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 Group I, claims 1-11 and 14-18 in the reply filed on 7-21-2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 12-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 7-21-2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11 and 14-18 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 is objected to because of the use of “B” as a variable because B stands for (boron). Claim 1 is objected to because of the use of “C” as a variable because C stands for (carbon). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-11 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 is rejected because the elements in “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” should be claimed in the order cited in the periodic table. Claim 1 is rejected because unclear how LiaAx relates to each other in the chemical formula because it is unclear how much of A with subscript x can be present when Lia=0.9-1.11 is present. Claims 2, 7 and 10 are rejected because the phrase “optionally” renders the claim indefinite In Ex parte Cordova, 10 USPQ2d 1949. Claim 3 is rejected because it is unclear what the lower range of the amount of doping element in the doped carbon layer. Claim 8 is rejected because it is unclear what the lower range of the lattice change rate of the core. Claim 9 is rejected because it is unclear what the lower range of the antisite out defect concentration. Claim 10 is rejected because unclear what the lower range of the surface oxygen valence of the positive electrode active material. Claim 11 is rejected because it is unclear what the upper range is of the compacted density. Claim 14 is rejected because it is unclear what the upper range is for the positive electrode active material.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-11 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (JP 2002198050 A) and further in view of Wu (US 2016/0190584) or Kim et al. (CN 105895879) or Li et al. (CN 109244391).
Nakamura teaches in [0001 and 0007], a positive electrode active material with superior charge and discharge characteristics at larger currents compared to conventional positive electrode active materials. Nakamura et al. teaches in [0010], the positive electrode active material (“a core”) comprising: Li1-xAxFe1-y-zMyMezP1-mXmO4-nZn wherein A is at least one of Na or K; M is at least one of a metal elements other than Al such as Mn; X is at least one of S, Si, Ni, etc. and Z is at least one of F, Cl, Br, S, etc. and 0≦x ≦0.1, 0≦y≦0.5, 0≦z≦0.3, 0≦y+z≦0.5, 0≦m≦0.3, 0≦n≦0.5, and x+z+m+n >0. Nakamura teaches in Example 13, the active material comprises Li0.95Na0.05Fe0.08Co0.2PO4 and teaches in Example 14, the active material comprises Li0.95K0.05Fe0.08Co0.2PO4; therefore, the teaching of LimAx is known. Nakamura et al. teaches in Example 9, the active material comprises LiFe0.8Co0.02P0.9Si0.1O4 and teaches in Example 10, the active material comprises LiFe0.8Co0.02P0.9N0.1O4; therefore, the teaching of P1-zCz is known. Nakamura teaches in Examples 3-5 and 7, the active material comprises LiFe0.8Co0.02PO3.9Z0.1 where Z can be F, Cl, Br, and S; therefore, the teaching of O4-nDn.
Nakamura et al. teaches the core of the claimed invention as explained above except for specifically teaching in the Examples that the positive active material specifically comprises Mn for the My component with By.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would utilize Mn with Fe in the positive active material component Mn1-yFey because Nakamura et al. teaches that M can comprise Mn (see [0010]).
Nakamura et al. teaches the core of the claimed invention as explained above except for specifically teaching in the Examples that LimAx and Mn1-yFey and P1-zCz and O4-nDn are present in the positive active material.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would utilize LimAx and M1-yFey and P1-zCz and O4-nDn, wherein A is Na or K, M is Mn, C is Si or N, and Z is F, Cl, Br, or S, as the core of the positive active material as taught by Nakamura et al. because it is prima facie obvious to combine two compositions each of which is taught by prior art to be useful for the same purpose in order to form a third composition that is to be used for the very same purpose. See In re Kerkhoven, 205 USPQ 1069 (See MPEP 2144.06]). Therefore, Nakamura et al. meets the claim limitation of a positive electrode active material containing LimAxMn1-yByP1-zCzO4-nDn.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the lithium iron manganese phosphate inner core of Xu to be LimAx and M1-yFey and P1-zCz and O4-nDn, wherein A is Na or K, M is Mn, C is Si or N, and Z is F, Cl, Br, or S, as the core of the positive active material, as taught by Nakamura et al., in order to exhibit superior charge and discharge characteristics at larger currents compared to conventional positive electrode active materials (see [0007]).
Nakamura et al. teaches the claimed positive active material but does not teach having a doped carbon coating layer shell layer. Wu teaches in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising the formula LiMnxFe1-xP1-aSibMcO4-dFd and in claims 3-4 teaches that the positive electrode material contains a carbon coating layer wherein a content of the carbon in the carbon coating layer is not higher than 20% by weight of the positive electrode material. Kim et al. teaches a fluorine-doped carbon-coated positive electrode lithium iron manganese phosphate material comprising a core having the formula LiMn1-xFexPO4. Kim et al. teaches that the fluorine doped carbon in the material of the invention can accelerate transmission speed of electron-reducing electrolyte material erosion, thus providing a positive electrode material having high reversible specific capacity, good multiplying power performance, excellent cycle performance and high energy density. Li et al. teaches a nitrogen-doped carbon-coated lithium iron manganese phosphate material comprising a core having the formula LiMn1-xFexPO4. Li et al. teaches that the shell layer is 1-5 µm and the coating quantity is 1-5% and the nitrogen content is 25-35%. Li et al. teaches that the positive active material has good conductivity, high capacitance, good low temperature performance and multiplying power resistance. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would include coating layer comprising a doped carbon layer on the core structure of the positive electrode active material of Nakamura et al. because Wu teaches that it is known to have the positive electrode material contains a carbon coating layer wherein a content of the carbon in the carbon coating layer is not higher than 20% by weight of the positive electrode material; Kim et al. teaches that a fluorine doped carbon shell helps accelerate transmission speed of electron-reducing electrolyte material erosion, providing a positive electrode material having high reversible specific capacity, good multiplying power performance, excellent cycle performance and high energy density. Li et al. teaches a known positive active material comprising a nitrogen-doped carbon-coated lithium iron manganese phosphate material comprising a core with a shell layer of 1-5 µm; a coating quantity is 1-5% and the nitrogen content is 25-35% that has good conductivity, high capacitance, good low temperature performance and multiplying power resistance. When Nakamura teaches the same positive electrode sheet comprising the first positive electrode active material comprising Li1-xAx[A = Na or K]Fe1-yMy[M=Mn]P1-mXm[X= Si or N]O4-nZn[Z=F, Cl, Br, or S], then inherently the positive electrode active material would have lattice change rate of the core below 8%, a Li/Mn anti-site defect concentration of the positive electrode active material lower than 2, a surface oxygen valence of below -1.82 and a compacted density under 3T of above 2.0 g/cm3. In addition, the presently claimed property of a lattice change rate of the core below 8%, a Li/Mn anti-site defect concentration of the positive electrode active material lower than 2, a surface oxygen valence of below -1.82 and a compacted density under 3T of above 2.0 g/cm3 would have obviously been present once the Nakamura et al. product is provided. In re Best, 195 USPQ 433 (CCPA 1997).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 5-7 and 14-18 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19/295,750(reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Application No. 19/295,750 claims in claims 1-10, with the positive electrode active material comprises a core comprising LixM”y-x-1M1-aM’a(X1-z1Cz1O4-z2Dz2)mYn [which teaches claimed core LiaAxMn1-yByP1-zCzO4-nDn, where n=0; M”=Mg [IIA]; M=Mn and Fe; M’ = V from [VB] and Co; C=S; X= P; and D=F.]
PNG
media_image1.png
28
390
media_image1.png
Greyscale
. Application No. 19/295,750 claims in claims in 13-15, that the positive electrode active material comprises a shell comprising a doped carbon. Application No. 19/295,750 claims in claims 21-22, a battery comprising a positive electrode plate comprising a positive electrode film layer and an electric device comprising the battery.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ohira et al. (US 9,005,810) teaches a cathode active material having a composition represented by formula (1): LiMn1-xMxP1-ySiyO4where M = Zr, Sn, Y or Al where 0 < x < 0.5 and 0 < y < 0.5. Ohira et al. teaches specifically cathode active material in Table 1, comprising: Li(Mn0.9Sn0.1)(P0.8Si0,2)O4, Li(Mn0.95Zr0.05)(P0.9Si0,1)O4, or Li(Mn0.95Sn0.05)(P0.9Si0,1)O4. Wu Guan (JP 6157563 B2, machine translation) teaches a lithium ion battery positive electrode material comprising the formula LiMnxFe1-xP1-aSibMcO4-dFd where M can be B, Cl or S).
Natsui et al. (US 2023/0402594) teaches in Example 1, a lithium transition metal composite oxide comprising Li1.67Sb0.001Mn0.55Ni0.275P0.065O1.92F0.08. Ma et al. (US 2023/0335723) claims in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising Li1+xMn1-yAyP1-zRzO4 which is the exact same material of the instant positive electrode material. Ma et al. (US 2023/0343938) claims in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising LiaAxMn1-yByP1-zCzO4-nDn which is the exact same material of the instant positive electrode material. Jiang et al. (US 2023/0361296) claims in claim 1, a positive electrode active material comprising LiaAxMn1-yByP1-zCzO4-nDn which is the exact same material of the instant positive electrode material. Wu (US 2016/0190584) teaches in claim 1, a Li-ion battery positive electrode material comprising LiMnxFe1-xP1-aSibMcO4-dFd where M is B or S and teaches in claim 3 that the positive active material contains a carbon coating layer. Ohira et al. (US 2013/0209886) teaches a cathode comprising a cathode material comprising LiMn1-xMxP1-ySiyO4.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Laura Weiner whose telephone number is (571)272-1294. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 pm EST M, Th and F.
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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/LAURA S. WEINER/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1723
/Laura Weiner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights