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/Restriction and Claim Status
Applicant’s election of Species C corresponding to Claims 1–10 and 13–20 in the reply filed on 6 May 2026 is acknowledged. Applicant did not specify whether election was made with or without traverse; however, as Applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 11 and 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 6 May 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 6, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2: “wherein a negative electrode comprises a negative electrode active material that comprises a silicon-based active material” should instead read “further comprising a negative electrode, wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode active material that comprises a silicon-based active material”.
Claims 6 and 13: “comprises a lithium nickel-based active material” should instead read “comprises the lithium nickel-based active material”.
Appropriate correction is required. Note that withdrawn claims should be reviewed for similar issues to put the application in better form for the future.
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 14 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 14 recites the limitation “the carbon-based active material" in lines 2–3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, the limitation has been interpreted as “a carbon-based active material”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 5–7, 9, 10, 13, and 17–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 107394124 A; see attached machine translation) in view of Park et al. (US 20210135187 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, 5–7, 10, and 13, Wang discloses a secondary battery (see power lithium-ion battery, [0014]) comprising:
a positive electrode (see cathode sheet, [0007]) comprising a positive electrode active material (see cathode active material, [0007]) that comprises a lithium nickel-based active material (see ternary cathode material, [0007], [0011]) and LFP (LiFePO4) (see lithium iron phosphate, [0007]) in the form of secondary particles (see secondary granules, [0009]); and
wherein the lithium nickel-based active material contains 80 or 85 mol.% of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium (see LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 (x = 0.8, y = 0.1) and LiNi0.85Mn0.10Al0.05O2, [0011]).
Wang further discloses ([0007]) wherein the positive electrode active material comprises the LFP (LiFePO4) in the form of secondary particles in an amount of from 0.1 to 15 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the positive electrode active material, but does not explicitly disclose the claimed ranges of 0.1 to 10 (Claims 1 and 13), 0.1 to 5 (Claim 10), and 0.1 to 3 (Claim 7) parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the positive electrode active material.
However, Wang discloses ([0021]) that when the positive electrode active material comprises the disclosed amount of LFP (LiFePO4), the structural stability of the battery material system is improved and the risk of runaway of active materials when the battery is abused is reduced. Note that Wang is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of lithium secondary batteries.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I), and thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the amount by weight of LFP (LiFePO4) in the form of secondary particles comprised in the positive electrode active material with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in a battery material system with improved structural stability and reduced risk of runaway of active materials when the battery is abused.
Wang does not explicitly disclose that the lithium nickel-based active material is in the form of single particles (Claim 1), nor wherein an average particle diameter (D50) of the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles is from 3 µm to 10 µm (Claim 5).
Park teaches a secondary battery (see lithium secondary battery, [0075]) comprising: a positive electrode (see positive electrode, [0075]) comprising a positive electrode active material (see positive electrode active material, [0019]) that comprises a lithium nickel-based active material (see composite transition metal oxide, [0019]) in the form of single particles (see composed of a single particle, [0019]) having an average particle diameter (D50) of preferably 3 µm to 7 µm ([0026]); and wherein the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains 65 mol.% or more of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium ([0019]). Park teaches ([0026]) that when the lithium nickel-based active material is in the form of single particles having an average particle diameter within a preferred range of 3 µm to 7 µm, particle strength can be increased to suppress particle breakage during rolling and improve rolling density, and the amount of gas generated by electrolyte solution side reactions can be decreased due to a decrease in specific surface area and lithium by-product. Note that Park is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of lithium secondary batteries.
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of modified Wang such that the lithium nickel-based active material is in the form of single particles having an average particle diameter (D50) of 3 µm to 7 µm, as taught by Park, for the purpose of increasing particle strength to suppress particle breakage during rolling and improve rolling density, and decreasing the amount of gas generated by electrolyte side reactions due to decreased specific surface area and lithium by-product.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above. Wang further discloses wherein the lithium nickel-based active material contains 80 or 85 mol.% of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium (see LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 (x = 0.8, y = 0.1) and LiNi0.85Mn0.10Al0.05O2, [0011]).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above. Wang further discloses ([0018]) the secondary battery comprising an electrolyte that is an organic liquid electrolyte.
Regarding Claims 18–20, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above, but does not explicitly disclose a battery module comprising a secondary battery according to Claim 1 as a unit cell (Claim 18), a battery pack comprising the secondary battery according to Claim 1 (Claim 19), or a battery pack comprising the battery module according to Claim 18 (Claim 20).
Park teaches ([0098]–[0099]) utilizing the secondary battery as a unit cell in a battery module, and further utilizing the battery module in a battery pack for the purpose of supplying power to a power tool, electric car, or power storage system.
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the secondary battery of modified Wang into a battery module as a unit cell, and further to incorporate such a battery module into a battery pack, as taught by Park, for the purpose of supplying power to a power tool, electric car, or power storage system.
Claims 2, 4, 8, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 107394124 A; see attached machine translation) in view of Park et al. (US 20210135187 A1) as applied to Claims 1, 5–7, 9, 10, 13, and 17–20 above, further in view of Lee et al. (WO 20200180160 A1; US 20220029152 A1 used herein for translation and citation purposes), herein referred to as Lee ‘160.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above. Wang further discloses the secondary battery further comprising a negative electrode (see negative electrode sheet, [0014]), wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode active material (see negative electrode active material, [0016]).
However, Wang does not disclose wherein the negative electrode active material comprises a silicon-based active material, and instead discloses wherein the negative electrode active material comprises a carbon-based active material (see artificial graphite and natural graphite, [0032]).
Lee ‘160 teaches a secondary battery (see lithium secondary battery, [0024]) comprising: a positive electrode (see positive electrode, [0024]), comprising a positive electrode active material (see positive electrode active material, [0024]) that comprises a lithium nickel-based active material (see lithium nickel cobalt manganese-based oxide, [0024]) in the form of single particles (see form of a single particle, [0043]); and wherein the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains 50 mol.% or more of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium ([0031], [0035]). Lee ‘160 further teaches the secondary battery further comprising a negative electrode (see negative electrode, [0024]), wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode active material (see negative electrode active material, [0076]) that comprises a mixture of a carbon-based active material (see carbon-based negative electrode active material, [0077], [0082]) and a silicon-based active material (see silicon-based negative electrode active material ([0077], [0082]). Lee ‘160 teaches that better capacity characteristics can be obtained when the silicon-based active material is included. Note that Lee ‘160 is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of lithium secondary batteries.
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of modified Wang such that the negative electrode active material further comprises a silicon-based active material, as Lee ‘160 teaches that better capacity characteristics can be obtained when a silicon-based active material is included.
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein the negative electrode active material comprises the silicon-based active material in an amount of from 1 to 15 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material (Claim 4), nor wherein the negative electrode active material comprises the carbon-based active material in an amount of 60 parts by weight or more and 99 parts by weight or less with respect to 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material (Claim 14).
Lee ‘160 teaches that when the negative electrode active material composed of a mixture of silicon-based and carbon-based active materials comprises the silicon-based active material in an amount of from 1 to 30 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material (see a mixing ratio of the silicon-based negative electrode active material: the carbon-based negative electrode active material may be in a range of 1:99 to… 30:70, [0082]; note that such a range corresponds to the carbon-based active material being comprised in a balanced amount of from 70 to 99 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material), excellent cycle performance can be secured by suppressing volume expansion of the silicon-based active material and improving capacity characteristics ([0082]).
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of modified Wang such that the negative electrode active material comprises the silicon-based active material in an amount of from 1 to 30 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material, and correspondingly comprises the carbon-based active material in a balanced amount of from 70 to 99 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the negative electrode active material, as taught by Lee ‘160, for the purpose of securing excellent cycle performance by suppressing volume expansion of the silicon-based active material and improving capacity characteristics.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I), and thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the amount by weight of silicon-based active material and the carbon-based active material comprised in the negative electrode active material with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in a battery material system with excellent cycle performance due to suppressed volume expansion of the silicon-based active material and improved capacity characteristics.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above. Wang discloses wherein the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains 80 mol.% of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium (see LiNixMnyCo1−x−yO2 (x = 0.8, y = 0.1), [0011]), but does not explicitly disclose the claimed range of 55 mol.% or more and less than 80 mol.% of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium.
Lee ‘160 teaches a secondary battery (see lithium secondary battery, [0024]) comprising: a positive electrode (see positive electrode, [0024]), comprising a positive electrode active material (see positive electrode active material, [0024]) that comprises a lithium nickel-based active material (see lithium nickel cobalt manganese-based oxide, [0024]) in the form of single particles (see form of a single particle, [0043]); and wherein the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains 50 mol.% or more and 95 mol.% or less of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium ([0031], [0035]). Lee ‘160 teaches ([0035]) that when the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains a mol.% of nickel in the disclosed range, it is more advantageous for achieving high capacity. Note that Lee ‘160 is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of lithium secondary batteries.
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of modified Wang such that the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains 50 mol.% or more and 95 mol.% or less of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium, as taught by Lee ‘160, for the purpose of it being more advantageous for achieving high capacity.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I), and thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the mol.% of nickel contained in the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in it being more advantageous for achieving high capacity.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above. Modified Wang further discloses wherein the silicon-based active material comprises SiOx (0<x<2) (see silicon oxide (SiOx, where 0<x<2), Lee ‘160 [0080]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 107394124 A; see attached machine translation) in view of Park et al. (US 20210135187 A1) as applied to Claims 1, 5–7, 9, 10, 13, and 17–20 above, further in view of Li et al. (US 20210175511 A1).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein the positive electrode has a porosity of from 19% to 23%.
Li teaches a secondary battery (see lithium-ion battery, [0041]) comprising: a positive electrode (see positive electrode plate, [0041]) comprising a positive electrode active material (see positive active material, [0041]) that comprises a lithium nickel-based active material (see positive active substance I [which] is a layered lithium nickel transition metal oxide, [0041]) in the form of single particles (see single particle morphology, [0049]), and LFP (LiFePO4) (see positive active substance II [which] is an olivine-type li-containing phosphate, [0041], which can specifically be LiFePO4, [0067]) in the form of secondary particles (see the positive active substance II includes… secondary particles, [0062]); and wherein the lithium nickel-based active material in the form of single particles contains 55 mol.% or more of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium (see all specific examples of the layered nickel transition metal oxide listed in [0065] except LiNi0.5Co0.2Mn0.3O2 and LiNi0.5Co0.25Mn0.25O2), and wherein the positive electrode active material comprises the LFP (LiFePO4) in the form of secondary particles in an amount of from 2 to 40 parts by weight with respect to 100 parts by weight of the positive electrode active material ([0056]). Li further teaches ([0057]) that when the positive electrode has a porosity of from 19% to 25%, a relatively high composition of positive electrode active material can be loaded in the positive electrode to improve the volume energy density of the secondary battery, and quick entrance of lithium ions into the positive electrode can be ensured to facilitate relatively good charge-discharge power of the secondary battery. Note that Li is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of lithium secondary batteries.
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of modified Wang such that the positive electrode has a porosity of from 19% to 25%, as taught by Li, for the purpose of loading a relatively high composition of positive electrode active material in the positive electrode to improve the volume energy density of the secondary battery, and ensuring quick entrance of lithium ions into the positive electrode to facilitate relatively good charge-discharge power of the secondary battery.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I), and thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portions of the ranges for the porosity of the positive electrode with a reasonable expectation that such selection would successfully result in a relatively high composition of positive electrode active material can be loaded in the positive electrode to improve the volume energy density of the secondary battery, and quick entrance of lithium ions into the positive electrode can be ensured to facilitate relatively good charge-discharge power of the secondary battery.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 107394124 A; see attached machine translation) in view of Park et al. (US 20210135187 A1), further in view of Lee et al. (WO 20200180160 A1; US 20220029152 A1 used herein for translation and citation purposes), herein referred to as Lee ‘160, as applied to Claims 2, 4, 8, 14, and 15 above, further in view of Lee et al. (US 20200388833 A1), herein referred to as Lee ‘833.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Wang discloses the secondary battery as set forth above. Modified Wang further discloses wherein the silicon-based active material comprises SiOx (0<x<2) (see silicon oxide (SiOx, where 0<x<2), Lee ‘160 [0080]), but does not disclose wherein at least one of a Mg-containing compound or a Li-containing compound is present in the SiOx (0<x<2) or on a surface of SiOx (0<x<2).
Lee ‘833 teaches a secondary battery (see secondary battery, [0062]) comprising: a positive electrode (see positive electrode, [0062]) comprising a positive electrode active material (see positive electrode active material, [0063]) that comprises a lithium nickel-based active material (see lithium nickel oxide or Ni-site type lithium nickel oxide, [0065]); and wherein the lithium nickel-based active material contains 70 to 99 mol.% (see LiNi1−c2Mc2O2 wherein… 0.01≤c2≤0.3, [0065]) or 100 mol.% (see LiNiO2, [0065]) of nickel with respect to 100 mol.% of metals excluding lithium. Lee ‘833 further teaches wherein the secondary battery further comprises a negative electrode (see negative electrode, [0062]), wherein the negative electrode comprises a negative electrode active material (see negative electrode active material, [0019]) that comprises a silicon-based active material comprising SiOx (0≤x<2) ([0019]), and more specifically SiOx (0.5≤x≤1.5) ([0020]). Lee ‘833 further teaches a Li-containing compound (see lithium-containing compound, [0019]) present in the SiOx, and a Mg-containing compound (see magnesium silicate, [0019]) present on a surface of the SiOx. Lee ‘833 teaches ([0023]) that the Li-containing compound can improve the initial efficiency of the secondary battery and energy density of the negative electrode, while ([0029]) the Mg-containing compound improves the initial efficiency of the secondary battery and suppresses the volume expansion of the negative electrode active material and generation of cracks. Note that Lee ‘833 is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of lithium secondary batteries.
It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery of modified Wang such that a Li-containing compound is present in the SiOx, as taught by Lee ‘833, for the purpose of improving the initial efficiency of the secondary battery and energy density of the negative electrode, and further such that a Mg-containing compound is present on the surface of the SiOx, as also taught by Lee ‘833, for the purpose of improving the initial efficiency of the secondary battery and suppressing the volume expansion of the negative electrode active material and the generation of cracks.
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 and 2 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claim 1 of copending Application No. 19/008,264 (reference application).
Claims 3–10 and 13–20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 3-10 and 13–20, respectively, of copending Application No. 19/008,264 (i.e. Claim 3 of the instant application is provisionally rejected over Claim 3 of the reference application, Claim 4 of the instant application is provisionally rejected over Claim 4 of the reference application, and so on). In each case, although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims only recite limitations which are also recited by the conflicting claims.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA MARIE FEHR, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-0860. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/J.M.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights