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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-30 in the reply filed on 3/10/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-30 will be examined. Claims 31-32 are withdrawn from consideration in view of the election without traverse.
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.
Claim 20-23 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.
Claims 20-23 recites the limitation "the third composition". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 20-23 depend from Claim 17 and the third composition is not recited in claim 17.
Claim 19 recites a third composition. It is unclear to the Examiner if the third composition of claim 19 is referring to the same third composition required in claims 20-23. Applicant is required to clarify the confusion and amend accordingly.
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 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.
Claim 1-18, 24-27 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20140045067A1 (Cho) further in view of US20150228975A1 (Lee) and in further view of US20150380728A1 (Son)
Regarding claim 1, Cho teaches a positive active material for a rechargeable lithium battery [abs] that includes: a core comprising a plurality of primary particles [0077; 0205- fig. 7f]; and a shell disposed on the core [abs], wherein a primary particle of the plurality of primary particles includes a lithium nickel transition metal oxide [0071-0074; i.e. Formula 1, M1- Lik1M1 1-x1-y1M2 x1M3 y1On1; being nickel transition metal], and the shell includes a first composition [0066, 0072; represented by Formula 2, which is a layered structure and/or Formula 3, which is a spinel structure]; wherein the first composition contains a first metal [0070-0072; M1 to M3 are different and are each independently Ni, Co, Mn, Al, Mg, Ba, Ti, V, Zr, Fe, Cu, or Sr, and specifically the M1 may be Ni, and the M2 and M3 may be Co, Mn, Al, Mg, Ba, Ti, V, Zr, Fe, Cu, or Sr. More specifically, the M1 may be Ni, the M2 may be Co, and the M3 may be Mn].
Cho is silent with regard and a second composition, and the second composition contains a second metal, wherein the first metal comprises cobalt, the second metal comprises cerium, and the first composition comprises a first phase and the second composition comprises a second phase that is distinguishable from the first phase or a combination thereof, wherein the lithium nickel transition metal oxide is represented by Formula 6 or Formula 7: Formula 6 LiaNibCocMndM8eO2-αXαFormula 7 LiaNibCocAldM8eO2-αXαwherein in Formulae 6 and 7, 0.9≤a≤1.2, 0.7<b<1, 0<c<0.1, 0<d<0.1, 0≤e<0.01, b+c+d+e=1, and 0≤α<2, M8 is Zr, Al, V, Cr, Fe, Re, B, Ru, Ti, Nb, Mo, Mg, or Pt, and X is F, S, or P.
Lee teaches a cathode active material including a lithium-containing transition metal oxide and two or more metal composite oxide layers [abs]; and teaches the second metal comprises cerium [0025-0026; M(C2H5O2)n]. With regard to the claimed “the first composition comprises a first phase and the second composition comprises a second phase that is distinguishable from the first phase”; It is noted, that since Lee teaches another type of metal that is [M(C2H5O2)n ; n is an integer between 1 and 4 ; 0025-0026] which is a fluorite structure it would be distinguishable from the first composition, as the first composition is a layered crystal structure and a spinel structure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cathode structure of Cho to further incorporate the second metal taught by Lee. Doing so, exhibits uniform thickness on the surface of a cathode active material, which may further improve charge and discharge efficiency [0021-022].
Cho and Lee are silent in regards to Formula 6. Son teaches active material composite including any of the composite and an electrochemically active material [0009; 0156].Son teaches Formula 6 (as required above),wherein
0.9<a<1.2, 0.7<b<1,0<c<0.1, 0<d<0.1,0<e<0.01, b+c+d+e=1, and 0<a<2, M8 is Zr) Al, V, Cr, Fe, Re, B, Ru, Ti, Nb, Mo, Mg, or Pt, and X is F, S, or P.
All values fall within recited ranges. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho to include the Formula of Son, as Son teaches battery having improved capacity and good improved rate characteristics may be manufactured using an electrochemically active material composite as recited above [0175].
Regarding claim 2, modified Cho teaches wherein the first composition comprises a phase having a layered crystal structure and a phase having a spinel crystal structure [please refer to claim 1 as it is explained therein].
Regarding claim 3, modified Cho teaches wherein the layered crystal structure belongs to a space group R-3m [0193], and wherein the spinel crystal structure belongs to a space group Fd-3m [0204] [please refer to claim 1 as it is explained therein].
Regarding claim 4, modified Cho teaches wherein the second composition comprises a phase having a fluorite crystal structure [please refer to claim 1; Lee 0025-0026].
Regarding claim 5, modified Cho teaches wherein the fluorite crystal structure belongs to a space group Fm-3m [please refer to the rejection in claim 1; Lee, 0025-0026].
Regarding claim 6, modified Cho teaches wherein the shell comprises: a multi-layered structure comprising a first layer and a second layer, Cho teaches a layered structure [0070] wherein the first layer includes a first composition, but is silent with respect to the second layer includes a second composition as recited in claim 1. Lee teaches the second composition [Lee; M(C2H5O2)n ; n is an integer between 1 and 4 ; 0025-0026] ]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho’s layered structure with the second composition of Lee in the second layer of Cho, as this would have been a simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.). In addition, Lee teaches the using the metal oxide layers to coat the cathode active material exhibits uniform thickness on the surface of a cathode active material, which may further improve charge and discharge efficiency [0021-022].
Regarding claim 7, modified Cho teaches the cathode active material of claim 6. Cho teaches the primary particle to be nickel i.e. M2x1; molar ratio of x1 may be 0≦x1<0.2 and the first metal of the first layer of the shell is M3y2= 0<y2<0.5; wherein M3 is defined in claim 1.
Therefore, Cho teaches the first layer and wherein a concentration of the first metal in the first layer is greater than a concentration of the first metal in the primary particle.
Regarding claim 8, Cho teaches wherein the first metal further comprises Mg, Zr, Al, Mn, Si, Pd, Ti, Sn, Ir, Pt, Ru, Ca, Ba, V, Nb, Fe, Cu, Ag, Zn, B, Ga, Ge, Sb, Bi, or a combination thereof [please refer to claim 1, as this is addressed therein].
Regarding claim 9, Cho teaches the first composition comprises the first metal and oxygen, or a composition comprising lithium, the first metal, and oxygen [0074-0078; Formula2- Lik2M1 1-x2-y2M2 x2M3 y2On2], wherein an amount of the lithium is 0 moles to about 3.3 moles of lithium, based on 1 mole of the first composition [Lik2 is 0.98≦k2≦1.35; 0081] , an amount of the first metal is about 0.7 moles to about 3.3 moles of the first metal, based on 1 mole of the first composition [M1 to M3 can be Ni, Co, Mn, Al, Mg, Ba, Ti, V, Zr, Fe, Cu, or Sr; wherein 0≦x2<0.2, 0<y2<0.5, 0<x2+y2<0.7, y2>y1, and 1.98≦n2≦2, and specifically, 1≦k2≦1.35, 0≦x2<0.15, 0<y2<0.45, 0<x2+y2<0.6, y2>y1; which fall within the claimed range] , and an amount of the oxygen is about 1.7 moles to about 4.3 moles of oxygen, based on 1 mole of the first composition [On2 wherein n2=2; 0081].
Regarding claim 10, Cho teaches wherein the first composition is represented by Formula 1: Formula 1 LiaM1bOcwherein in Formula 1, M1 is Co, or M1 is a combination of Co and Mg, Zr, Al, Mn, Si, Pd, Ti, Sn, Ir, Pt, Ru, Ca, Ba, V, Nb, Fe, Cu, Ag, Zn, B, Ga, Ge, Sb, Bi, or a combination thereof, and 0≤a≤3.1, 0.9≤b≤3.1, and 1.9≤c≤4.1 [please refer to rejection 9, as this is taught therein].
Regarding claim 11, Cho teaches the shell comprises Co3O4, [0071-0082, it is noted, the formulas taught by Cho illustrate the recited composition for the first metal and can be manipulated to incorporate the metals as required].
Regarding claim 12, Cho teaches wherein the first composition further comprises LiAlO2 [0074, 0078-008, wherein M2 can be A1 and O2].
Regarding claim 13, Cho teaches wherein an amount of the first composition or the first metal included in the shell is 10 parts by weight or less, based on 100 parts by weight of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide [0074, 0078-0082]. Thus, Formula 1 of Cho is the lithium nickel transition metal oxide composition and Formula 2 is the composition of the first composition of the shell;
Therefore, Lik2M1 1-x2-y2 M2 x2 M3 y2 On2 [Chemical Formula 2; shell]; 0.98≦k2≦1.35, 0≦x2<0.2, 0<y2<0.5, 0<x2+y2<0.7, y2>y1, and 1.98≦n2≦2, and specifically, 1≦k2≦1.35, 0≦x2<0.15, 0<y2<0.45, 0<x2+y2<0.6, y2>y1, and n2=2; where M2 and M3 can be 0, so M1 is the first metal that will have a value of 0.3 mol being the maximum.
The Formula for the lithium nickel transition metal oxide is Cho’s formula 1:
Lik1M1 1-x1-y1 M2 x1M3 y1On1 [Chemical Formula 1; core];
0.98≦k1≦1.35, 0≦x1<0.2, 0≦y1<0.3, 0<x1+y1<0.5, and 1.98≦n1≦2, and specifically, 1≦k1≦1.35, 0<x1<0.15, 0≦y1<0.25, 0<x1+y1<0.4, and n1=2.; where Li is 0.98-1.35; Ni is M1, which is 0.5 being the maximum value, which gives us a value that is higher than the value of the shell above, thus Cho teaches the recited limitation.
Regarding claim 14, modified Cho teaches the second composition. Cho is silent in regards to wherein the second composition is a composition comprising the second metal and oxygen, wherein an amount of the second metal is about 0.7 moles to about 1.3 moles, based on 1 mole of the second composition, and an amount of the oxygen is about 1.7 moles to about 2.3 moles, based on 1 mole of the second composition. Lee teaches the second composition, and the second metal being Cerium [0026; M(C2H5O2)n; where M is Cerium]; wherein an amount of the second metal is about 0.7 moles to about 1.3 moles [0025-0026; i.e. n is an integer between 1 and 4; which falls within the claimed range], based on 1 mole of the second composition and the oxygen is 2 mol.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cathode structure of Cho to further incorporate the second metal mol% taught by Lee. Doing so, exhibits uniform thickness on the surface of a cathode active material, which may further improve charge and discharge efficiency [0021-022].
Regarding claim 15, as discussed above in claim Cho and Lee teach the second composition is represented by Formula 2: M2bOc; wherein in Formula 2, M2 is Ce
0.9<b<1.1 and 1.9<c<2.1 [please refer to the rejection of claim 14].
Regarding claim 16, modified Cho teaches wherein the second composition comprises CeO2, [i.e. M(C2H5O2)n; where M is Cerium please refer to the rejection in claim 1; Lee 0025-0026]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cathode structure of Cho to further incorporate the second metal taught by Lee. Doing so, exhibits uniform thickness on the surface of a cathode active material, which may further improve charge and discharge efficiency [0021-022].
Regarding claim 17, modified Cho teaches wherein the second composition further comprises La2O3, Sc2O3, Y2O3, Nd2O3, Sm2O3, Er2O, or a combination thereof [Lee 0025-0026; It is noted, that since Lee teaches another type of metal that is [M(C2H5O2)n ; n is an integer between 1 and 4 ; where M, as a metal desorbed from a metal precursor, represents at least one metal selected from the group consisting of magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), strontium (Sr), barium (Ba), yttrium (Y), titanium (Ti), zirconium (Zr), vanadium (V), niobium (Nb), tantalum (Ta), chromium (Cr), molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), cobalt (Co), iridium (Ir), nickel (Ni), zinc (Zn), aluminum (Al), gallium (Ga), indium (In), silicon (Si), germanium (Ge), tin (Sn), lanthanum (La), and cerium (Ce); thus, Lee teaches the required composition.
Regarding claim 18, as discussed above in claim Cho and Lee teaches wherein an amount of the second composition or second metal included in the shell is 10 parts by weight or less, based on 100 parts by weight of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide [please refer to the rejection of the second composition i.e. CeO2 taught above in claim 16 and the rejection of claim 13 that addresses the value of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide].
Regarding claim 24, Cho teaches wherein the shell further includes a third composition including a third metal [0072-0075].
Regarding claim 25, Cho teaches wherein the lithium nickel transition metal oxide comprises a third metal [0072-0075].
Regarding claim 26, Cho teaches wherein the lithium nickel transition metal oxide comprises lithium, nickel, a third metal, a fourth metal, and oxygen, an amount of the lithium is about 0.1 moles to about 1.3 moles Li= 0.98≦k1≦1.35 (falls within the claimed range), based on 1 mole of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide, an amount of the nickel is about 0.7 moles to about 0.99 moles, based on 1 mole of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide, an amount of the third metal is about 0.0005 moles to about 0.01 moles M2=0≦x1<0.2 (falls within the claimed range), based on 1 mole of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide, an amount of the fourth metal is about 0.01 moles to about 0.3 moles M3 0≦y1<0.3 ;(falls within the claimed range), based on 1 mole of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide, an amount of the oxygen is about 1.7 to about 2.3 moles O=2 (falls within the claimed range)
, based on 1 mole of the lithium nickel transition metal oxide, and the fourth metal is a metal that is different from lithium, nickel, and the third metal [0072-0075; M1 to M3 are different and are each independently Ni, Co, Mn, Al, Mg, Ba, Ti, V, Zr, Fe, Cu, or Sr, thus teach the claimed recitations].
Regarding claim 27, modified Cho teaches a cathode comprising the composite cathode active material of claim 1 [abs, full disclosure].
Regarding claim 30, modified Cho teaches an anode; and an electrolyte between the cathode and the anode [Cho 0006].
Claim 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20140045067A1 (Cho) further in view of US20150228975A1 (Lee) in further view of US20150380728A1 (Son) and “The preparation and role of Li2ZrO3 surface coating LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 as cathode for lithium-ion batteries; Applied Surface Science Volume 361, January 15, 2016, pg. 150-156” (Xu)
Regarding claim 19, Cho and Lee are silent with regards to wherein the core comprises a grain boundary between primary particles of the plurality of primary particles, and the grain boundary comprises a third composition comprising a third metal. Xu teaches a cathode for lithium ion batteries and teaches Li2ZrO3-coated to a LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 (LZO-LMO) is successful to synthesize using a wet chemical method [Xu, p 150-156]. It is noted, Li2ZrO3 has a monoclinic structure and is part of the C2/c space group, thus this limitation is taught by Xu. The Li2ZrO3 coating forms a uniform layer on LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 particles (LMO) without changing the crystal structure [abs].It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho in further view of Xu to include the grain boundary and the third composition as taught by Xu, as the coating layer of LZO plays the positive role in conductivity of lithium diffusion and improves rate performance of LMO [abs].
Regarding claim 20, modified Cho teaches wherein the third composition comprises a third phase having a monoclinic crystal structure, and the structure of the third composition belongs to a C2/m, C12/c1, or C2/c space group [Xu, please refer to claim 19].
Regarding claim 21, modified Cho teaches wherein the third metal is Zr, Al, Co, Mg, Mn, Si, Mo, Pd, Ti, Sn, Ir, Pt, Ru, or a combination thereof [Xu, please refer to claim 19].
Regarding claim 22, modified Cho teaches the third composition (Zr) comprising lithium, the third metal, and oxygen Xu teaches the claimed: amount of the lithium is about 1.7 moles to about 2.3 moles, based on 1 mole of the third composition, an amount of the third metal is about 0.7 moles to about 1.3 moles, based on 1 mole of the third composition, and an amount of the oxygen is about 2.7 moles to about 3.3 moles, based on 1 mole of the third composition [i.e. Li2ZrO3; p. 151 col. 1]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Cho in further view of Xu to include the grain boundary and the third composition comprising Li2ZrO3 taught by Xu, plays the positive role in the rate performance and the electrochemical performances at high temperature [p. 151 col. 1].
Regarding claim 23, modified Cho teaches wherein the third composition is represented by Formula 3: Formula 3 LiaM3bOcwherein in Formula 3, M3 is Zr, Al, Co, Mg, Mn, Si, Mo, Pd, Ti, Sn, Ir, Pt, Ru, or a combination thereof, and 1.9≤a≤2.1, 0.9≤b≤1.1, and 2.9≤c≤3.1.
Please refer to the rejection of claim 22 for detailed explanation of the recited Formula 3.
Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20140045067A1 (Cho) further in view of US20150228975A1 (Lee) and in further view of US20150380728A1 (Son) and in further view of US20160204424A1 (Sawai)
Regarding claim 28, modified Cho teaches a cathode active material of claim 27, however is silent with respect to the cathode active material having an olivine structure. Sawai teaches positive electrode material is used to produce a positive electrode of a lithium secondary battery, the positive electrode material being a composite lithium material that includes a first lithium compound and a second lithium compound [abs]. Sawai teaches the lithium-containing phosphate compound may be of olivine-type [0016]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cathode material of Cho to further use the olivine type structure of Sawai. The motivation for doing so would have been that Sawai discloses the olivine-type material does not easily undergo deoxidation, and may significantly contribute to preventing thermal runaway of a battery, thereby improving the safety of the lithium secondary battery [0056].
Regarding claim 29, Cho and Lee in view of Sawai teach the cathode active material having an olivine structure [Sawai 0056]. Sawai teaches an amount of the cathode active material having an olivine structure is less than or equal to about 10 weight percent, based on a total weight of the cathode active material [0016-Sawai discloses the value of the olivine would be =1 thus falls with the claimed ranges.] It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cathode material of Cho to further use the olivine weight % of Sawai. The motivation for doing so would have been that Sawai discloses the olivine-type material does not easily undergo deoxidation, and may significantly contribute to preventing thermal runaway of a battery, thereby improving the safety of the lithium secondary battery [0056].
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-9, 11, 13-16, 18-19, 22-23 and 27-30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 and 19, 21-24 of U.S. Patent No. 11955631B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claim: A composite cathode active material comprising: a core comprising a plurality of primary particles; and a shell disposed on the core, wherein a primary particle of the plurality of primary particles includes a lithium nickel transition metal oxide, and the shell includes a first composition and a second composition, wherein the first composition contains a first metal and the second composition contains a second metal, wherein the first metal comprises cobalt, the second metal comprises cerium, and the first composition comprises a first phase and the second composition comprises a second phase that is distinguishable from the first phase or a combination thereof [claim 1]. Further the claimed: the lithium nickel transition metal oxide is represented by Formula 6 or Formula 7: Formula 6 LiaNibCocMndM8eO2-αXαFormula 7 LiaNibCocAldM8eO2-αXαwherein in Formulae 6 and 7, 0.9≤a≤1.2, 0.7<b<1, 0<c<0.1, 0<d<0.1, 0≤e<0.01, b+c+d+e=1, and 0≤α<2, M8 is Zr, Al, V, Cr, Fe, Re, B, Ru, Ti, Nb, Mo, Mg, or Pt, and X is F, S, or P is also claimed in ‘631 claim 19.
Claim 2 of the present application is claimed in claim 1 of ‘631.
Claim 3 of the present application is claimed in claim 2 of ‘631.
Claim 4 of the present application is claimed in claim 3 of ‘631.
Claim 5 of the present application is claimed in claim 4 of ‘631.
Claim 6 of the present application is claimed in claim 5 of ‘631.
Claim 7 of the present application is claimed in claim 6 of ‘631.
Claim 8 of the present application is claimed in claim 1 of ‘631.
Claim 9 of the present application is claimed in claim 7 of ‘631.
Claim 11 of the present application is claimed in claim 8 of ‘631.
Claim 13 of the present application is claimed in claim 9 of ‘631.
Claim 14 of the present application is claimed in claim 10 of ‘631.
Claim 15 of the present application is claimed in claim 11 of ‘631.
Claim 16 of the present application is claimed in claim 12 of ‘631.
Claim 18 of the present application is claimed in claim 13 of ‘631.
Claim 19 of the present application is claimed in claim 14 of ‘631.
Claim 22 of the present application is claimed in claim 14 of ‘631.
Claim 23 of the present application is claimed in claim 15 of ‘631.
Claim 27 of the present application is claimed in claim 21 of ‘631.
Claim 28 of the present application is claimed in claim 22 of ‘631.
Claim 29 of the present application is claimed in claim 23 of ‘631.
Claim 30 of the present application is claimed in claim 24 of ‘631.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARIKA GUPTA whose telephone number is (571)272-9907. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729