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 Objections
Claims 1 and 15 objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 4 of both Claims 1 and 15, “lithium-based oxide” should read “lithium nickel-based oxide” to maintain consistency with line 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-14 are objected to due to their dependency on Claim 1.
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 15 recites the limitation "the positive electrode material" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim: “the positive electrode material” should read “a positive electrode material” or “the positive electrode material of Claim 1”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 20240055592 A1, cited in the 8/14/2025 IDS) in view of Mori (US 20150188136 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim teaches a positive electrode material comprising a positive electrode active material (Abstract) comprising a lithium nickel-based oxide (0007, 0015 – Chemical Formula 1) having a mole fraction of nickel of 50 mol% to 90 mol% among metallic elements excluding lithium (0016, Table 1 – embodiments 1-4 have a mole fraction of about 84% among metallic elements excluding lithium); and a coating layer comprising boron formed on a surface of the lithium-based oxide (Abstract, 0052), wherein the boron is included in an amount ranging from 500 ppm to 1000 ppm based on a total weight of the positive electrode material (0019 – the boron is doped with 0.0005 to 0.005 mol % based on 1 mol % of a metal in the lithium metal oxide; Table 1 – embodiment 4: although the boron is added based on mol %, the weight proportion of boron is ((0.0049*10.81)/(1.0014*6.94 + 0.8361*58.69 + 0.1021*58.93 + 0.034*54.94 + 0.018*26.98 + 0.0049*183.84 + 0.0049*10.81)), which is about 810 ppm).
Kim teaches that the specific area of the active material is 0.19 m2/g or less rather than between 0.2 m2/g to 0.4 m2/g.
Mori teaches a positive electrode active material comprising a lithium nickel complex oxide (Abstract). The active material comprises a plurality of primary particles aggregated into secondary particles and the overall specific surface area is preferably between 0.3 and 1 m2/g (0026, 0127), which overlaps the claimed range of 0.2 m2/g to 0.4 m2/g. This range allows a quicker Li ion diffusion rate and a reduction in the irreversible capacity (0063).
Kim and Mori are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they relate to the same field of endeavor, namely lithium nickel-based oxides.
Therefore, 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 specific surface area of the active material of Kim to be within the range taught by Mori in order to allow for quicker Li ion diffusion and a reduction in the irreversible capacity.
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have routinely selected the overlapping portions of the disclosed surface area ranges as the selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Examiner also notes that it has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close (See MPEP 2144.05). In this case, Kim’s upper bound of 0.19 m2/g is close enough to the claimed 0.2 m2/g that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected the active materials to have the same properties.
Regarding Claims 2, 3, and 14, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1. The lithium nickel-based oxide can have a composition represented by Formula 1 (Kim: 0015, 0016 – Chemical Formula 1 where A’ can be Zr).
Although modified Kim does not teach a specific embodiment represented by Formula 1, Kim’s Chemical Formula 1 teaches the same materials in the same amounts and Zr as a possible element for A’ (Claim 3). Therefore, 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 material of modified Kim to be represented by the claimed Formula 1 as choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation for success, is likely to be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2143 E).
This can be viewed as a lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide doped with Zr (Claim 14).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 3. The Zr may be included in a molar amount between 0 and 0.1 (Kim: 0015, 0016). Using the active material of embodiment 4 (Kim: Table 1) as a basis, the Zr may be present in an amount ranging from 0 ppm (0 mol) to about 123000 ppm (0.1 mol), which would overlap the claimed range of between 4000 to 5000 ppm based on the total weight of the positive electrode material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have routinely selected the overlapping portions of the disclosed weight ranges as the selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Calculation for Claim 4:
123000 = ((0.1*91.22)/(1.0014*6.94 + 0.8361*58.69 + 0.1021*58.93 + 0.034*54.94 + 0.1*91.22 + 0.0049*183.84 + 0.0049*10.81)) * 1,000,000
Regarding Claim 5, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1. The coating layer further comprises tungsten (W) (Kim: Abstract, 0017).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 5. The tungsten may be included in an amount between 0.0005 to 0.005 mol% based on 1 mol% of a metal in the lithium metal oxide (Kim: 0019). Using the active material of embodiment 4 (Kim: Table 1) as a basis, the tungsten may be present in an amount of about 1424 ppm (0.0005 mol %) to about 14000 ppm (0.005 mol %) based on the total weight of the positive electrode material. This would overlap the claimed range of 4000 ppm or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have routinely selected the overlapping portions of the disclosed weight ranges as the selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Calculations for Claim 6:
1424 = ((0.0005*183.84)/(1.0014*6.94 + 0.8361*58.69 + 0.1021*58.93 + 0.034*54.94 + 0.018*26.98 + 0.0005*183.84 + 0.0049*10.81)) * 1,000,000
14000 = ((0.005*183.84)/(1.0014*6.94 + 0.8361*58.69 + 0.1021*58.93 + 0.034*54.94 + 0.018*26.98 + 0.005*183.84 + 0.0049*10.81)) * 1,000,000
Regarding Claim 7, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1. The grain size of the positive electrode active material may range from 100 to 500 nm (Kim: 0011), which overlaps the claimed range of 90 nm to 110 nm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have routinely selected the overlapping portions of the disclosed size ranges as the selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1. Modified Kim teaches that the positive electrode active material is a secondary particle in which multiple primary particles are aggregated (Kim: 0009) but does not disclose the average particle diameter of the primary particles.
Mori teaches a positive electrode active material comprising a lithium nickel complex oxide (Abstract). The active material comprises a plurality of primary particles aggregated into secondary particles and the average particle diameter of the primary particles can range from 0.1 µm to 1 µm (0026), which would overlap the claimed range of 500 nm to 1 µm. This allows for a reduction in the irreversible capacity to be obtained while preventing a decline in the packing behavior (0064).
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 average particle diameter of the primary particles of modified Kim to be within the range taught by Mori in order to allow for a reduction in the irreversible capacity to be obtained while preventing a decline in the packing behavior.
It would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have routinely selected the overlapping portions of the disclosed average particle diameter ranges as the selection of overlapping portions of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1 and a positive electrode comprising the material of Claim 1 (Kim: 0021).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Kim teaches the positive electrode of Claim 12 and a secondary battery comprising the positive electrode of Claim 12 (Kim: 0021).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1, which comprises a lithium nickel-based oxide having a mole fraction of nickel of 50 mol% to 90 mol% among metallic elements excluding lithium, a coating layer comprising boron on a surface of the lithium nickel-based oxide, wherein the positive electrode material has a BET specific surface area of 0.2 m2/g to 0.4 m2/g, and the boron is included in an amount ranging from 500 ppm to 1000 ppm based on a total weight of the positive electrode material (See rejection of Claim 1 above).
Thus, modified Kim would necessarily teach a method of making the positive electrode material of Claim 1 comprising preparing a lithium nickel-based oxide having a mole fraction of nickel of 50 mol% to 90 mol% among metallic elements excluding lithium; and forming a coating layer comprising boron on a surface of the lithium-based oxide, wherein the positive electrode material has a BET specific surface area of 0.2 m2/g to 0.4 m2/g, and the boron is included in an amount ranging from 500 ppm to 1000 ppm based on a total weight of the positive electrode material.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Mori as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ouki (US 20210367230 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 1. Modified Kim does not disclose that the material has a bimodal particle size distribution.
Ouki teaches a positive electrode active material comprising a center part and a covering part. The center part includes a lithium-nickel composite oxide and the covering part covers a surface of the center part and includes a boron compound (Abstract). The active material may have a volume-based particle size distribution with two or more peaks which allows for easier packing when compared to only one peak (0101). Specifically, the particle size distribution may have two peaks (0102), which would mean it is a bimodal particle size distribution.
Ouki is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it relates to the same field of endeavor, namely lithium nickel-based oxides.
Therefore, 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 particle size distribution of the active material modified Kim to have two peaks as taught by Ouki in order to allow for easier packing of the active material.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 9. Modified Kim does not disclose the average particle diameters of material.
Ouki teaches that a bimodal particle size distribution may have a large particle-diameter active material with an average particle size between 14 µm and 30 µm and a small particle-diameter active material having an average particle size between 3 µm and 7 µm (0102, Fig. 8). Specifically, the peak/average particle size of the small particle-diameter active material may be 4.4 µm and the peak/average particle size of the large particle-diameter active material may be 19.1 µm (0161). Average particle size can be viewed the same as average particle diameter.
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 particle size distribution of modified Kim to have peaks at the values taught by Ouki as they are known average particle sizes/diameters for a lithium nickel composite oxide active material with a bimodal particle size distribution. Doing so would provide nothing more than the predictable results of an active material with suitable average particle sizes/diameters and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved (see MPEP 2143 B).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Kim teaches the material of Claim 10. Modified Kim does not disclose the weight ratio between the large particle-diameter active material and the small particle-diameter active material.
Ouki teaches that the weight ratio between large-sized active material particles and small-sized active material particles can be 7:3 (0161). This falls within the claimed range of 9:1 to 6:4.
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 weight ratio between the large particle-diameter active material and the small particle-diameter active material particles of modified Kim to be the ratio taught by Ouki as it is a known weight ratio for a positive electrode active material with a bimodal particle size distribution. Doing so would provide nothing more than the predictable results of an active material with a bimodal particle size distribution with a suitable weight ratio and the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved (see MPEP 2143 B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZIHENG LU whose telephone number is (703)756-1077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 - 5 ET.
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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/ZIHENG LU/ Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights