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 .
Priority
1. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/18/2023 and 08/12/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, and 9-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (Pub. No. US 20210408547 A1) in view of Jo et al. (Pub. No. US 20200259172 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a lithium secondary battery (lithium secondary battery, see [0110]) comprising: a positive electrode (cathode, see [0110]) including a positive electrode active material (cathode active material, see [0110]), a negative electrode (anode, see [0110]) including a negative electrode active material (anode active material, see [0110]), a separator (separator, see [0131] gives a specific example of the battery including a separator, see [0061] where the separator separates the cathode from the anode, therefore disposed between) disposed between the positive electrode (cathode, see [0110]) and the negative electrode (anode, see [0110]), and a non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent), and the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent) comprises a lithium salt (lithium salt, see [0094]), an organic solvent (solvent, see [0097], see [0098] where the solvents are organic solvents), lithium difluorophosphate (lithium difluorophosphate, see [0075] where the additive A is lithium difluorophosphate), but fails to teach in this embodiment wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte solution comprises a dinitrile-based compound represented by Formula 3, wherein, in Formula 3, R.sup.1, R.sup.2, R.sup.3, and R.sup.4 are each independently hydrogen, an alkyl group having 1 to 10 carbon atoms, or —R—CN, wherein R is an alkylene group having 1 to 12 carbon atoms, at least one of R.sup.1 or R.sup.2 is —R—CN, and at least one of R.sup.3 or R.sup.4 is —R—CN, and fails to teach wherein the positive electrode active material comprises a core including a lithium cobalt-based oxide represented by Formula 1; and a shell including a lithium cobalt-based oxide represented by Formula 2 which is disposed on a surface of the core, Li.sub.aCo.sub.1-bM.sub.bO.sub.2 [Formula 1]
Li.sub.xCO.sub.1-yM.sup.1.sub.yO.sub.2 [Formula 2] wherein, in Formulas 1 and 2, M and M.sup.1 are each independently at least one doping element selected from the group consisting of aluminum (Al), zirconium (Zr), magnesium (Mg), and titanium (Ti), 1≤a≤1.2 and 0.005≤b≤0.05, and 0.5≤x<1 and 0≤y≤0.002.
However, in a different embodiment Wang teaches wherein the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent) comprises a dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) represented by Formula 3 (1,4-dicyano-2-butene, see chemical diagram below, see [0068] where the compound is 1,4-dicyano-2-butene), wherein, in Formula 3 (1,4-dicyano-2-butene, see chemical diagram below, see [0068] where the compound is 1,4-dicyano-2-butene), R.sup.1 (R1, see diagram below), R.sup.2 (R2, see diagram below), R.sup.3 (R3, see diagram below), and R.sup.4 (R4, see diagram below) are each independently hydrogen (R2/R4 are hydrogen, see diagram below), an alkyl group having 1 to 10 carbon atoms, or —R—CN (R1/R4 are cyano group, see diagram below), wherein R is an alkylene group having 1 to 12 carbon atoms (see diagram below where R is a alkylene group having 1 carbon atom), at least one of R.sup.1 (R1, see diagram below) or R.sup.2 is —R—CN (see diagram below where R1 is the -R-CN), and at least one of R.sup.3 or R.sup.4 (R4, see diagram below) is —R—CN (see diagram below where R4 is a -R-CN).
PNG
media_image1.png
330
330
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chemical Diagram of 1,4-dicyano-2-butene provided by PubChem
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the current embodiment of Wang to have the 2 to 3 cyano group compound be a dinitrile compound of 1,4-dicyano-2-butene as taught by a different embodiment of Wang. Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art. Further, Wang teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Wang fails to teach wherein the positive electrode active material comprises a core including a lithium cobalt-based oxide represented by Formula 1; and a shell including a lithium cobalt-based oxide represented by Formula 2 which is disposed on a surface of the core, Li.sub.aCo.sub.1-bM.sub.bO.sub.2 [Formula 1]
Li.sub.xCO.sub.1-yM.sup.1.sub.yO.sub.2 [Formula 2] wherein, in Formulas 1 and 2, M and M.sup.1 are each independently at least one doping element selected from the group consisting of aluminum (Al), zirconium (Zr), magnesium (Mg), and titanium (Ti), 1≤a≤1.2 and 0.005≤b≤0.05, and 0.5≤x<1 and 0≤y≤0.002.
However, Jo teaches wherein the positive electrode active material (lithium cobalt-based positive electrode active material, see [0028]) comprises a core (core portion, see [0028]) including a lithium cobalt-based oxide (lithium cobalt-based oxide represented by Formula 1, see [0028]) represented by Formula 1 (Formula 1, see [0028]); and a shell (shell portion, see [0028]) including a lithium cobalt-based oxide (lithium cobalt-based oxide represented by Formula 2, see [0028]) represented by Formula 2 (Formula 2, see [0029]) which is disposed on a surface of the core (core portion, see [0028], see [0103] gives a specific example showing the shell is disposed on the surface of the core portion), Li.sub.aCo.sub.1-bM.sub.bO.sub.2 [Formula 1] (Formula 1, see [0028])
Li.sub.xCO.sub.1-yM.sup.1.sub.yO.sub.2 [Formula 2] (Formula 2, see [0029]) wherein, in Formulas 1 (Formula 1, see [0028]) and 2 (Formula 2, see [0029]), M and M.sup.1 (see Formula 1 and 2 in [0028-0029]) are each independently at least one doping element (M and M.sup.1, Formula 1 and 2, see [0028-0029]) selected from the group consisting of aluminum (Al) (Al, see [0029-0030]), zirconium (Zr) (Zr, see [0029-0030]), magnesium (Mg) (Mg, see [0029-0030]), and titanium (Ti) (Ti, see [0029-0030], further see [0035-0036] and [0040-0041] where M and M.sup.1 are most preferably one or more of Al, Mg, Ti, and Zr), 1≤a≤1.2 (1≤a≤1.2, see [0029]) and 0.005≤b≤0.05 (0.005≤b≤0.05, see [0029]), and 0.5≤x<1 (0.5≤x<1, see [0030]) and 0≤y≤0.002 (0≤y≤0.001, see [0043]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang to substitute the cathode active material as taught by Wang for the lithium cobalt-based positive electrode active material as taught by Jo as an art effective equivalent cathode active material to exhibit excellent output and lifespan properties, high temperature storage, and suppressing generation of gas and cobalt elution (see [0002] of Jo). Further, Wang teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 3, Wang in view of Jo teaches wherein the at least one doping element (M and M.sup.1, Formula 1 and 2, see [0028-0029] of Jo, see modifications above) comprises zirconium (Zr) (Zr, see [0029-0030], see further see [0035-0036] and [0040-0041] where M and M.sup.1 are most preferably one or more of Al, Mg, Ti, and Zr, see Jo and see modifications above), and optionally further comprises at least one of aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), or titanium (Ti) (see [0035-0036] and [0040-0041] where M and M.sup.1 are most preferably one or more of Al, Mg, Ti, and Zr, see Jo and see modifications above).
Further regarding claim 3, if it is found that Wang in view of Jo fails to specifically teach wherein the at least one doping element comprises zirconium (Zr), and optionally further comprises at least one of aluminum (Al), magnesium (Mg), or titanium (Ti).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the lithium cobalt-based positive electrode active material comprises Zr and optionally further comprises at least one of Al, Mg, or Ti as Jo teaches the selection and combination of Al, Mg, Ti, and Zr is a result effective variable improving structural stability (see [0036] and [0041] of Jo). Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 6, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the aluminum (Al) is present in an amount of 0.5 wt % to 0.55 wt % based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material.
However, Jo further teaches wherein the aluminum (Al) (Al, see [0029-0030]) is present in an amount of 0.5 wt % to 0.55 wt % (0.5wt%, see [0105] in Example 3 the doping element is Aluminum, see [0113] and Table 1 where the doping element is present in 5000 ppm which equates to 0.5wt%) based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material (lithium cobalt-based positive electrode active material, see [0028], see [0113] the doping element content is of the positive active material).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the doping element of Al is included in 5000 ppm as taught by Jo to ensure significant suppression of generation of gas and cobalt elution is significant (see [0044] of Jo). Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 9, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the lithium difluorophosphate is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 1.5 wt % based on a total weight of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution.
However, Wang teaches wherein the lithium difluorophosphate (lithium difluorophosphate, see [0075] where the additive A is lithium difluorophosphate) is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 1.5 wt % (about 1.0 wt%, see [0076]) based on a total weight (total weight of electrolyte, see [0076]) of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the additive A being lithium difluorophosphate is included in about 1.0 wt% as Wang teaches it is known in the art to do so. Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 10, Wang in view of Jo teaches wherein the —R—CN groups (R1/R4 are cyano group, see diagram above) in the dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) are in a trans position with each other (see diagram above where R1 and R4 are trans positions from each other).
Regarding claim 11, Wang in view of Jo teaches wherein the dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) is at least one selected from the group consisting of 1,4-dicyano-2-butene (1,4-dicyano-2-butene, see chemical diagram above, see [0068] where the compound is 1,4-dicyano-2-butene, see modifications above), 1,4-dicyano-2-methyl-2-butene, 1,4-dicyano-2-ethyl-2-butene, 1,4-dicyano-2,3-dimethyl-2-butene, 1,4-dicyano-2,3-diethyl-2-butene, 1,6-dicyano-3-hexene, 1,6-dicyano-2-methyl-3-hexene, and 1,6-dicyano-2-methyl-5-methyl-3-hexene.
Regarding claim 12, Wang in view of Jo teaches wherein the dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) is 1,4-dicyano-2-butene (1,4-dicyano-2-butene, see chemical diagram above, see [0068] where the compound is 1,4-dicyano-2-butene, see modifications above).
Regarding claim 13, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein a weight ratio of the lithium difluorophosphate to the dinitrile-based compound is in a range of 1:0.25 to 1:3.
However, Wang teaches wherein the dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) is present in an amount of about 1 wt% (about 1 wt%, see [0069]) based on a total weight (total weight, see [0069]) of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent) and wherein the lithium difluorophosphate (lithium difluorophosphate, see [0075] where the additive A is lithium difluorophosphate) is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 1.5 wt % (about 1.0 wt%, see [0076]) based on a total weight (total weight of electrolyte, see [0076]) of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the 1,4-dicyano-2-butene is included in about 1 wt% of the total weight of the electrolyte and the lithium difluorophosphate is included in a weight ratio of about 1 wt% of the total weight of the electrolyte as Wang teaches it is known in the art to do so. Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Therefore Wang in view of Jo teaches wherein a weight ratio of the lithium difluorophosphate (lithium difluorophosphate, see [0075] where the additive A is lithium difluorophosphate) to the dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) is in a range of 1:0.25 to 1:3 (1:1, see modifications above where both compounds are present in about 1 wt% of the total weight of electrolyte solution, therefore 1:1 ratio).
Regarding claim 14, Wang in view of Jo teaches a weight ratio of the lithium difluorophosphate (lithium difluorophosphate, see [0075] where the additive A is lithium difluorophosphate) to the dinitrile-based compound (compound having 2 to 3 cyano groups, see [0067] where the compound is a dinitrile compound) is in a range of 1:0.25 to 1:2 (1:1, see modifications above where both compounds are present in about 1 wt% of the total weight of electrolyte solution, therefore 1:1 ratio).
Regarding claim 15, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein a ratio of a radius of the core to a thickness of the shell is in a range of about 1:0.01 to about 1:0.1.
However, Jo further teaches wherein a ratio of a radius (ratio of half diameter, see [0046]) of the core (core portion, see [0028]) to a thickness (thickness of shell portion, see [0046]) of the shell (shell portion, see [0028]) is in a range of about 1:0.01 to about 1:0.1 (1:0.01 to 1:0.1, see [0046]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the ratio of the half diameter of the core portion to the thickness of the shell portion is 1:0.01 to about 1:0.1 as taught by Jo to ensure increasing mobility of lithium ions is significant and ensuring structural stability of the active material particles (see [0046] of Jo). Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 16, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein a thickness of the shell is in a range of 1 nm to 500 nm.
However, Jo further teaches wherein a thickness (thickness, see [0046]) of the shell (shell portion, see [0028]) is in a range of 1 nm to 500 nm (1-500 nm, see [0046], note the thickness is disclosed as 1-500 microns, however this appears to be a translation or typographical error as seen in [0050] the average particle diameter is 10 to 50 microns, therefore it is not possible for the shell portion alone to have a thickness of up to 500 microns when the entire diameter is a magnitude smaller than that).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the thickness of the shell portion is 1-500 nm as further taught by Jo to ensure increasing mobility of lithium ions is significant and ensuring structural stability of the active material particles (see [0046] of Jo). Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 17, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the lithium difluorophosphate is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 1.5 wt % based on a total weight of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution.
However, Wang teaches wherein the lithium difluorophosphate (lithium difluorophosphate, see [0075] where the additive A is lithium difluorophosphate) is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 1.5 wt % (about 1.0 wt%, see [0076]) based on a total weight (total weight of electrolyte, see [0076]) of the non-aqueous electrolyte solution (electrolyte, see [0110], see [0097] where the solvent of the electrolyte is a non-aqueous solvent).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the additive A being lithium difluorophosphate is included in about 1.0 wt% as Wang teaches it is known in the art to do so. Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
5. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (Pub. No. US 20210408547 A1) in view of Jo et al. (Pub. No. US 20200259172 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang et al. (Pub. No. KR 20170063418 A).
Regarding claim 2, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the at least one doping element is present in a concentration gradient that decreases from a center of the core toward an interface between the core and the shell.
However, Kang teaches wherein the at least one doping element (doping element, see [0033], see [0031] where the doping elements are on of Zr or Al) is present in a concentration gradient (concentration gradient, see [0033]) that decreases from a center (center of particle, see [0033]) of the core (core, see [0033]) toward an interface (interface, see [0033]) between the core (core, see [0033]) and the shell (shell, see [0033]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the lithium cobalt-based positive electrode active material is formed such that Al or Zr is present in a concentration gradient that decreases from a center of core portion to an interface between the core portion and the shell portion as taught by Kang so that elution of the doping element can be suppressed and the effect of the doping element can be continuously exhibited (see [0034] of Kang). Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
6. Claim(s) 4-5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (Pub. No. US 20210408547 A1) in view of Jo et al. (Pub. No. US 20200259172 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nakanishi et al. (Pub. No. US 20030077517 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the zirconium (Zr) is present in an amount of 0.025 wt % to 0.085 wt % based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material.
However, Nakanishi teaches wherein the zirconium (Zr) (Zirconium, see [0032] where the added metal is Zirconium) is present in an amount of 0.025 wt % to 0.085 wt % (10-500ppm, see [0033], this equates to 0.001 wt% to 0.05 wt%) based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material (active materials of positive electrode, see [0031], see [0033]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that Zirconium is included in 10-500ppm based on a total weight of the active material as taught by Nakanishi ensure inhibiting evolution of gases and sufficient high rate and low temperature discharge characteristics (see [0033] of Nakanishi), and further obvious to modify the range to stay within the claimed range of 250 ppm to 500 ppm as Nakanishi teaches it is a result effective variable of inhibiting evolution of gases and ensuring high and low temperature discharge characteristics (see [0033] of Nakanishi). Further, it has been held that generally differences in concentration will not support patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art, as it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges, see MPEP 2144. Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 5, Wang in view of Jo and further in view of Nakanishi fails to teach wherein the zirconium (Zr) is present in an amount of 0.03 wt % to 0.08 wt % based on the total weight of the positive electrode active material.
However, Wang in view of Jo and further in view of Nakanishi teaches wherein the zirconium (Zr) (Zr, see [0029-0030]) is present in an amount of 0.025 wt % to 0.085 wt % (250-500ppm, see [0033], this equates to 0.025 wt% to 0.05 wt%, see Nakanishi, see modifications above) based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material (cathode active material, see [0110]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo and further in view of Nakanishi such that the range of amount of zirconium is modified stay within the claimed range of 300 ppm to 500 ppm as Nakanishi teaches it is a result effective variable of inhibiting evolution of gases and ensuring high and low temperature discharge characteristics (see [0033] of Nakanishi). Further, it has been held that generally differences in concentration will not support patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art, as it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges, see MPEP 2144. Further, Wang in view of Jo in view of Nakanishi teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Regarding claim 8, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the titanium (Ti) is present in an amount of 0.01 wt % to 0.05 wt % based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material.
However, Nakanishi teaches wherein the titanium (Ti) (titanium, see [0032] where the added metal is titanium) is present in an amount of 0.025 wt % to 0.085 wt % (10-500ppm, see [0033], this equates to 0.001 wt% to 0.05 wt%) based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material (active materials of positive electrode, see [0031], see [0033]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that titanium is included in 10-500ppm based on a total weight of the active material as taught by Nakanishi ensure inhibiting evolution of gases and sufficient high rate and low temperature discharge characteristics (see [0033] of Nakanishi), and further obvious to modify the range to stay within the claimed range of 250 ppm to 500 ppm as Nakanishi teaches it is a result effective variable of inhibiting evolution of gases and ensuring high and low temperature discharge characteristics (see [0033] of Nakanishi). Further, it has been held that generally differences in concentration will not support patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art, as it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges, see MPEP 2144. Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
7. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (Pub. No. US 20210408547 A1) in view of Jo et al. (Pub. No. US 20200259172 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (Pub. No. US 20150162598 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Wang in view of Jo fails to teach wherein the magnesium (Mg) is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 0.15 wt % based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material.
However, Kim teaches wherein the magnesium (Mg) (Mg, see [0024]) is present in an amount of 0.1 wt % to 0.15 wt % (1000 to 2500 ppm, see [0024], this is 0.1 to 0.25 wt%, see [0089] gives a specific example of Mg present in 1000 ppm) based on a total weight of the positive electrode active material (lithium cobalt-based oxide, see [0024]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang in view of Jo such that the magnesium in included in 1000-2500 ppm based on a total weight of the cathode active material as taught by Kim to ensure structural stability at high voltage and high temperature lifespan characteristics (see [0025] of Kim). Further it would have been obvious to modify the range to stay within the claimed range of 1000 to 1500 ppm as Kim teaches it is a result effective variable of ensuring structural stability at high voltage and high temperature lifespan characteristics (see [0025] of Kim). Further, it has been held that generally differences in concentration will not support patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art, as it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges, see MPEP 2144. Further, Wang in view of Jo teaches that modifications can be made (see [0113] of Wang).
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS CALEB MARROQUIN whose telephone number is (571)272-0166. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5:00 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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at 571-270-7078. 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.
/DOUGLAS C MARROQUIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/JEREMIAH R SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights