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
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (KR102436308B1, see US PG Pub English equivalent US20230231106A1 for citations) in view of Miyamoto et al. (JP2005135691A, cited in IDS filed 05/16/2024, see Examiner provided English translation for citations) and Watanabe et al. (JP2018078103A, see Examiner provided English translation for citations ).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery ([0016]), comprising: a positive electrode (i.e. cathode, [0115]); a negative electrode (i.e. anode, [0115]); and a non-aqueous electrolyte ([0016]-[0017]), wherein
the positive electrode has a positive electrode core (i.e. cathode current collector, [0037]-[0038]) and a positive electrode mixture layer (i.e. cathode active material layer, [0037]) formed on a surface of the positive electrode core ([0037]).
Kim further discloses the positive electrode mixture layer (i.e. cathode active material layer), includes, as a positive electrode active material, first positive lithium-metal composite oxide particles (i.e. second cathode active material represented by LixNiaM1bM2cM3dM5eOy, [0082]) being non-aggregated particles (i.e. second cathode active material may substantially consist of the single particle structures and a secondary particle structure formed from aggregation of primary particles may be excluded, [0077]).
Kim further discloses the positive electrode active electrode mixture layer including second lithium-metal composite oxide particles (i.e. first cathode active material represented by LixNiaM1bM2cOy, [0042]) being secondary particles formed by aggregating primary particles ([0077]).
Furthermore, Kim discloses when the positive mixture layer is bisected in a thickness direction and is defined as a first region (i.e. second cathode active material layer, Fig. 1, 114, [0074]) and a second region (i.e. first cathode active material layer, Fig. 1, 112, [0074]) in this order from a surface side of the positive electrode (Fig. 1), a content of the first lithium-metal composite oxide particles in the first region is higher than the second region (i.e. second cathode active material layer 114 contains second cathode active material, [0074]-[0075]).
Kim further discloses the average diameter (D50) of the first lithium-metal composite oxide particles (i.e. second cathode active material particle) may be in a range from 1-10 µm ([0099-0100]), which is encompasses with the claimed median diameter of greater than 2 µm and less than or equal to 10 µm.
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 selected within the overlapping portion of the range for the median diameter of the first lithium-metal composite oxide particles, with reasonable expectation in achieving a satisfactory positive electrode.
Furthermore, Kim discloses an average diameter of (D50) of the second lithium-metal composite oxide particles (i.e. first cathode active material) may be in a range from about 7 µm to 15 µm ([0100]) which is overlaps with the claimed secondary particles having a median diameter of greater than or equal to 10 µm or less than or equal to 30 µm.
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 selected within the overlapping portion of the range for the median diameter of the second lithium-metal composite oxide particles, with reasonable expectation in achieving a satisfactory positive electrode.
While Kim discloses an average particle diameter for the first and second cathode active material ([0099]-[0100]), Kim does not explicitly disclose that the average diameter (i.e. median diameter) is on a volumetric basis.
A skilled artisan would recognize that median and average diameter (i.e. D50) is commonly measured on a volumetric basis using a method such as laser diffraction, as evidenced by Miyamoto ([0137]).
Furthermore, while Kim discloses an average particle diameter for the secondary particles of the second lithium metal composite oxide ([0100]), Kim does not explicitly disclose the average particle diameter of the primary particles of the second lithium-metal composite oxide particles.
Miyamoto teaches a similar non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery ([0007]) comprising of lithium-transition metal composite oxide as a positive electrode active material ([0009]). Miyamoto further teaches wherein the lithium transition metal composite oxides exist in the form of primary and secondary particles that are aggregates of the primary particles ([0027]). Furthermore, Miyamoto teaches the median diameter of the secondary particle is 10 to 40 µm ([0032]), while the primary particle diameter is 0.1 µm to 5 µm ([0031]), which overlaps with the claimed primary particles having an average particle diameter of greater than or equal to 50 nm and less than or equal to 2 µm.
Miyamoto further teaches if the primary particle size is too large, the lithium ion diffusivity in the particles is lower, lowering the potential and deteriorating cycle characteristics ([0031]). Conversely, when the primary particle size is too small, the filling property is lowered ([0031]) such that the space between large particles cannot be filled with the small particles so the electrode plate density is not improved ([0035]).
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 selected within the overlapping portion of the claimed range for the size of the primary particles of the second lithium-metal composite oxide particles, with reasonable expectation of achieving a successful positive electrode, and to achieve the desired balance between potential, cycle characteristics, and electrode density.
Kim discloses a non-aqueous electrolyte containing a lithium salt and organic solvent ([0016]-[0017]), but does not explicitly disclose the non-aqueous electrolyte including a silane compound having a carbon-carbon unsaturated bond.
Watanabe teaches a similar non-aqueous secondary battery ([10]) wherein the non-aqueous electrolytic solution contains a silane compound with the general formula SiR4, wherein each R is independently a hydrocarbon group and at least one of R has a carbon-carbon double bond (i.e. carbon-carbon unsaturated bond, [10]). Watanabe further teaches that since the silane compound contains a hydrocarbon group having carbon-carbon double bond, generation of gas from the electrolytic solution can be suppressed at high temperatures ([21]).
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 further utilized a silane compound having a carbon-carbon unsaturated bond for the benefit of suppressing gas generation at high temperatures, as taught by Watanabe.
Regarding claim 2, modified Kim discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Kim further teaches wherein the silane compound is represented by the general formula SiR4, satisfying the claimed formula (1), wherein each R is independently a hydrocarbon group and at least one of R has a carbon-carbon double bond (i.e. carbon-carbon unsaturated bond, Watanabe, [10])
Watanabe further teaches the hydrocarbon group having a carbon-carbon double bond may be an alkenyl group, including an ethynyl (vinyl) group, a 1-propenyl group, and a 2-propenyl group (allyl group) ([25]), where at least one of the R-groups is an ethynyl group (vinyl group), and even more preferable that two or more R-groups are ethynyl groups ([26]).
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 selected from a vinyl, an allyl, and/or a propenyl group for at least one of R1, R2, R3, and R4, with reasonable expectation in achieving a successful non-aqueous electrolyte.
Regarding claim 3, modified Kim discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Kim, while disclosing a silane compound, as rendered obvious above, does not explicitly disclose the mass% of the silane compound based on a mass of the non-aqueous electrolyte.
Watanabe teaches the concentration of the silane compound is preferably 0.05 to 1 mass%, more preferably 0.08 to 0.8 mass%, when the electrolytic solution is taken as 100 mass% ([30]), which overlaps with the claimed range of 0.01 mass% to and less than or equal to 0.5 mass% based on a mass of the non-aqueous electrolyte. Furthermore, Watanabe teaches when the concentration of the silane compound is within that range, gas generation can be sufficiently suppressed at high temperatures ([30]).
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 selected within the overlapping portion of the ranges, with reasonable expectation that such a selection would result in a successful nonaqueous electrolyte solution for a secondary battery.
Regarding claim 4, modified Kim discloses all limitations as set forth above.
Modified Kim further discloses an embodiment wherein the second cathode active material particle (i.e. first lithium-metal composite oxide particle), Denka Black as a conductive agent, and PVDF as a binder were mixed by a weight ratio of 92:5:3 (Kim, [0131]) to form the second cathode active material layer (i.e. first region).
As modified Kim does not disclose any first cathode active material (i.e. second lithium-metal composite oxide particles) in the second cathode active material layer (i.e. first region), a skilled artisan would recognize that the mass of the positive electrode active material included in the second cathode active material layer (i.e. first region) is entirely the second cathode active material (i.e. first lithium-metal composite oxide particle), and therefore, the second cathode active material is 100 mass% based on a mass of the positive electrode active material included in modified Kim’s second cathode active material layer (i.e. first region).
100% by weight of the first lithium-metal composite is within the claimed range of greater than or equal to 50 mass% based on a mass of the positive electrode active material included in the first region.
Therefore, modified Kim satisfies claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESTHER J TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3479. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-4:00 PM.
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 Leong can be reached at (571)270-1292. 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.
/E.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 8/20/2026
Prosecution Insights