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 1-5 and 18-20) in the reply filed on 8/6/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/11/2024 has been considered by the examiner. Initialed copies accompany this action.
Drawings
The Drawings filed 11/11/2024 are approved by the examiner.
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 3 is 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 3 recites “a peak area corresponding to a content”. A claim is indefinite when it contains words or phrases whose meaning is unclear. In re Packard, 751 F.3d 1307, 1314, 110 USPQ 2d 1785, 1789 (Fed. Cir. 2014). It is unclear what “peak area” is referring to.
Claim 5 recites “residual lithium”. It is unclear that the term is referring to and/or how it relates to the claimed electrode material.
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.
Claims 1 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (CN104347855). The machine translation of CN104347855 is relied upon for the rejection purposes.
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a phosphate coated lithium nickel manganate electrode material doped with X and Y ions having a molecular formula of LiNi0.5Mn1.5-aXaYbO4-b, wherein X is one or more of chromium, aluminum, cobalt, copper, zinc, rubidium, lanthanum, titanium, magnesium, iron, tungsten, gallium, molybdenum, rhodium, niobium, and vanadium; a is the sum of the number of one or more metal ions of X in the molecular formula of the cathode material, 0≤a≤0.2; Y is one or more of fluorine, nitrogen, and sulfur; b is the sum of the number of one or more of fluorine, nitrogen, and sulfur in the molecular formula of the cathode material, wherein 0≤b≤0.2 (para 0015). X ions (vanadium, niobium, molybdenum, and tungsten) meet the claimed M element. The doped lithium nickel manganate is coated with a phosphate compound with MA(PO4)B where M is one of magnesium, barium, copper, calcium, lanthanum, chromium, gallium, or yttrium, A is the number of metal ions M in phosphate and B is the number of phosphate ions PO4. The mass fraction of phosphates in the nickel manganese oxide lithium cathode material coated MA(PO4)B is 1% to 5% or 10000ppm to 50000ppm (para 0013). Xu discloses the claimed invention with the feature of the various elements but does not disclose the elements with enough specificity to anticipate the claimed invention. Nevertheless, given that Xu discloses all the claimed elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the chemical art at the time of the invention to select the claimed elements since Xu teaches each one. In addition, Xu teaches a coating amount of phosphate overlaps the claimed range, therefore, the claim is obvious over the teachings of the reference because overlapping ranges would have been obvious. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) and MPEP 2144.05, I.
Regarding claim 18-20, Xu discloses a lithium battery having the lithium nickel manganate of claim 1 (para 0012 and 0020) and the lithium battery is used in portable electronic products such as mobile phones, laptops, and cameras, as well as small and medium-sized transportation equipment such as electric bicycles and vehicles (para 0004-0005).
Claims 1, 2 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (CN104347855) in view of He et al. (US2018/0316016).
Regarding claims 1 and 2, Xu discloses a phosphate coated lithium nickel manganate electrode material doped with X and Y ions having a molecular formula of LiNi0.5Mn1.5-aXaYbO4-b, wherein X is one or more of chromium, aluminum, cobalt, copper, zinc, rubidium, lanthanum, titanium, magnesium, iron, tungsten, gallium, molybdenum, rhodium, niobium, and vanadium; a is the sum of the number of one or more metal ions of X in the molecular formula of the cathode material, 0≤a≤0.2; Y is one or more of fluorine, nitrogen, and sulfur; b is the sum of the number of one or more of fluorine, nitrogen, and sulfur in the molecular formula of the cathode material, wherein 0≤b≤0.2 (para 0015). X ions (vanadium, niobium, molybdenum, and tungsten) meet the claimed M element. The doped lithium nickel manganate is coated with a phosphate compound with MA(PO4)B where M is one of magnesium, barium, copper, calcium, lanthanum, chromium, gallium, or yttrium, A is the number of metal ions M in phosphate and B is the number of phosphate ions PO4. The mass fraction of phosphates in the nickel manganese oxide lithium cathode material coated MA(PO4)B is 1% to 5% or 10000ppm to 50000ppm (para 0013). He discloses a coating liquid containing a phosphate having a general formula of AlmMnPO4, used to coat a cathode active material. He discloses a molar ratio of P to a sum of Al and M can be in a range from about 4:3 to about 2:3, that is, P:(Al+M)=4:3-2:3 (para 0021) and a mass percent of the coating layer in the cathode composite material can be in a range from about 0.3% to about 5% (para 0061). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the invention to coat the lithium nickel manganate of Xu with the phosphate coating liquid taught by He since said coating liquid is a homogeneous clear solution, it is easy to form a thin, uniform, and continuous coating layer on each cathode active material particle, and each cathode active material particle can be completely covered by the coating layer, thereby preventing side reactions between the cathode active material and electrolyte liquid, and improving thermal stability and capacity retention performance of the lithium ion battery. In addition, since the thickness of the coating layer is small, the electrochemical performance of the lithium ion battery is not reduced (para 0010).
Regarding claim 18-20, Xu discloses a lithium battery having the lithium nickel manganate of claim 1 (para 0012 and 0020) and the lithium battery is used in portable electronic products such as mobile phones, laptops, and cameras, as well as small and medium-sized transportation equipment such as electric bicycles and vehicles (para 0004-0005).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (CN104347855) in view of He et al. (US2018/0316016) as applied above, further in view of Liu et al. (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 4661−4675)
Xu discloses a phosphate coated lithium nickel manganate electrode material described above and is incorporated herein by reference. Xu does not disclose the electrode material has the claimed BET and particle size. Liu discloses large active surface area of the nanostructures (lithium nickel manganese oxide LNMO) might accelerate the side reactions with the electrolytes under high operating potentials, leading to low Coulombic efficiency and dramatic capacity decay. On the other hand, the large-size LNMO, e.g., on the micron-scale, was adopted because the lower surface area originating from the large size which can not only effectively decrease the activity of the side reactions to enhance cycling performance, but also result in a higher tap density meaningful for increasing energy density in the practical application (page 4662). Based on these disclosures, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the invention to modify the size of the lithium nickel manganate electrode material of Xu, thus adjusting the surface area, to enhance cycling performance and increase energy density in the practical application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIDUNG D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5455. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 10a-3p.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/HAIDUNG D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
9/5/2026
Prosecution Insights