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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/24/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 4/24/2026 are entered and fully considered.
Response to Arguments
In view of the amendments a new rejection is provided. The previous rejection relied upon LI because it used a core shell (coated) structure. However, in view of the amendment, the materials used in LI are different. A new rejection is provided below using the previously cited references. As noted below the examiner could not motivate substituting “equivalent” active materials to result in the claimed structure where the specified materials are used in the coated structure. The equivalent materials would suggest that either material could be coated on the other, but the claim specifically identifies which material is the coating material and is distinguished from the exemplary core shell materials described in LI.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group III, claims 10-20 in the reply filed on 8/4/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 are withdrawn.
Claim(s) 10, 12, 18, 20, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BARKER et al. (US 2008/0241043) and PARK et al. (US 2012/0217452).
Regarding claims 10 and 12,
BARKER teaches when using cathode active materials LiFePO4, Li3Fe2(PO4)3 (lithium iron phosphates) and LiTiPO4F are known equivalent active materials specifically disclosed in the context of general formula (1) [0042]. The positive electrode active materials are formed into the electrode plate [0003] and [0087]. The reference only teaches using one type of positive electrode active material. However, it is considered prima facie obvious to combine equivalents known for the same purpose, MPEP 2144.06.I. In this instance, both lithium iron phosphate and LiTiPO4F are species of the same generic formula and serve the same purpose as positive electrode active material. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the positive electrode active materials, because the idea of combining them flows logically from their having been individually taught in the prior art.
In addition, PARK further teaches mixing cathode active materials to make a battery that maintains a required power for wider state of charge (SOC) range [0017]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to mix cathode active materials together to maintain a wider state of charge range. PARK also teaches that when mixing first and second cathode active material for improving SOC range, the second active material can be included at 10 to 30 parts by weight per 100 parts of the total mixed active material [0063]. The claimed range is overlapped by the prior art range and considered prima facie obvious, MPEP 2144.05.I.
The references do not describe the plateau voltage of the various cathode active materials. However, applicant’s specification also does not indicate which cathode active materials satisfy the plateau voltage of less than 3.22V. Accordingly, each of the materials described as second cathode active materials are presumed to have a plateau voltage of less than 3.22V, including the LiTiPO4F.
Regarding claim 18,
BARKER teaches using the cathode active material in a cell 10 enclosed in a sealed container [0084] and fig. 1. PARKER teaches making batteries for EVs [0016]. One of ordinary skill would recognize that batteries are used to power and store energy for an electrical apparatus.
Regarding claims 20 and 24,
BARKER teaches including a binder in the positive electrode [0087]. The binder, by definition, physically bonds the components of the positive electrode (including active material).
Claim(s) 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BARKER et al. (US 2008/0241043) and PARK et al. (US 2012/0217452) further in view of WATANABE et al. (US 2013/0143081).
Regarding claims 15 and 16,
BARKER teaches using the cathode active material in a cell 10 enclosed in a sealed container [0084] and fig. 1. The reference does not expressly teach incorporating the cells into “modules” or “packs”. However, PARK teaches mixing cathode active materials to make a battery that maintains a required power for wider state of charge (SOC) range [0017]. The maintained power over the battery charge is particularly used in EVs [0016]. WATANABE teaches that EVs use battery packs, made of battery modules, which are made of individual cells that incorporate the cathode active material [0019] and [0021]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to assemble cathode materials into battery modules and battery modules into battery packs to be used for commercial products.
Claim(s) 22, 26, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BARKER et al. (US 2008/0241043) and PARK et al. (US 2012/0217452) further in view of KAWAMURA (US 2022/0006076).
Regarding claims 22, 26, and 32,
PARK teaches that when using mixtures of first and second cathode active particles, the particle size and specific surface area are variables that need to be considered [0064]. Specifically, the reference discusses conductivity as a result effective variable to ensure improved conductivity. The reference teaches the relative sizes of the particles but does not teach the absolute particle size. However, KAWAMURA teaches that when making cathode active material particles, the particle size is a result effective variable [0035]. Specifically, a larger particle of active material causes more resistance for electron and ion mobility to pass to the center of the particle, but if the particles are too small, the surface area is actually too high and can cause problems with cycling [0035]. At the time of filing the invention it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to change the size of particles to obtain a desired internal resistance and discharge characteristic.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 21 and 25 require the second active material to be coated on the first active material. The examiner was unable to motivate the coated structure wherein the compound comprises LiTiPO4F at the required weight ratio. By requiring a coated structure, the claim requires both a material and structural limitation to the active material. This is distinguished from a simple homogenized mixture of cathode active material which could be any mixture ratio of any active material. The claim requires a particular active material with particular properties at a particular loading.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN MURATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5596. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, MICHAEL CLEVELAND can be reached at 571272-1418. 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.
/AUSTIN MURATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1712
Prosecution Insights