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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 4/18/2026. Claims 21-26 are newly added. Claims 1-26 are pending. Applicant’s arguments have been considered and are persuasive for claim 1. Claims 1-26 are non-finally rejected for reasons necessitated by applicant’s amendment.
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 1-5, 8-11, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Luo (CN 101339994), Gao (WO 2018/032569), and Sato (JP 2007-242411), or in alternative, Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Chen (CN 114242988) and Gao (WO 2018/032569), Sato (JP 2007-242411), and Jang (LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4 cathodes with improved lithium storage properties, Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011, 21, 6510-6514).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a secondary battery, comprising a positive electrode plate and a non-aqueous electrolytic solution, wherein
the positive electrode plate comprises a positive electrode active material, the positive electrode active material has a core-shell structure and comprises a core and a shell covering the core, wherein
the core has a chemical formula of LiMnxFe(1-x)PO4,
the core is electrically neutral.
Chen discloses the shell comprises a first cladding layer covering the core, a second cladding layer covering the first cladding layer, and a third cladding layer covering the second cladding layer, wherein,
Chen discloses the third cladding layer is carbon [0049].
Regarding claim 9, the third cladding layer has a thickness of 2 nm to 25 nm, Chen discloses that by providing a carbon coating layer, the conductivity of the lithium manganese iron phosphate composite material is improved, and the charge and discharge performance of the lithium manganese iron phosphate is guaranteed. The mass content of the carbon is 1% to 4% [0049]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the amount of carbon layer depending on its desired conductivity. It is noted that an ordinary skilled artisan would not desire a large thickness for the benefit of reducing electrical resistance.
It is noted that the amount of carbon is directly related to its thickness.
Regarding claim 13, manganese is 10 wt% to 35 wt%, based on the weight of the positive electrode active material, Chen discloses by providing an inner core wrapped with a wrapping layer, the occurrence of manganese dissolution in the lithium iron manganese phosphate inner core with a high manganese content is effectively improved; the lithium iron manganese phosphate inner core with a high manganese content improves the energy density of the lithium iron manganese phosphate composite material; the barrier material layer blocks the dissolution of manganese in the inner core, thereby ensuring the structural stability and electrochemical stability of the lithium iron manganese phosphate composite material; the manganese content in the lithium iron manganese phosphate layer is low, thereby avoiding the occurrence of a large amount of manganese dissolution, and at the same time, the performance of the lithium iron manganese phosphate layer with a low manganese content is closer to the performance of lithium iron phosphate, which is beneficial to improving the high-rate charging and discharging of the lithium iron manganese phosphate composite material [0005]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the amount of manganese in the positive electrode active material for the benefit of having good energy density as well as to avoid manganese dissolution.
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses the core has a chemical formula of LiMnxFe(1-x)PO4, wherein the manganese is higher than iron in the core [0005], but does not disclose a dopant R comprising B, Si, N, S in the amount of 0.001 to 0.100. Luo teaches multi-site-doped lithium iron phosphate, compared with a single one lattice site doped. It improves matrix capacity and cycle performance, and also suitable for industrial stabilizing production and suitable for non-high-pure raw material. See Abstract. The phosphorus dopant comprises B, W, S, and Si in an amount of, for example, 0.02, and the phosphorus amount is 0.98. See Example 1. Regarding claim 10, Chen discloses in the core the ratio of y to 1-y is from 1:10 to 1:1 [0005]; Luo teaches in the core the ratio of z to 1-z is from 1:9 to 1:999. Example 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to add a B, Si, or S to the active material of Chen, as taught by Xu, for the benefit of using a non-high-pure raw material, as well as having good capacity and cycle performance.
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a barrier layer comprising a pyrophosphate [0027, 0039], but does not disclose the first cladding layer comprises crystalline pyrophosphates LiaMP2O7 or Mb(P2O7)c as claimed in claim 1. Gao teaches a cathode active material comprising core having a lithium manganese iron phosphate having a shell comprising a mixture of carbon and one or more of LiFeP2O7, LiAlP2O7, Li3V2(PO4)3 [0010, 0012]. The addition of the lithium-containing metal phosphates and/or pyrophosphates can, on the one hand, increase the conductivity of the material ions, and on the other hand, effectively improve the effect of carbon coating, thereby reducing the carbon coating content, so that the rate performance and cycle performance of the core-shell structure positive electrode material are significantly improved, and it has a higher compaction density [0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to add a pyrophosphate of Gao as the pyrophosphate of Chen, as taught by Gao, for the benefit of having good conductivity of the active material.
Regarding claim 9, the first cladding layer has a thickness of 1 nm to 10 nm, Chen’s barrier layer reads on Applicant’s first cladding layer [0035]. The barrier layer block manganese from dissolving and improve overall performance of the lithium iron phosphate composite material [0038]. Chen’s barrier layer thickness is 100 nm to 500 nm [0040]. Chen discloses that the coating layer includes multiple barrier layers and multiple lithium iron manganese phosphate layers, and are alternately stacked in sequence on the surface of the inner core [0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to reduce the thickness of each of the first cladding layer when multiple layers are present, and to adjust the thickness of the each of the first cladding layer of Chen depending on the desired amount of protection of manganese dissolution.
Chen clearly teaches that the first cladding layer is a result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 1, Chen does not disclose the non-aqueous electrolytic solution comprises a first additive comprising one or more of a compound shown in Formula 1. Sato teaches a lithium secondary battery having an electrolyte with an additive aliphatic diisocyanate. See chemical formula 4. It forms a stable SEI on the negative electrode by charging and discharging during the initial period of use [0008].
Regarding claim 2, R1 represents at least one selected from the group consisting of the following groups substituted or unsubstituted by Ra: C2~C10 alkylidene [0009].
Regarding claim 3, the first additive comprises the compound H36 [0009].
Regarding claim 4, the first additive is W1% by weight, with W1 being 0.01 to 20, based on the total weight of the non-aqueous electrolytic solution; and/or
the first cladding layer is C1% by weight, with Cl being greater than 0 and less than or equal to 6, based on the weight of the core; and/or
the second cladding layer is C2% by weight, with C2 being greater than 0 and less than or equal to 6, based on the weight of the core; and/or
the third cladding layer is C3% by weight, with C3 being greater than 0 and less than or equal to 6, based on the weight of the core, Sato teaches the amount of the diisocyanate is 0.5 to 5% by weight [0009].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to add the additive of Sato to the electrolyte of Chen for the benefit of forming a stable SEI on the negative electrode by charging and discharging during the initial period of use for the benefit of protecting the negative electrode.
Regarding claim 5, W1/(C1+C2+C3) is from 0.001 to 2, the diisocyanate additive forms a stable SEI on the negative electrode by charging and discharging during the initial period of use [0008]. Sato clearly teaches that additive is a result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the amount the additive of Sato to the electrolyte of Chen depending on the desired thickness of SEI to stably form an SEI on the negative electrode.
Regarding claim 8, Chen does not disclose the non-aqueous electrolytic solution further comprises a third additive. Sato teaches and the third additive comprises one or more of a cyclic carbonate compound containing unsaturated bonds. With the additive, a decrease in capacity can be suppressed [0030]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to add a vinylene carbonate of Sato to the electrolyte of Chen for the benefit of suppressing capacity decrease.
Regarding claim 18, the third additive is W3% by weight, with W3 being 0.01 to 10, based on the total weight of the non-aqueous electrolytic solution, Sato teaches and the third additive comprises one or more of a cyclic carbonate compound containing unsaturated bonds. With the additive, a decrease in capacity can be suppressed [0030]. Sato clearly teaches that additive is a result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the amount the additive of Sato to the electrolyte of Chen for the benefit of suppressing capacity decrease.
Regarding claim 11, the crystalline pyrophosphate in the first cladding layer has an interplanar spacing ranging from 0.293 nm to 0.470 nm, and a crystal orientation angle ranging from 18.00° to 32.00°; and/or
the crystalline phosphate in the second cladding layer has an interplanar spacing ranging from 0.244 nm to 0.425 nm, and a crystal orientation angle ranging from 20.00° to 37.00°, it is noted that this is an intrinsic property of a material. Hence, it appears that the pyrophosphate of Park meets the limitation of claim 11.
MPEP 2112 V states that "once a reference teaching product appearing to be substantially identical is made the basis of a rejection, and the Examiner presents evidence or reasoning tending to show inherency, the burden shifts to the Applicant to show an unobvious difference."
Regarding claim 14, the positive electrode active material satisfies at least one of the following (1) to (4):
(1) before and after complete intercalation/deintercalation of lithium, the positive electrode active material has a lattice change rate of 4% or less;
(2) the positive electrode active material has a Li/Mn anti-site defect concentration of 4% or less;
(3) the positive electrode active material has a compaction density at 3T of 2.2 g/cm3 or more; and
(4) the positive electrode active material has a surface oxygen valence of -1.90 or less, the instant Specification states (emphasis added):
[0030] Crystalline pyrophosphates and crystalline phosphates having interplanar spacing and angle within the above ranges can more effectively inhibit the lattice change rate of lithium manganese phosphate and leaching of manganese ion during the process of deintercalation and intercalation of lithium, and thereby enhance the high-temperature cycling performance and the high-temperature storage performance of the secondary battery.
[0033] In embodiments of the present application, phosphorus is present in a content of from 12 wt% to 25 wt%, optionally in the range of 15 wt% to 20 wt%, based on the weight of the positive electrode active material. Thus, the following can be effectively avoided: if the content of the elemental phosphorus is too high, it may cause the covalency of P-O to be too strong and affect the conductivity of the small polarizers, thereby affecting the electrical conductivity of the positive electrode active material; if the content of the elemental phosphorus is too small, it may make the lattice structure of the pyrophosphate in the core, in the first cladding layer, and/or of the phosphate in the second cladding layer less stable, thereby affecting the positive electrode active material's overall stability.
[0084] The inventors have found after conducting a large number of researches that by doping modification of lithium manganese phosphate and cladding lithium manganese phosphate with multiple layers, a new type of positive electrode active material having a core-shell structure can be obtained, and the positive electrode active material is capable of realizing a reduced leaching out of manganese ion and a reduced lattice change rate, so as to be able to improve rate performance, cycling performance, storage performance, safety performance of secondary batteries, and to increase the capacity exertion of the secondary batteries.
It appears that the structure of pyrophosphate, the amount of phosphorus, and the presence of dopant in the active material of Chen modified by Gao and Luo reads on Applicant’s lattice limitation of claim 11.
Regarding claim 15, Chen modified by Luo, Gao, and Sato teaches a battery module, comprising the secondary battery according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Chen modified by Luo, Gao, and Sato teaches a battery pack, comprising the battery module according to claim 15.
Regarding claim 17, Chen modified by Luo, Gao, and Sato teaches an electrical device comprising the secondary battery according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, phosphorus is 12 wt% to 25 wt%, based on the weight of the positive electrode active material, it is noted that Chen modified by Luo and Sato meet the compounds of claim 1, and hence meets the phosphorus amount of the positive electrode active material. It is noted that the phosphorus amount is not patentable unless the amount is critical.
Regarding claim 20, secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein a weight ratio of manganese to phosphorus is in the range of 0.90 to 1.25 [0074].
Regarding claim 1, the second cladding layer comprises crystalline phosphate XPO4, X is one or more elements selected from Li, Fe, Ni, Mg, Co, Cu, Zn, Ti, Ag, Zr, Nb and Al, Chen discloses the second cladding layer comprises LiMnyFe(1-y)O4 [0004]. Chen discloses the manganese content in the lithium iron manganese phosphate layer is low, thereby avoiding the occurrence of a large amount of manganese dissolution, and at the same time, the performance of the lithium iron manganese phosphate layer with a low manganese content is closer to the performance of lithium iron phosphate, which is beneficial to improving the high-rate charging and discharging of the lithium iron manganese phosphate composite material [0005]. The amount of manganese is 0<y<0.65 [0007]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to have no manganese on the second cladding layer for the benefit of forming LiFePO4 and hence, avoiding any manganese dissolution and having high-rate charging and discharging of lithium iron phosphate. LiFePO4 of Chen would read on Applicant's second cladding material.
Should it not be obvious, Jang teaches a LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4. LiFePO4 coating renders good thermal stability at elevated temperatures, provide long-term capacity retention and reduce reactivity towards electrolytes at high voltages (page 6512). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to replace the lithium manganese phosphate layer of Chen with Jang’s LiFePO4 since either phosphate layer provides good cycle performance, as well as to prevent the core from further contact with the electrolyte.
Regarding claim 9, the second cladding layer has a thickness of 2 nm to 15 nm, Chen’s lithium manganese iron phosphate layer reads on Applicant’s second cladding layer [0035]. Chen discloses that the thickness of the lithium manganese iron phosphate layer is 400 nm to 800 nm to avoid excessive manganese dissolution [0044]. Chen discloses that the coating layer includes multiple barrier layers and multiple lithium iron manganese phosphate layers, and are alternately stacked in sequence on the surface of the inner core [0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to reduce the thickness of each of the second cladding layer when multiple layers are present, and to adjust the thickness of the each of the second cladding layer of Chen depending on the desired amount of protection of manganese dissolution.
Chen clearly teaches that the second cladding layer is a result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. I
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Luo (CN 101339994), Gao (WO 2018/032569), and Sato (JP 2007-242411), or in alternative, Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Chen (CN 114242988) and Gao (WO 2018/032569), Sato (JP 2007-242411), and Jang (LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4 cathodes with improved lithium storage properties, Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011, 21, 6510-6514) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Tsujioka (US 2010/0323240).
Regarding claim 6, Chen modified by Luo, Gao and Sato does not teach the non-aqueous electrolytic solution further comprises a second additive as claimed, and regarding claim 7, Chen modified by Luo, Gao and Sato does not teach the second additive is W2% by weight, with W2 being 0.01 to 20, based on the total weight of the non-aqueous electrolytic solution.
Tsujioka teaches an electrolyte having an additive comprising lithium difluorophosphate. The additive contains a concentration of lower than 0.01 wt % reduces the nonaqueous electrolyte solution in durability resulting from lithium difluorophosphate, such as cycle characteristics and high-temperature storage characteristics, and does not sufficiently produce the effect of suppressing gasification. Meanwhile, if a lithium difluorophosphate concentration in the electrolyte solution for the nonaqueous electrolyte battery exceeds 5.0 wt %, there may arise a fear that the electrolyte solution decreases in ionic conduction and increases in internal resistance [0029]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to add and adjust the amount of lithium difluorophosphate in the electrolyte of Chen modified by Luo, Gao and Sato, as taught by Tsujioka, for the benefit of having good battery cycle characteristics.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Luo (CN 101339994), Gao (WO 2018/032569), and Sato (JP 2007-242411), or in alternative, Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Chen (CN 114242988) and Gao (WO 2018/032569), Sato (JP 2007-242411), and Jang (LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4 cathodes with improved lithium storage properties, Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011, 21, 6510-6514) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Takei (US 2016/0099464).
Regarding claim 12, Chen modified by Luo, Gao, and Sato does not teach the carbon of the third cladding layer is a mixture of SP2 carbon and SP3 carbon. Takei teaches a lithium nickel-based oxide particle and a coating on the particle comprising diamond-like carbon. An sp2/sp3 ratio of the coating layer is about 50/50 to 60/40. See Abstract. The SP2 carbon atom contributes to conductivity of the diamond-like carbon, and the SP3 carbon atom contributes to oxidation resistance and abrasion resistance of the diamond-like carbon [0054]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to use a mixture of SP2 and SP3 carbon as the carbon layer of Chen, as taught by Takei, for the benefit of having good conductivity as well as oxidation resistance and abrasion resistance.
Claims 21, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Luo (CN 101339994), Gao (WO 2018/032569), and Sato (JP 2007-242411), or in alternative, Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Chen (CN 114242988) and Gao (WO 2018/032569), Sato (JP 2007-242411), and Jang (LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4 cathodes with improved lithium storage properties, Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011, 21, 6510-6514) as applied to claim 2, further in view of Beck (US 2011/0052988).
Regarding claim 21, Chen modified by Chen, Gao, and Sato does not disclose Li₁+xMn₁-vAyP1-zR₂O₄, A comprises Fe and one or more elements selected from Zn, Na, K, Mg, Mo, W, V, Ni, Co, Ga, Sn, Sb, Nb, and Ge. Regarding claim 22, Chen modified by Chen, Gao, and Sato does not disclose Li₁+xMn₁-yAyP₁-zR₂O₄, A comprises Fe and one or more elements selected from Mg, V, Ni, and Co. Beck teaches a positive active material comprising lithium iron manganese phosphate doped with one or more dopant Co, Ni, V, and Nb. See Abstract. Contrary to conventional wisdom, certain dopant metals may contribute to increase the energy density and/or the specific capacity of the battery [0051]. Doping with hypervalent transition metals such as Nb or V may further contribute to the advantageous application of the resulting olivine materials for rechargeable lithium ion battery applications. The advantageous role of the dopant may be several fold and include the increased electronic conductivity of the olivine powder and may limit the sintering of the olivine nanophosphate particles to allow full utilization of the lithium capacity during fast charge/discharge of the battery [0081]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to dope the lithium iron manganese phosphate of Chen with Co, Ni, or V, as taught by Beck, for the benefit of obtaining good electronic conductivity.
Claims 23, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Luo (CN 101339994), Gao (WO 2018/032569), and Sato (JP 2007-242411), or in alternative, Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Chen (CN 114242988) and Gao (WO 2018/032569), Sato (JP 2007-242411), and Jang (LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4 cathodes with improved lithium storage properties, Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011, 21, 6510-6514) as applied to claim 2, further in view of Li (CN 110098383).
Regarding claim 23, Chen does not disclose wherein each M in the crystalline pyrophosphates LiaMP₂O₇ and Mb(P2O7)c of the first cladding layer is independently one or more elements selected from Ni, Mg, Co, Cu, Zn, Ti, Ag, Nb. Regarding claim 24, Chen does not disclose the first cladding layer comprises one or more selected from Li2FeP₂O₇, Al4(P₂O₇)₃, and Li2NiP₂O₇.
Li teaches a positive electrode material with a coating comprising Li2FeP₂O₇ (page 3 of translation). The coating is crystalline and thus, it has a three-dimensional frame structure and channel size can increase in the c-axis direction, which is good for Li+ embedding. It has good Li+ conducting ability, high discharge performance (gas 2 of translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to use the coating of Li as the first cladding layer of Chen modified by Chen, Gao, and Sato, as taught by Li, for the benefit of having good Li+ ion conductivity.
Claims 25, 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Luo (CN 101339994), Gao (WO 2018/032569), and Sato (JP 2007-242411), or in alternative, Chen (CN 114256448) in view of Chen (CN 114242988) and Gao (WO 2018/032569), Sato (JP 2007-242411), and Jang (LiFePO4 modified Li1.02(Co0.9Fe0.1)0.98PO4 cathodes with improved lithium storage properties, Journal of Materials Chemistry, 2011, 21, 6510-6514) as applied to claim 2, further in view of Park (US 2012/0100430).
Regarding claim 25, in the crystalline phosphate XPO4 of the second cladding layer, X is one or more elements selected from Li, Ni, and Co, Chen discloses the second cladding layer comprises LiMnyFe(1-y)O4 [0004]. Regarding claim 26, the second cladding layer comprises one or more selected from LiNiPO4 and LiCoPO4, Chen discloses the second cladding layer comprises LiMnyFe(1-y)O4 [0004]. Park teaches a cathode active material comprising a lithium metal composite oxide coated with second lithium-containing metal composite oxide. An entire surface of a first lithium-containing metal composite oxide is coated with a second lithium-containing metal composite oxide having a lower potential vs. lithium potential and a higher resistance than the first lithium-containing metal composite oxide. Therefore, during a high-rate discharge, such as an internal short, the second lithium-containing metal composite oxide acts as a significant electric resistance layer, and suppresses the inflow of electrons into the core of the first lithium-containing metal composite oxide having a high potential vs. lithium potential, thereby inhibiting the intercalation of lithium ions. In other words, during an internal short, it is possible to slow down the intercalation rate of a large amount of lithium ions and electrons from an anode to a cathode, and thus to prevent heat generation caused by the temporary occurrence of over-current, thereby improving the safety of a battery [0013]. Park discloses the coating is LiCoPO4 and LiNiPO4 (Park’s claim 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to use the coating of Park as the second cladding layer of Chen modified by Chen, Gao, and Sato, as taught by Park, for the benefit of suppressing the inflow of electrons into the core of the active material of Chen modified by Chen, Gao, and Sato.
Response to Arguments
Arguments dated 4/18/2026 regarding claims 1 and 10 are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections. Regarding arguments to claim 9:
Regarding claim 9, the first cladding layer has a thickness of 1 nm to 10 nm, Chen’s barrier layer reads on Applicant’s first cladding layer [0035]. The barrier layer block manganese from dissolving and improve overall performance of the lithium iron phosphate composite material [0038]. Chen’s barrier layer thickness is 100 nm to 500 nm [0040]. Chen discloses that the coating layer includes multiple barrier layers and multiple lithium iron manganese phosphate layers, and are alternately stacked in sequence on the surface of the inner core [0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to reduce the thickness of each of the first cladding layer when multiple layers are present, and to adjust the thickness of the each of the first cladding layer of Chen depending on the desired amount of protection of manganese dissolution.
Chen clearly teaches that the first cladding layer is a result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 9, the second cladding layer has a thickness of 2 nm to 15 nm, Chen’s lithium manganese iron phosphate layer reads on Applicant’s second cladding layer [0035]. Chen discloses that the thickness of the lithium manganese iron phosphate layer is 400 nm to 800 nm to avoid excessive manganese dissolution [0044]. Chen discloses that the coating layer includes multiple barrier layers and multiple lithium iron manganese phosphate layers, and are alternately stacked in sequence on the surface of the inner core [0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made to reduce the thickness of each of the second cladding layer when multiple layers are present, and to adjust the thickness of the each of the second cladding layer of Chen depending on the desired amount of protection of manganese dissolution.
Chen clearly teaches that the second cladding layer is a result effective variable. It has been held by the courts that discovering an optimum value or workable ranges of a result-effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, and thus not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2144.05. I
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA KYUNG SOO WALLS whose telephone number is (571)272-8699. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F until 5pm.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CYNTHIA K WALLS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights