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 .
Status of Application
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN111129498A, translation attached).
Regarding claim 1-2, 5, 12-13 Wang discloses an electrochemical device ([0305-0313]), comprising: a positive electrode [0240-0294], a negative electrode [0059-0167], and an electrolyte solution [0168-0239]; wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive current collector and a positive active material layer formed on the positive current collector [0241], and the positive active material layer comprises a positive active material [0243-0244];
the positive active material comprises a first element (e.g., LiNi0.85Co0.10Al0.05O2 [0245]) {for claim 2 – second element comprising Al} wherein the first element is Co, which is not at least one of lanthanum, yttrium, cerium, or tungsten as claimed.
In this regard, Wang further discloses wherein the type of cathode active material is not particularly limited and may be a substance containing lithium and at least one transition metal [0235-0236], wherein some of the transition metal atoms as the body of the lithium transition metal composite may be substituted with Na, K, B, F, Al, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Li, Ni, Cu, Zn, Mg, Ga, Zr, Si, Nb, Mo, Sn, W and other elements [0245]. It therefore would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted some of the Co with W (e.g., LiNi0.85Co0.10Al0.05O2 [Wingdings font/0xE0] LiNi0.85Co0.099W0.001Al0.05O2), with a reasonable expectation to form a cathode active material capable of electrochemically absorbing and releasing metal ions [0235]. A skilled artisan would calculate that based on a mass of the positive active material (e.g., LiNi0.85Co0.099W0.001Al0.05O2 as modified above), a mass percentage of the first element (i.e., W) is 0.191% (i.e., a=0.191), which falls within the claimed range of “a≤1” and 0.01≤a≤1 {for claim 5}.
Wang further discloses wherein the electrolyte solution comprises a propionate ester and a cyano-containing compound (see Examples 46, 48-49 in Table 5 comprising propyl propionate and adiponitrile, 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile, diethylene glycol bis(2-cyanoethyl) ether) {for claims 12,13}.
Regarding claims 3-4, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, an aggregate mass percentage of the propionate ester and the cyano-containing compound is 22 wt% (see Table 5; 20 wt% propionate + 2 wt% cyano compound; i.e., b=22), wherein a*b is 4.2, which falls within the claimed range of 0.1≤a×b≤20 {for claim 3}. and 0.2≤a×b≤15 {for claim 4}.
Regarding claim 6, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, an aggregate mass percentage of the propionate ester and the cyano-containing compound is b % (i.e., 22 wt%), and b ranges from 5 to 65.
Regarding claim 7, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, a mass percentage of the propionate ester is 20 wt% (i.e., x=20), a mass percentage of the cyano-containing compound is 2 % (i.e., y=2), and x/y = 10, which falls within the claimed range of “1≤x/y≤20.”
Regarding claim 8, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, a mass percentage of the propionate ester is 20 % (i.e., x= 20), which falls within the claimed range of “from 5 to 50.”
Regarding claim 9, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, a mass percentage of the cyano-containing compound is 2% (i.e., y=2) which falls within the claimed range of “from 0.1 to 15.”
Regarding claim 10, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein a mass percentage of the positive active material in the positive active material layer is greater than 80 wt% and less than 99 wt% to ensure the capacity of the cathode active material and the strength of the positive electrode [0281], which overlaps with the claimed range of “from 95 to 99.” It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have selected the overlapping wt % range of the positive active material (i.e., M is 95 to 99) with a reasonable expectation to ensure capacity and strength of the cathode electrode. Wang further discloses wherein based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, a mass percentage of the propionate ester is 20 wt% (i.e., x=20). Thus, M/x is 4.75-4.95, which falls within the claimed range of “1.5≤M/x≤18.”
Regarding claim 11, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein an average particle size of the positive active material may be greater than 0.05 μm and less than 5μm (i.e., D= 0.05 to 5) to ensure the powder filling rate and the specific surface area, suppress the degradation of the battery, obtain suitable crystallinity, and ensure the reversibility of charging/discharging of the electrochemical device [0264], wherein the upper limit is substantially close to the claimed range of “from 5 to 30”, absent evidence otherwise. It therefore would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have selected the substantially close average particle size (i.e., 5 μm), with a reasonable expectation to form a positive active material having sufficient powder filling rate, specific surface area, suitable crystallinity [0264]. Based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, a mass percentage of the cyano-containing compound is 2% (i.e., y=2), and D/y is 2.5, which falls within the claimed range of 1≤D/y≤20.
Regarding claim 14, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein the electrolyte solution may further comprise lithium difluorophosphate [0170-0173]. Wang further discloses when the electrolyte includes propionate, an organic compound having a cyano group, lithium difluorophosphate, the interface stability of the anode mixture layer is further improved, so that the capacity retention rate after cycling and direct current resistance of the lithium-ion battery are significantly improved [0366]. Thus, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added the lithium difluorophosphate in the electrolyte, with a reasonable expectation to improve the interfacial stability, the capacity retention and DC resistance of the lithium-ion battery after cycling [0366].
Regarding claim 15, modified Wang discloses he electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein the electrolyte solution may further comprise an additive such as fluoroethylene carbonate to form a stable protective film on the surface of the anode and suppress the decomposition reaction of the electrolyte during charge/discharge of the battery [0216-0221]. As such, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have added an additive such as the fluoroethylene carbonate, with a reasonable expectation to suppress the decomposition reaction of the electrolyte during the charge/discharge of the battery [0219].
Regarding claim 16, modified Wang discloses the electrochemical device according to claim 1, wherein the positive active material comprises a tungsten-containing ternary positive active material (i.e., LiNi0.85Co0.099W0.001Al0.05O2 as modified above).
Regarding claims 17-18, modified Wang discloses an electronic device ([0315-0319]; e.g., laptops), comprising an electrochemical device [0305-0313, 0316] comprising: a positive electrode [0240-0294], a negative electrode [0059-0167], and an electrolyte solution [0168-0239]; wherein the positive electrode comprises a positive current collector and a positive active material layer formed on the positive current collector [0241], and the positive active material layer comprises a positive active material [0243-0244];
the positive active material comprises a first element (e.g., LiNi0.85Co0.10Al0.05O2 [0245]) wherein the first element is Co, which is not at least one of lanthanum, yttrium, cerium, or tungsten as claimed.
In this regard, Wang further discloses wherein the type of cathode active material is not particularly limited and may be a substance containing lithium and at least one transition metal [0235-0236], wherein some of the transition metal atoms as the body of the lithium transition metal composite may be substituted with Na, K, B, F, Al, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Li, Ni, Cu, Zn, Mg, Ga, Zr, Si, Nb, Mo, Sn, W and other elements [0245]. It therefore would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted some of the Co with W (e.g., LiNi0.85Co0.10Al0.05O2 [Wingdings font/0xE0] LiNi0.85Co0.099W0.001Al0.05O2), with a reasonable expectation to form a cathode active material capable of electrochemically absorbing and releasing metal ions [0235] {for claim 18 – second element comprising Al}. A skilled artisan would calculate that based on a mass of the positive active material (e.g., LiNi0.85Co0.099W0.001Al0.05O2 as modified above), a mass percentage of the first element (i.e., W) is 0.191% (i.e., a=0.191), which falls within the claimed range of “a≤1”.
Wang further discloses wherein the electrolyte solution comprises a propionate ester and a cyano-containing compound (see Examples 46, 48-49 in Table 5 comprising propyl propionate and adiponitrile, 1,3,6-hexanetricarbonitrile, diethylene glycol bis(2-cyanoethyl) ether).
Regarding claims 19-20, modified Wang discloses the electronic device according to claim 17, wherein, based on a mass of the electrolyte solution, an aggregate mass percentage of the propionate ester and the cyano-containing compound is 22 wt% (see Table 5; 20 wt% propionate + 2 wt% cyano compound; i.e., b=22), wherein axb is 4.2, which falls within the claimed range of 0.1≤a×b≤20 {for claim 19} and 0.2≤a×b≤15 {for claim 20}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAEYOUNG SON whose telephone number is (703)756-1427. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm.
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.
/T.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights