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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 9/24/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 10-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/24/2026.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0049], line 7, "and an an analysis region" should read --and an analysis region--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okazaki et al. (WO 2020080452 A1), hereinafter “Okazaki”, as cited in the IDS dated 3/26/2024, wherein (US 2021384496 A1) is cited as an English translation.
Regarding claim 1, Okazaki teaches a negative electrode active material for a non-aqueous secondary battery (Okazaki, [0017], lines 1-6) comprising:
A composite particle 13 including a silicate phase 11 and silicon particles 12 dispersed in the silica phase 11 (corresponding to the claimed composite particles each including a matrix and a silicon phase dispersed in the matrix) (Okazaki, [0017], lines 1-6; [0060], lines 4-9)
A conductive layer 15 and a surface layer 14 coated on the surface of the composite particle 13 (corresponding to the claimed each of the composite particles is coated with a coating layer) (Okazaki, [0060], lines 4-9 & 12-17)
The conductive layer 15 may comprise a carbon material (Okazaki, [0061], lines 1-4) and the surface layer 14 may comprise a fluorine resin (Okazaki, [0040], lines 1-7) (corresponding to the claimed coating layer is a mixture of a carbon material and a fluorine-containing material)
Regarding claim 8, Okazaki teaches the composite particle may comprise a silicon phase and silicate particles (corresponding to the claimed matrix is at least one of a silicon compound phase and a carbon phase) (Okazaki, [0037], lines 6-11; [0043], lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 9, the instant specification defines a main component as "a component constituting 50 mass% or more of the total mass of the silicon compound phase" (Instant specification, [0032], lines 11-13). Okazaki teaches that the composite particle may comprise a silicate phase 11 including lithium disilicate (Li2Si2O5) in an amount of 80 mass% or more, based on the total mass of the silicate phase (corresponding to the claimed silicon compound phase includes, as a main component, a silicate phase including lithium, silicon, and oxygen) (Okazaki, [0006], lines 5-7; [0043], lines 7-12; [0044], lines 1-7).
Okazaki further teaches that the silicate phase 11 may comprise sodium silicate (corresponding to the claimed silicate phase includes an element M other than lithium (Li), silicon (Si), and oxygen (O), and the element M includes at least one selected from the group consisting of sodium (Na), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), barium (Ba), zirconium (Zr), niobium (Nb), tantalum (Ta), vanadium (V), titanium (Ti), phosphorus (P), bismuth (Bi), zinc (Zn), tin (Sn), lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), cobalt (Co), fluorine (F), tungsten (W), aluminum (Al), boron (B), and rare-earth elements) (Okazaki, [0044], lines 1-7).
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 2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okazaki (WO 2020080452 A1), as cited in the IDS dated 3/26/2024, wherein (US 2021384496 A1) is cited as an English translation.
Regarding claim 2, Okazaki teaches:
The conductive layer 15 may be formed on the entire surface of the composite particle 12 (Okazaki, [0062], lines 12-17)
The surface layer 14 may be formed on the entire surface of the conductive layer 15 (Okazaki, [0062], lines 12-17)
A thickness range of 5nm to 100nm for the conductive layer 15 (Okazaki, [0062], lines 1-3), wherein the conductive layer may comprise a carbon material (Okazaki, [0061], lines 1-4)
A thickness range of 1nm to 200nm for the surface layer 14 (Okazaki, [0042], lines 13-20), wherein the surface layer 14 may comprise a fluorine resin (Okazaki, [0040], lines 1-7)
Since the conductive layer 15 and surface layer 14 combined correspond to the claimed coating layer, the combined thicknesses of the conductive layer 15 and the surface layer 14 corresponds to the claimed coating layer thickness.
Furthermore, Okazaki’s conductive layer 15 and surface layer 14 thickness ranges allow for the surface layer 14 thickness to be equal to, or greater than, the conductive layer thickness (Okazaki, [0062], lines 1-3; [0042], lines 13-20). Therefore, the surface layer 14 may comprise half, or more than half, the combined thickness of the surface layer 14 and the conductive layer 15. When the surface layer 14 comprises half or more than half the combined thickness, the fluorine resin concentration in the surface layer 14 would correspond to the claimed fluorine content A in a surface of the coating layer and the claimed fluorine content B at a depth corresponding to half a thickness of the coating layer. As a result, the fluorine resin concentration at the outer surface of the surface layer 14 and the fluorine resin concentration at half the thickness of the combined conductive and surface layers would be equal.
Therefore, the claimed fluorine content A in a surface of the coating layer, and a fluorine content B at a depth corresponding to half a thickness of the coating layer satisfy B > 0.1A would result from the combination of the surface layer 14 formed on the entire surface of the conductive layer 15 (Okazaki, [0062], lines 12-17) and the conductive and surface layer thickness ranges (Okazaki, [0062], lines 1-3; [0042], lines 13-20), explicitly disclosed by the prior art. See § MPEP 2112.
Regarding claim 6, Okazaki teaches:
A thickness range of 5nm to 100nm for the conductive layer 15 (Okazaki, [0062], lines 1-3)
A thickness range of 1nm to 200nm for the surface layer 14 (Okazaki, [0042], lines 13-20)
As stated in the rejection of claim 2 above, the combined thicknesses of the conductive layer 15 and the surface layer 14 corresponds to the claimed coating layer thickness. The conductive layer 15 and surface layer 14 combined form a layer thickness range of 6nm to 300nm, which overlaps with the instantly claimed range of 1nm or more and 100nm or less coating layer thickness. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP § 2144.05. It would have been within the skill of one of ordinary skill to select any value of conductive and surface layer thicknesses within the disclosed range, including a value within the claimed range, as it has been held that overlapping ranges are prima facie obvious.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okazaki (WO 2020080452 A1), as applied to claims 2 and 6 above, and further in view of Hirose et al. (CN 105981204 A), hereinafter “Hirose”, wherein (US 2021384496 A1) is cited as an English translation of Okazaki, and an English machine translation of Hirose is cited.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Okazaki teaches that the fluorine resin of the surface layer 14 may include poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVdF) (corresponding to the claimed fluorine-containing material includes a fluorine-containing organic polymer). Okazaki does not teach the fluorine-containing material including lithium fluoride. However, Hirose teaches a negative electrode active material coated by lithium fluoride (LiF) (corresponding to the claimed fluorine-containing material includes lithium fluoride) (Hirose, [0052], lines 1-6; [0060], lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Hirose's LiF coating to the surface layer of Okazaki in order to suppress decomposition of the electrolyte (Hirose, [0113], lines 1-3).
Further regarding claims 3 and 4, the instant specification describes a process of producing LiF and carbon-carbon double bonded PVdF from a chemical reaction between lithium silicate and PVdF (Instant specification, [0025], lines 1-6). Okazaki teaches that the negative electrode active material may comprise lithium silicate (Okazaki, [0018], lines 1-9) and PVdF (Okazaki, [0040], lines 1-3). Hirose teaches an electrochemical method to generate LiF on the negative electrode active material particle surface by changing the potential or current of the lithium counter electrode (Hirose, [0111], lines 4-8; [0113], lines 1-3). Therefore, the claimed:
fluorine-containing organic polymer has a carbon-carbon double bond in part of a molecular structure thereof (re. instant claim 3)
fluorine-containing organic polymer has a -CH=CF-structure at least in part of a molecular structure thereof (re. instant claim 4)
would flow naturally from the combination of Okazaki’s negative electrode active material and Hirose’s electrochemical method. See MPEP § 2112. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Hirose's electrochemical method to the negative electrode active material of Okazaki in order to reduce decomposition of the electrolyte (Hirose, [0113], lines 1-3; [0211], lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 5, examiner interprets the limitation “some of the carbon-carbon single bonds in polyvinylidene fluoride has been changed to carbon-carbon double bonds” as the polyvinylidene fluoride comprises some carbon-carbon double bonds unless otherwise stated. Okazaki teaches that the surface layer 14 fluorine resin may comprise PVdF (corresponding to the claimed fluorine-containing organic polymer includes polyvinylidene fluoride) (Okazaki, [0040], lines 1-11). As stated above in the rejection of claims 3 and 4, the claimed some of the carbon-carbon single bonds in the polyvinylidene fluoride have been changed to carbon-carbon double bonds would flow naturally from the combination of Okazaki’s negative electrode active material (Okazaki, [0018], lines 1-9; [0040], lines 1-3) and Hirose’s electrochemical method (Hirose, [0111], lines 4-8; [0113], lines 1-3). See MPEP § 2112. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Hirose's electrochemical method to the negative electrode active material of Okazaki in order to reduce decomposition of the electrolyte (Hirose, [0113], lines 1-3; [0211], lines 1-6).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okazaki (WO 2020080452 A1), as applied to claims 2 and 6 above, and further in view of Oh et al. (US 20200112019 A1), hereinafter “Oh”, as cited in the IDS dated 10/1/2025, wherein (US 2021384496 A1) is cited as an English translation of Okazaki.
Regarding claim 7, Oh teaches negative electrode active material particles (Oh, [0038], lines 1-4) comprising a LiF coating layer with a range of 0.4wt% to 1wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material particles (corresponding to the claimed mass of the fluorine-containing material in the coating layer) (Oh, [0036], lines 1-4). Oh also teaches the negative electrode active material particles comprising a carbon coating layer with a range of 1wt% to 10wt% based on the total weight of the negative electrode active material particles (corresponding to the claimed mass of the carbon material in the coating layer is larger than a mass of the fluorine-containing material in the coating layer) (Oh, [0042], lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add Oh's LiF coating layer weight percent range to the surface layer of Okazaki in order to minimize decreases in battery discharge capacity (Oh, [0036], lines 4-8), and to add Oh’s carbon coating layer weight percent range to the conductive layer of Okazaki in order to avoid interrupting lithium intercalation and deintercalation (Oh, [0042], lines 4-10).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rachel Avina whose telephone number is (571)270-0429. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1177. 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.
/R.M.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 1734
/JONATHAN JOHNSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights