DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/27/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This is a non-final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 5/27/2026. Claims 1, 17 and 20 are currently amended. Claim 21 is newly added. Claims 1-21 are pending review in this action.
The and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections in the previous Office Action are withdrawn.
New grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendments are presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues pertaining amended claims 1, 17 and 20 that Harada explicitly teaches a primary particle size of 1 μm or less, and thus, an ordinary skilled artisan would not have been motivated to increase the size of the particles beyond 1 μm, as required by the amendments to the claims.
Examiner respectfully disagrees for the following reasons. Harada teaches that the primary particles may preferable be up to 1 μm in diameter, which denotes a non-limiting preference rather than a mandatory requirement or an explicit exclusion of other particle sizes. Under MPEP 2143.05, a reference that sets forth a preferred range does not necessarily render the selection of a value outside that range impossible or obvious only through hindsight, particularly when the prior art does not provide a reason as to why values outside that range would fail. Harada does not teach that values beyond 1 μm would cause failure or inability for the cathode to function, but rather identifies an optimal range for the specific metric of “smooth solid phase diffusion” of lithium ion. Further, Seino explicitly teaches that increasing particle size to the 0.1-20 μm range (with examples up to 12.5 μm) improves tap density and mechanical stability. Thus, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a need to balance these competing factors, and further recognize that modification of Harada’s cathode to include the particle size and morphology disclosed by Seino represents a routine optimization of result-effective variables. And based on Seino’s demonstration that particles in the range of up to 20 μm successfully operate in battery with improved cycle life, applying this known parameter to Harada’s battery would yield predictable improvements in mechanical stability without rendering the battery inoperative for its intended purpose.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 3-4 and claim 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claims 3, 4 and 19 each require a particle size of the single crystalline particle to be in the nanometer range whereas their respective parent claims explicitly require the particle size to be greater than 1 μm. Thus, patentable weight has not been given to claims 3-4 and portion of claim 19 which pertains to the particle size of the single crystalline particle.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-10 and 14-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada (US20140193718A1) view of Seino (US20120028128A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 14, Harada discloses a solid state battery (solid electrolyte secondary battery) comprising a cell (electrode group 2) [pars. 0031,0052-0077; Fig. 2] which comprises:
a cathode electrode (positive electrode 5 including a positive electrode active material layer 4) comprising cathode active material particles (positive electrode active material), solid electrolyte particles (solid electrolyte material), and carbon particles (conductive agent including a carbonaceous material such as acetylene black, carbon black, graphite), the cathode active material particles comprising a cathode active material configured to bind with lithium ions (i.e., absorb/release lithium), the solid electrolyte particles comprising a first solid electrolyte material configured to enable transport of lithium ions within the cathode electrode (i.e., enhance lithium ionic conductivity and improve charge/discharge properties), carbon particles configured to enable transport of electrons within the cathode electrode (i.e., enhance power collecting property and suppress contact resistance with current collector) [pars. 0052-57,0059,0061-63,0072,0077];
an anode electrode (negative electrode 8) [pars. 0040,0072]; and
a solid electrolyte layer 9 positioned between the cathode electrode and the anode electrode, and configured to enable transport of lithium ions between the cathode layer and the anode layer [pars. 0033,0077], wherein the solid electrolyte layer comprises a second solid electrolyte material that is the same as or different from the first solid electrolyte material [par. 0031],
wherein the cathode active material particles, the solid electrolyte particles and the carbon particles are mixed and distributed in the cathode electrode (i.e., mixed and dispersed to obtain a paste) [pars. 0062,0088].
Harada teaches wherein the cathode active material particles comprise single crystalline particles (i.e., positive electrode active material in the form of primary particles), such that inside of the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles (inherent feature of primary particles which lack grain boundaries, and thus, the positive electrode active material particles are free of the first and second solid electrolyte material) [par. 0055].
Harada fails to explicitly teach: (1) wherein the cathode active material particles are single crystalline particles having a particle size of greater than 1 μm, such that inside of the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles; and (2) wherein the cathode electrode has lithium ion diffusibility ranging from about 1 x 10-14cm2/s to about 1 x 10-7 cm2/s.
Pertaining (1) above, Harada describes primary particle of the cathode active material as preferably having a diameter of 100 nm to 1 μm [par. 0055], but it cannot be established whether the cathode active material particles are provided as single crystalline particles, polycrystalline particles, or both. In this regard, Seino, from the same field of endeavor, teaches a solid-state battery cathode containing cathode active material particles and a solid electrolyte, wherein the cathode active material particles contains a balance of both single crystalline particles and polycrystalline particles to control tap density of the cathode electrode, and wherein the active material particles have an average diameter in the range of 0.1 to 20 μm, with specific examples disclosing diameter of 4.69 μm to 12.5 μm [Seino – pars. 0025-34,0049; Table 1]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada to have comprised cathode active material particles including single crystalline particles having a particle size of greater than 1 μm, such that inside the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles, and wherein the cathode electrode further comprises additional cathode active material particles comprising polycrystalline particles, each of which comprises polycrystalline grains, in order to control cathode electrode tap density {It should be noted here that while Harada teaches a preferred primary particle size of up to 1 μm [Harada – par. 0055], it is not limited to the latter range}.
Pertaining (2) above, the parameter of lithium ion diffusibility represents a physical property inherent to a functional composite cathode composed of lithium cobalt oxide/NMC active materials, sulfide solid electrolytes, and carbon conductive agents. The prior art combination of Harada and Seino discloses a cathode composition and structure identicial or substantially similar to that claimed and as disclosed in the instant specification. When the prior art discloses a product substantially identical to that claimed, the claimed properties are presumed to be present unless the applicant provides evidence to the contrary. Applicant has provided no evidence that the specific structural arrangement of Harada modified by Seino would fail to exhibit the lithium ion diffusibility within the claimed range. Conversely, the specification itself describes this range as a natural outcome of the disclosed composition. Therefore, the claimed diffusibility range is inherently possessed by the battery of Harada, as modified by Seino.
Regarding Claim 2, Harada teaches the positive electrode active material in the form of primary particles [par. 0055], which necessarily meets the claimed requirements of wherein each of the single crystalline particles do not include polycrystalline grains therein.
Regarding Claim 5, Harada discloses the positive electrode current collector may have a thickness of 0.1 μm to 20 μm [par. 0064], but fails to teach wherein the cathode electrode has a thickness in a range of about 10 μm to about 100 μm. However, providing the cathode electrode to have a thickness within the claimed range based on the thickness of the current collector of Harada being 0.1 μm to 20 μm is easily achievable and would depend on at least the type and size of the battery being produced for its particular application. Absent persuasive evidence that the thickness of the cathode electrode having the claimed range is significant, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the cathode electrode of Harada to have a thickness in a range of about 10 μm to about 100 μm depending on the type and size of battery being produced for its particular application, without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success [MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 6, Harada discloses wherein the cathode electrode active material comprises lithium nickel manganese oxide (e.g., LixMn2−yNiyO4) [par. 0053].
Regarding Claims 7-8 and 21, Harada discloses that, as the content of the positive electrode active material and the binder, the positive electrode active material may preferably be kept within the range of 80 mass % or more and 98 mass% or less [par. 0060], and then additionally states, in the case of adding the conductive agent, the amount thereof may be from 3 mass % to 15 mass % [par. 0061]. While Harada does not explicitly teach a range for the amount of solid electrolyte, based on at least the teachings of minimizing internal resistance due to the binder and suppressing decomposition of the electrolyte at the positive electrode conductive agent surface, a prima facie case of obviousness exists for the amount of positive electrode to be controlled so as to provide optimal energy storage capacity with respect to all components of the cathode electrode. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have controlled the amounts of the cathode electrode components where the cathode electrode comprises at least about 60% by weight, or at least about 75% by weight, and no greater than 80% by weight of the cathode active material based on a total weight of the cathode electrode in order to provide optimal energy storage capacity, while maintaining sufficient binding of all electrode components and minimal internal resistance, electron conductivity and lithium ion conductivity, without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success [MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 9, Harada discloses wherein the cathode electrode further comprises a binder [par. 0052].
Regarding Claim 10, Harada fails to discloses wherein the solid sate battery is under a pressure in a range of about 1 Mpa to about 5 MPa. However, it is well known in the art to maintain a pressure inside the battery within the claimed range in order to compress the cell electrode assembly to control volume contraction/extraction thereof. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada wherein the solid sate battery is under a pressure in a range of about 1 Mpa to about 5 MPa in order to maintain a pressure inside the battery within the claimed range in order to compress the cell electrode assembly to control volume contraction/extraction thereof.
Regarding Claim 15, Harada discloses an electric vehicle comprising the solid state battery of claim 1 [par. 0067].
Regarding Claim 16, Harada discloses an energy storage system for storing power generated by a wind generator and/or a solar power generator, comprising the solid state battery of claim 1 [par. 0073; Fig. 3].
Regarding Claim 17, Harada discloses a solid state battery comprising at least two cells [par. 0073], each cell comprises:
a cathode electrode (positive electrode 5 including a positive electrode active material layer 4) comprising cathode active material particles (positive electrode active material), solid electrolyte particles (solid electrolyte material), and carbon particles (conductive agent including a carbonaceous material such as acetylene black, carbon black, graphite), the cathode active material particles comprising a cathode active material configured to bind with lithium ions (i.e., absorb/release lithium), the solid electrolyte particles comprising a first solid electrolyte material configured to enable transport of lithium ions within the cathode electrode (i.e., enhance lithium ionic conductivity and improve charge/discharge properties), carbon particles configured to enable transport of electrons within the cathode electrode (i.e., enhance power collecting property and suppress contact resistance with current collector) [pars. 0052-57,0059,0061-63,0072,0077]; and
a solid electrolyte layer 9 positioned between the cathode electrode and the anode electrode, and configured to enable transport of lithium ions between the cathode layer and the anode layer [pars. 0033,0077], wherein the solid electrolyte layer comprises a second solid electrolyte material that is the same as or different from the first solid electrolyte material [par. 0031],
wherein the cathode active material particles, the solid electrolyte particles and the carbon particles are mixed and distributed in the cathode electrode (i.e., mixed and dispersed to obtain a paste) [pars. 0062,0088].
Harada fails to explicitly teach: (1) wherein the cathode active material particles are single crystalline particles having a particle size of greater than 1 μm, such that inside of the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles; and (2) wherein the cathode electrode has lithium ion diffusibility ranging from about 1 x 10-14cm2/s to about 1 x 10-7 cm2/s.
Pertaining (1) above, Harada describes primary particle of the cathode active material as preferably having a diameter of 100 nm to 1 μm [par. 0055], but it cannot be established whether the cathode active material particles are provided as single crystalline particles, polycrystalline particles, or both. In this regard, Seino, from the same field of endeavor, teaches a solid-state battery cathode containing cathode active material particles and a solid electrolyte, wherein the cathode active material particles contains a balance of both single crystalline particles and polycrystalline particles to control tap density of the cathode electrode, and wherein the active material particles have an average diameter in the range of 0.1 to 20 μm, with specific examples disclosing diameter of 4.69 μm to 12.5 μm [Seino – pars. 0025-34,0049; Table 1]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada to have comprised cathode active material particles including single crystalline particles having a particle size of greater than 1 μm, such that inside the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles, and wherein the cathode electrode further comprises additional cathode active material particles comprising polycrystalline particles, each of which comprises polycrystalline grains, in order to control cathode electrode tap density {It should be noted here that while Harada teaches a preferred primary particle size of up to 1 μm [Harada – par. 0055], it is not limited to the latter range}.
Pertaining (2) above, the parameter of lithium ion diffusibility represents a physical property inherent to a functional composite cathode composed of lithium cobalt oxide/NMC active materials, sulfide solid electrolytes, and carbon conductive agents. The prior art combination of Harada and Seino discloses a cathode composition and structure identicial or substantially similar to that claimed and as disclosed in the instant specification. When the prior art discloses a product substantially identical to that claimed, the claimed properties are presumed to be present unless the applicant provides evidence to the contrary. Applicant has provided no evidence that the specific structural arrangement of Harada modified by Seino would fail to exhibit the lithium ion diffusibility within the claimed range. Conversely, the specification itself describes this range as a natural outcome of the disclosed composition. Therefore, the claimed diffusibility range is inherently possessed by the battery of Harada, as modified by Seino.
Regarding Claim 18, Harada discloses wherein each of the single crystalline particles do not include polycrystalline grains therein (i.e., primary particles).
Regarding Claim 19, Harada teaches the positive electrode current collector may have a thickness of 0.1 μm to 20 μm [par. 0064], but fails to teach wherein the cathode electrode has a thickness in a range of about 10 μm to about 100 μm. However, providing the cathode electrode to have a thickness within the claimed range based on the thickness of the current collector of Harada being 0.1 μm to 20 μm is easily achievable and would depend on at least the type and size of the battery being produced for its particular application. Absent persuasive evidence that the thickness of the cathode electrode having the claimed range is significant, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the cathode electrode of Harada to have a thickness in a range of about 10 μm to about 100 μm depending on the type and size of battery being produced for its particular application, without undue experimentation and with a reasonable expectation of success [MPEP 2144.05(II)].
Regarding Claim 20, Harada discloses A method of using a solid state battery, the method comprising:
repeatedly charging and discharging the solid state battery [par. 0091], the solid state battery comprising a cell which comprises:
a cathode electrode (positive electrode 5 including a positive electrode active material layer 4) comprising cathode active material particles (positive electrode active material), solid electrolyte particles (solid electrolyte material), and carbon particles (conductive agent including a carbonaceous material such as acetylene black, carbon black, graphite), the cathode active material particles comprising a cathode active material configured to bind with lithium ions (i.e., absorb/release lithium), the solid electrolyte particles comprising a first solid electrolyte material configured to enable transport of lithium ions within the cathode electrode (i.e., enhance lithium ionic conductivity and improve charge/discharge properties), carbon particles configured to enable transport of electrons within the cathode electrode (i.e., enhance power collecting property and suppress contact resistance with current collector) [pars. 0052-57,0059,0061-63,0072,0077];
a solid electrolyte layer 9 positioned between the cathode electrode and the anode electrode, and configured to enable transport of lithium ions between the cathode layer and the anode layer [pars. 0033,0077], wherein the solid electrolyte layer comprises a second solid electrolyte material that is the same as or different from the first solid electrolyte material [par. 0031],
wherein the cathode active material particles, the solid electrolyte particles and the carbon particles are mixed and distributed in the cathode electrode (i.e., mixed and dispersed to obtain a paste) [pars. 0062,0088].
Harada fails to explicitly teach: (1) wherein the cathode active material particles are single crystalline particles having a particle size of greater than 1 μm, such that inside of the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles; and (2) wherein the cathode electrode has lithium ion diffusibility ranging from about 1 x 10-14cm2/s to about 1 x 10-7 cm2/s.
Pertaining (1) above, Harada describes primary particle of the cathode active material as preferably having a diameter of 100 nm to 1 μm [par. 0055], but it cannot be established whether the cathode active material particles are provided as single crystalline particles, polycrystalline particles, or both. In this regard, Seino, from the same field of endeavor, teaches a solid-state battery cathode containing cathode active material particles and a solid electrolyte, wherein the cathode active material particles contains a balance of both single crystalline particles and polycrystalline particles to control tap density of the cathode electrode, and wherein the active material particles have an average diameter in the range of 0.1 to 20 μm, with specific examples disclosing diameter of 4.69 μm to 12.5 μm [Seino – pars. 0025-34,0049; Table 1]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada to have comprised cathode active material particles including single crystalline particles having a particle size of greater than 1 μm, such that inside the single crystalline particles is substantially free of the first and second solid electrolyte material while the first solid electrolyte material contacts surfaces of the single crystalline particles, and wherein the cathode electrode further comprises additional cathode active material particles comprising polycrystalline particles, each of which comprises polycrystalline grains, in order to control cathode electrode tap density {It should be noted here that while Harada teaches a preferred primary particle size of up to 1 μm [Harada – par. 0055], it is not limited to the latter range}.
Pertaining (2) above, the parameter of lithium ion diffusibility represents a physical property inherent to a functional composite cathode composed of lithium cobalt oxide/NMC active materials, sulfide solid electrolytes, and carbon conductive agents. The prior art combination of Harada and Seino discloses a cathode composition and structure identicial or substantially similar to that claimed and as disclosed in the instant specification. When the prior art discloses a product substantially identical to that claimed, the claimed properties are presumed to be present unless the applicant provides evidence to the contrary. Applicant has provided no evidence that the specific structural arrangement of Harada modified by Seino would fail to exhibit the lithium ion diffusibility within the claimed range. Conversely, the specification itself describes this range as a natural outcome of the disclosed composition. Therefore, the claimed diffusibility range is inherently possessed by the battery of Harada, as modified by Seino.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada and Seino, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lopez (US20110052981A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Harada fails to explicitly teach wherein the solid state battery comprises a specific capacity of greater than about 100 mAh/g. However, providing a battery to have a desired specific capacity is merely a design choice depending on desired application of battery, and it is well-known to produce batteries having specific capacities well above the claimed range as demonstrated by Lopez who illustrates forming a battery having a specific capacity ranging from about 230 mAh/g to 270 mAh/g [Lopez – Fig. 21]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada to have comprises specific capacity of greater than about 100 mAh/g as a mere design choice depending on desired application of battery.
Regarding Claim 12, Harada fails to teach wherein the solid state battery has a c-rate of at least about 0.33. However, c-rate, by definition, is how quickly a battery is able to charge or discharge. It is well-known in the art to provide a battery having a c/3 rate or more in order to form battery capable of performing at higher rates and having excellent cycling properties [Lopez – par. 0007-8,0039]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada to have a c-rate of at least about 0.33 in order to provide a battery capable of performing at higher rates and having excellent cycling properties.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada and Seino, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Grepow (https://www.grepow.com/industry-news/a-flexible-battery-with-a-thickness-of-less-than-1-mm.html - issue date of 05/12/2020).
Regarding Claim 13, Harada fails to teach wherein a thickness of the cell is about 1 mm or less. However, ultra-thin batteries having a thickness of 1 mm or less are known in the art useful for electronics such as wearable electronics [Grepow]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the battery of Harada to have a cell thickness of about 1 mm or less in order to make a battery for electronics such as wearable electronics.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAROON S SHEIKH whose telephone number is (571)270-0302. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
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.
HAROON S. SHEIKH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights