrolyte solution comprise a boron dissolved therein, neither the claimed boron content ratio in the electrolyte solution and in the positive electrode. However, Du teaches the same nickel rich positive electrode coated with the same boron compound, i.e., boron oxide in the same amount, i.e. 2000 ppm, and the same non aqueous electrolyte solution of LiPF6 in similar solvent mixture containing ethylene carbonate and dimethyl carbonate ([0057]) to that of the instantly disclosed (instant example 1-1). The original specification does not identify a feature other than the presence of moisture in the fabrication and shipping process that results in the claimed effect, i.e., elution of boron from the positive electrode into the nonaqueous electrolyte solution, outside of the presence of the claimed components in the claimed amount. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable basis to expect the claimed effects, elution of boron in the claimed ratio and amount from the positive electrode into the nonaqueous electrolyte solution would naturally arise and be achieved by a composition with all the claimed ingredients under environmental moisture. "Products of identical chemical composition can not have mutually exclusive properties." In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990). A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. See MPEP § 2112.01. If it is the applicant’s position that this would not be the case: (1) evidence would need to be provided to support the applicant’s position; and (2) it would be the Office’s position that the application contains inadequate disclosure that there is no teaching as to how to obtain the claimed properties with only the claimed ingredients.
Regarding claim 9, Du teaches that the primary particles of the positive electrode active material substrate have a particle diameter of 0.2 μm to 1 μm exemplified as 0.4 μm, and the secondary particles have a particle diameter of 5 μm to 18 μm, exemplified as 12μm ([0027] and [0050]), which meets the claimed particle sizes of primary and secondary particles, respectively.
Claims 1 and 4-10 are alternatively, and claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Du in view of US2006/0188787A1(Nakanishi), which is listed in Applicant’s information disclosure statement.
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4-8 and 10, Du teaches a lithium ion battery comprises a positive electrode , a negative electrode, a separator and a non-aqueous electrolyte ([0040]-[0046]).
Du teaches that the positive electrode comprises a modified positive electrode active material comprising a positive electrode active material substrate, and an oxide layer containing boron oxide coated on the surface of the positive electrode active material substrate([0005], Fig. 1, [0021], [0024] , [0051] and Table 1), wherein the positive electrode active material substrate is exemplified as LiNi0.8 Co0.1Mn0.1O2 ([0050]), which meets the claimed nickel amount and formula 1 of claim 8 wherein a is 1, x is 0.8, y is 0.1, M1 is Mn, z is 0.1 and w is 0.
Du further teaches that the positive electrode active material substrate comprises secondary particles formed by agglomeration of the primary particles([0027] and Fig. 2), wherein the coating is distributed on a surface of some of primary particles (Fig. 4).
Du exemplified the boron in an amount of 0.2% ([0021], [0024], [0051] and Table 1), i.e., 2000ppm, which meets the claimed range of boron content A of claims 5-7.
Du exemplifies the non aqueous electrolyte comprises LiPF6 ([0057]).
Du does not teach the nonaqueous electrolyte solution comprise a boron dissolved therein, neither the claimed boron content ratio in the electrolyte solution and in the positive electrode.
Nakanishi teaches the addition of an inorganic borate to an non-aqueous electrolyte makes it possible to suppress the amount of gas production when batteries are stored while being continuously charged, and to improve the capacity recovery rate as well as the high-rate discharge characteristics and cycle characteristics ([012] and [0067]), and exemplifies a concentration of 0.005 mol/L of Li2B4O7 added to a lithium hexafluorophosphate nonaqueous electrolyte solution of a solvent mixture of ethylene carbonate, ethyl methyl carbonate, and diethyl carbonate in a volume ratio of 20:60:20 ([0046] and Table 1), which is equivalent to about 216 ppm of boron content, estimated by the examiner based on atom mass of 10.8 of boron (i.e., 0.005X4X10.8/1000), which meets the claimed range of content (B) of claims 5-7.
At the time the invention was made it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to add an inorganic borate such as 0.005 mol/L of Li2B4O7 of Nakanishi to the nonaqueous electrolyte solution of Du. The rationale to do so would have been the motivation provided by the teachings of Nankanish that to do so would suppress the amount of gas production when batteries are stored while being continuously charged, and to improve the capacity recovery rate as well as the high-rate discharge characteristics and cycle characteristics ([012] and [0067]). Thus the ratio of (B/A) is 216 ppm to 2000 ppm, i.e., 0.108, which meets the claimed ratio.
Regarding claim 9, Du teaches that the primary particles of the positive electrode active material substrate have a particle diameter of 0.2 μm to 1 μm exemplified as 0.4 μm, and the secondary particles have a particle diameter of 5 μm to 18 μm, exemplified as 12μm ([0027] and [0050]), which meets the claimed particle sizes of primary and secondary particles, respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIQUN LI whose telephone number is (571)270-7736. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 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, Randy Gulakowski can be reached at 571-2721302. 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.
/AIQUN LI/Ph.D., Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1766
Prosecution Insights