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
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.
Claims 1, 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (WO 2020069886), hereinafter Han, in view of Erk et al. (US 20200161652), hereinafter Erk.
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches a process for a manufacture of a cathode active material with a core-shell structure (Abstract):
Providing a particulate electrode active material according to g general formula (Abstract):
Li1-xTM1-xO2 (Abstract);
TM is a combination of metals and includes Ni and Mn, and, optionally, at least one element selected from Al, Mg, Ba and transition metals other than Ni and Mn (Abstract);
"x" is in a range of from 0.075 to 0.2 (Abstract, Han teaches “x” range of 0-0.2);
At least 50 mole-% of the metal of TM is Mn (Abstract);
Treating said particulate electrode active material with an aqueous buffer solution with a pH value in a range of from 2.0 to 10.5 (pg. 4, ln. 21-25, Han teaches pH values of 2-14);
Removing a liquid phase in step (b) by a solid-liquid separation method (Abstract);
Treating a residue from step (c) at a temperature in a range of from 140 to 750°C (pg. 5, ln. 26-34, Han specifically teaches temperature range of 50-450°C).
Han fails to teach the general formula Li1+xTM1-xO2.
Erk teaches the general formula Li1+xTM1-xO2.
Han and Erk are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrode active materials. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the composition taught by Han in view of Erk to employ the alternative lithium stoichiometry, since both references are directed to lithium metal oxide cathode materials and such modification merely represents the use of a known alternative composition to obtain predictable cathode material properties.
Additionally, it is well established that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie within the ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to select a value of “x” within the claimed ranges as a matter of routine optimization of a result-effective variable.
Similarly, it is well established that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie within the ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to select a pH value within the claimed ranges as a matter of routine optimization of a result-effective variable.
Further, it is well established that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie within the ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to select a temperature value within the claimed ranges as a matter of routine optimization of a result-effective variable.
Regarding claim 3, Han and Erk teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Han further teaches the solid-liquid separation~ method in step (c) is a filtration (pg. 7, ln. 4-10).
Regarding claim 4, Han and Erk teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Han further teaches the aqueous buffer solution in step (b) has a pH value in a range of from 4.0 to 9.5 (pg. 4, ln. 21-25).
Specifically, Han teaches pH values of 2 to 14. It is well established that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie within the ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to select a pH value within the claimed ranges as a matter of routine optimization of a result-effective variable.
Regarding claim 5, Han and Erk teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Han further teaches the process according to claim 1 comprising a step (e) after step (d) (pg. 16, ln. 38 - pg. 17, ln. 5):
washing the heat-treated material residue from step (d) one to four times with water (pg. 16, ln. 38 - pg. 17, ln. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify wash with water the number of times claimed. The number of washing cycles constitutes a result-effective variable that affects the removal of residual impurities and surface species from the cathode active material. Optimization of the number of washing repetitions to achieve the desired degree of cleanliness would have been achieved through routine experimentation.
Regarding claim 6, Han and Erk teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Han further teaches step (b) is performed at a temperature in a range of from 25 to 90°C (pg. 5, ln. 26-34).
Specifically, Han teaches temperature ranging from 50-450°C. It is well established that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie within the ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to select a temperature value within the claimed ranges as a matter of routine optimization of a result-effective variable.
Regarding claim 7, Han and Erk teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Han further teaches removing the liquid by a solid-liquid separation method (Abstract). However, Han does not expressly disclose recycling the removed liquid phase. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to at least partially recycle the liquid phase obtained during the solid0liquid separation step. Recycling process liquids is a well-known and conventional practice in chemical and materials processing operations to reduce waste generation, decrease raw material consumption, lower manufacturing costs, and improve overall process efficiency.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the separated liquid may contain residual buffer components or process chemicals that remain suitable for reuse. Therefore, it would have been obvious to recycle at least a portion of the liquid phase as a matter of routine process optimization and to achieve the predictable benefits of reduced waste and improved manufacturing economy.
Claims 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Kern et al. (US 20200144617), hereinafter Kern.
Regarding claim 2, Han and Erk teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Han further teaches TM is a combination of metals according to a general formula (I) (pg. 10, ln. 24-42):
(NiaCobMnc)1-dMd (pg. 10, ln. 24-42);
"a" being in a range of from 0.75 to 0.95 (pg. 10, ln. 24-42);
"b" being zero or in a range of from 0.01 to 0.2 (pg. 10, ln. 24-42, specifically 0.025-0.2);
"c" being in a range of from 0.6 to 0.75 (pg. 10, ln. 24-42, specifically 0.025-0.2);
"d" being in a range of from 0 to 0.1 (pg. 10, ln. 24-42, specifically 0-0.1);
M is at least one of Al, Mg, Ti, Mo, W and Zr (pg. 10, ln. 24-42);
a + b + c = 1 (pg. 10, ln. 24-42).
Han fails to teach the claimed range of “a”.
Kern teaches TM is a combination of metals according to a general formula (I) (pg. 10, ln. 24-42):
(NiaCobMnc)1-dMd ([0070-0077]);
"a" being in a range of from 0.3 to 0.95 ([0070-0077]);
"b" being zero or in a range of from 0.01 to 0.2 ([0070-0077]);
"c" being in a range of from 0.6 to 0.75 ([0070-0077]);
"d" being in a range of from 0 to 0.1 ([0070-0077]);
M is at least one of Al, Mg, Ti, Mo, W and Zr ([0070-0077]);
a + b + c = 1 ([0070-0077]).
Han and Kern are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrode active materials. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the composition taught by Han to employ a nickel content within the range taught by Kern. It is well established that where the claimed ranges overlap or lie within the ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art to select a nickel content within the claimed ranges as a matter of routine optimization of a result-effective variable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tamara Orduna whose telephone number is (571) 431-1457. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/TAMARA ORDUNA/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights