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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 2/7/2024 and 3/7/2024. Claims 26 and 27 are new. Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 14-21, 26, 27 are pending. Applicant’s arguments have been considered. Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 14-21, 26, 27 are finally rejected for reasons below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed 10/29/2024 has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112, 1st
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 14-21, 26, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claims 1 and 10, the limitation “a first insulating glue layer, disposed between the first surface of the first current collector and a first location of a surface of the first lead facing the first surface of the first current collector, wherein the first lead is electrically connected to the first current collector via the first insulating glue layer or laser welding” is not supported by the disclosure as originally filed.
The Specification does not support that the first lead is electrically connected to the first current collector via the first insulating glue layer.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112, 2nd
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 18 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.
The limitation “the pair of second insulating glue layers” lacks antecedent basis.
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, 3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 14-21, 26, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugita (WO2013038677A1) in view of Matsushita (US20140120417A1; Matsushita is 102(a)(2) art) and Atsuo (JP2007165224A).
Regarding claim 1, Sugita teaches a lithium-ion battery ([001]-[002]), comprising:
a first plate (positive electrode plate 1a, 1c, 1d, 1f, FIGs. 2a, 4, 5, 7; [029]) comprising a first current collector (see [027]), a first film (the term is understood to mean “active material”; the active material is coated on the current collector, see [027]; FIG. 2a shows the “film” as the dark portion (no reference sign is provided)) and a first lead (collector tab 12, FIG. 2A; [029]),
wherein the first film is disposed on a first surface of the first current collector (see [027]) and is provided with a first recess (exposed portion 22, FIG. 2A; [027]) configured to receive the first lead (see FIG. 2a), and the first lead is electrically connected to the first surface of the first current collector (see FIG. 2a; the structure is inherently present since a “collector tab” is necessarily electrically connected to the first surface of the current collector), and the first film is also disposed on a second surface of the first current collector at a location opposite to the first recess on the first surface (see page 9, 6th paragraph of translation);
a second plate (negative electrode plate 2c, FIG. 13; [030], [056]) comprising a second current collector (see [027]), a second film (the active material is coated on the collector, see [027]) and a second lead (negative electrode lead 6, FIG. 2b; [027]),
wherein the second film is disposed on the second current collector and is provided with a second recess (exposed portion 31, FIG. 2b) configured to receive the second lead (see FIG. 2b), and the second lead is electrically connected to the second current collector (the structure is inherently present since a “collector tab” is necessarily electrically connected to the current collector); and
a separator (separator 3, FIG. 1; [069]) disposed between the first plate and the second plate (see FIG. 1);
wherein a length of a portion of the first lead in the first recess is less than a width of a remaining portion of the first film from an edge of the first insulating glue layer covering the first film to an edge of the first film opposite to the first recess (see FIG. 2a; since the length of the alleged first lead covers ~1/4 of the width of the current collecting plate (top-to-bottom), the limitation is held to be met).
Regarding claim 26, the negative active material includes silicon (page 9, 9th paragraph of translation)
Regarding claim 1, Sugita does not teach a first insulating glue layer, disposed between the first surface of the first current collector and a first location of a surface of the first lead facing the first surface of the first current collector, wherein the first lead is electrically connected to the first current collector via the first insulating glue layer or laser welding. Matsushita teaches a protective layer interposed between a peripheral edge of a lead and a positive electrode current collector exposed surface. Therefore, it is possible to suppress a foil cut of the positive electrode current collector due to a expansion and shrinkage during charge/discharge cycles, and to obtain a battery with excellent safety and reliability [0047].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add a protective layer between the positive tab and the recessed portion of the current collector of Sugita, as taught by Matsushita, for the benefit of protecting the tab from exposing its edge, and therefore protecting the battery from expansion and shrinkage during charge/discharge cycles.
Regarding claim 1, Sugita does not disclose a second insulating glue layer is disposed on a second location of the surface of the first film opposite to the second recess on the second current collector across the separator in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate. Atsuo teaches a battery having a positive electrode lead covered with tape, and a heat-resistant protective film formed on the surface of the negative electrode plate facing the uncoated portion [0008]. Instead of forming a heat resistant protective film on the uncoated part of the positive electrode current collector, it is provided on the negative mixture part facing the uncoated part. By doing so, it is possible to form a negative electrode mixture layer with very few irregularities and a dense heat-resistant protective film with high adhesion, and it is possible to provide a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery that can suppress heat generation when an internal short circuit occurs [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form a second insulating layer on the positive film, across the separator, opposite the negative lead on Sugita, as taught by Atsuo, for the benefit preventing a short circuit at the negative lead as well.
Regarding claim 3, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 2 as described above. Sugita also teaches wherein a distance between a center of the first recess and an end of the positive film is 1/4 - 3/4 of a length of the positive film (see FIG. 2a and claim mapping above), and a distance between a center of the second recess and an end of the negative film is 1/4 - 3/4 of a length of the negative film (see FIG. 13 and claim mapping above).
Regarding claims 5, 6, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 2 as described above.
None of Sugita, Kim, and Atsuo teach wherein a length of the first recess is less than a length of the positive lead by 1 - 100mm, a width of the first recess is greater than a width of the positive lead by 1 - 10mm; and a length of the second recess is less than a length of the negative lead by 1 - 100mm, a width of the second recess is greater than a width of the negative lead by 1 - 10mm (claim 5).
None of Sugita, Kim, and Atsuo teach wherein a length of the first recess is less than a width of the positive film by 1 - 100mm, and a length of the second recess is less than a width of the negative film by 1 - 100mm (claim 6).
However, it has been held that changes in size (dimension) are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
In the instant case, it appears that the prior art device (i.e., the combination of Sugita and Kim) have the same claimed features and that any relative difference in size, dimensions, or proportions would not lead to device that performs differently from the claimed device. Moreover, the present claims cover very broad ranges (three orders of magnitude) and there is no indication in the specification that such broad ranges establish the criticality of the ranges. Thus, the claimed device of claims 5, 6 and 8 is not patentably distinct from Sugita in view of Kim and Atsuo. Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed invention of claims 5, 6 and 8 because changes in proportion (size) are within ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 7, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 2 as described above. Sugita also necessarily teaches wherein a depth of the first recess is no larger than a thickness of the positive film, and a depth of the second recess is no larger than a thickness of the negative film. The recess portion are taught by Sugita as “exposed portions” (reference numeral 22, 31 or 32; it is noted the reference sign is not provided in FIG. 13 but is apparent from comparison of the other figures) and the undersigned understands this to be a non-coated portion (see [029]), meaning the depth of the recesses are approximately equal to the thickness of the positive/negative films. Thus, the limitation is inherently met.
Regarding claim 9, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 1 as described above.
Neither Sugita nor Kim teach wherein a width of a portion of the first lead in the first recess is greater than a width of a remaining portion of the first recess not occupied by the first lead located on one side of the first lead.
However, it has been held that changes in dimension are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
In the instant case, it does not appear that there would be any difference between the claimed device and the prior art device of Sugita in view of Kim. For at least these reasons, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed invention of claim 9 because changes in proportion are within ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 20, Kim teaches the first plate, the separator and the second plate are wound together; an outer winding end of the negative plate is located between two layers of the separator; and the two layers of the separator extend over the outer winding end of the negative plate along the winding direction. See Figure 5. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form the outer end of the negative plate of Sugita between two layers of the separator extend over the outer winding end of the negative plate along the winding direction for the benefit of protecting the ends of the negative active material layer.
Regarding claim 10, Sugita teaches a lithium-ion battery ([001]-[002]), comprising: a first plate (positive electrode plate 1a, 1c, 1d, 1f, FIGs. 2a, 4, 5, 7;; [029]) comprising a first current collector (see [027]), a first film (the term is understood to mean “active material”; the active material is coated on the current collector, see [027]; FIG. 2a shows the “film” as the dark portion (no reference sign is provided)) and a first lead (collector tab 12, FIG. 2A; [029]),
wherein the first film is disposed on a first surface of the first current collector (see [027]) and is provided with a first recess (exposed portion 22, FIG. 2A; [027]) configured to receive the first lead (see FIG. 2a), and the first lead is electrically connected to the first surface of the first current collector (see FIG. 2a; the structure is inherently present since a “collector tab” is necessarily electrically connected to the first surface of the current collector), and the first film is also disposed on a second surface of the first current collector at a location opposite to the first recess on the first surface (see page 9, 6th paragraph of translation);
a second plate (negative electrode plate 2c, FIG. 13; [030], [056]) comprising a second current collector (see [027]), a second film (the active material is coated on the collector, see [027]) and a second lead (negative electrode lead 6, FIG. 2b; [027]),
wherein the second film is disposed on the second current collector and is provided with a second recess (exposed portion 31, FIG. 2b) configured to receive the second lead (see FIG. 2b), and the second lead is electrically connected to the second current collector (the structure is inherently present since a “collector tab” is necessarily electrically connected to the current collector);
wherein a width of a portion of the first lead in the first recess is greater than a width of a remaining portion of the first recess not occupied by the first lead located on one side of the first lead (see FIG. 2a and discussion below); and
a separator (separator 3, FIG. 1; [069]) disposed between the first plate and the second plate (see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 27, the negative active material includes silicon (page 9, 9th paragraph of translation)
Regarding claim 10, Sugita does not teach a first insulating glue layer, disposed between the first surface of the first current collector and a first location of a surface of the first lead facing the first surface of the first current collector, wherein the first lead is electrically connected to the first current collector via the first insulating glue layer or laser welding. Matsushita teaches a protective layer interposed between a peripheral edge of a lead and a positive electrode current collector exposed surface. Therefore, it is possible to suppress a foil cut of the positive electrode current collector due to a expansion and shrinkage during charge/discharge cycles, and to obtain a battery with excellent safety and reliability [0047]. Regarding claim 19, the first insulating glue layer is disposed on an upper surface and below a lower surface of the first lead in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate, refer to fig 7B.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add a protective layer between the positive tab and the recessed portion of the current collector of Sugita, as taught by Matsushita, for the benefit of protecting the tab from exposing its edge, and therefore protecting the battery from expansion and shrinkage during charge/discharge cycles.
Regarding claim 10, Sugita does not disclose a second insulating glue layer is disposed on a second location of the surface of the first film opposite to the second recess on the second current collector across the separator in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate. Atsuo teaches a battery having a positive electrode lead covered with tape, and a heat-resistant protective film formed on the surface of the negative electrode plate facing the uncoated portion [0008]. Instead of forming a heat resistant protective film on the uncoated part of the positive electrode current collector, it is provided on the negative mixture part facing the uncoated part. By doing so, it is possible to form a negative electrode mixture layer with very few irregularities and a dense heat-resistant protective film with high adhesion, and it is possible to provide a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery that can suppress heat generation when an internal short circuit occurs [0007]. Regarding claim 18, as best understood, the second lead 7 on the second plate 4 is sandwiched between the pair of second insulating glue layers 8 in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate, refer to fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form a second insulating layer on the positive film, across the separator, opposite the negative lead on Sugita, as taught by Atsuo, for the benefit preventing a short circuit at the negative lead as well.
Regarding claim 12, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 10 as described above. Sugita also teaches wherein a distance between a center of the first recess and an end of the positive film is 1/4 - 3/4 of a length of the positive film (see FIG. 2a and claim mapping above), and a distance between a center of the second recess and an end of the negative film is 1/4 - 3/4 of a length of the negative film (see FIG. 13 and claim mapping above).
Regarding claims 14, 15 and 17, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 10 as described above.
Neither Sugita nor Matsushita nor Akita teach wherein a length of the first recess is less than a length of the first lead by 1 – 100 mm, a width of the first recess is greater than a width of the first lead by 1 - 10mm, and a length of the second recess is less than a length of the second lead by 1 - 100mm, a width of the second recess is greater than a width of the second lead by 1 – 10 mm (claim 14).
Neither Sugita nor Matsushita nor Atsuo teach wherein a length of the first recess is less than a width of the first film by 1 - 100mm, and a length of the second recess is less than a width of the second film by 1 - 100mm (claim 15).
Lastly, neither Sugita nor Matsushita nor Atsuo teach wherein a depth of the first recess is greater than a thickness of the first lead by 0.005 - 0.1mm, and a depth of the second recess is greater than a thickness of the second lead by 0.005 - 0.1mm (claim 17).
However, it has been held that changes in size (dimension) are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device. Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
In the instant case, it appears that the prior art device (i.e., the combination of Sugita and Kim) have the same claimed features and that any relative difference in size, dimensions, or proportions would not lead to device that performs differently from the claimed device. Moreover, the present claims cover very broad ranges (three orders of magnitude) and there is no indication in the specification that such broad ranges establish the criticality of the ranges. Thus, the claimed device of claims 14, 15 and 17 is not patentably distinct from Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo. Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arrived at the claimed invention of claims 14, 15 and 17 because changes in proportion (size) are within ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, Sugita in view of Matsushita and Atsuo teach the lithium-ion battery of claim 10 as described above. Sugita also necessarily teaches wherein a depth of the first recess is no larger than a thickness of the positive film, and a depth of the second recess is no larger than a thickness of the negative film. The recess portion are taught by Sugita as “exposed portions” (reference numeral 22, 31 or 32; it is noted the reference sign is not provided in FIG. 13 but is apparent from comparison of the other figures) and the undersigned understands this to be a non-coated portion (see [029]), meaning the depth of the recesses are approximately equal to the thickness of the positive/negative films. Thus, the limitation is inherently met.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugita (WO2013038677A1) in view of Matsushita (US20140120417A1; Matsushita is 102(a)(2) art) and Atsuo (JP2007165224A) as applied to claim 10, further in view of Kim (US 2009/0246639).
Regarding claim 21, Sugita modified by Matsushita and Atsuo does not teach the first plate, the separator and the second plate are wound together; an outer winding end of the negative plate is located between two layers of the separator; and the two layers of the separator extend over the outer winding end of the negative plate along the winding direction. Kim teach the first plate, the separator and the second plate are wound together; an outer winding end of the negative plate is located between two layers of the separator; and the two layers of the separator extend over the outer winding end of the negative plate along the winding direction. See Figure 5. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form the outer end of the negative plate of Sugita between two layers of the separator extend over the outer winding end of the negative plate along the winding direction for the benefit of protecting the ends of the negative active material layer.
Response to Arguments
Arguments filed 2/16/2026 are addressed:
Applicant argues claims 1 and 10 as amended each recite that "a second insulating glue layer is disposed on a second location of the surface of the first film opposite to the second recess on the second current collector across the separator in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate", which reduces the lithium precipitation build-up on the second plate where the second recess is located near the second lead and this feature is completely missing from Atsuo because the heat-resistant protective film in Atsuo does not prevent the movement.
In response, regarding claims 1 and 10, Sugita does not disclose a second insulating glue layer is disposed on a second location of the surface of the first film opposite to the second recess on the second current collector across the separator in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate. Atsuo teaches a battery having a positive electrode lead covered with tape, and a heat-resistant protective film formed on the surface of the negative electrode plate facing the uncoated portion [0008]. Instead of forming a heat resistant protective film on the uncoated part of the positive electrode current collector, it is provided on the negative mixture part facing the uncoated part. By doing so, it is possible to form a negative electrode mixture layer with very few irregularities and a dense heat-resistant protective film with high adhesion, and it is possible to provide a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery that can suppress heat generation when an internal short circuit occurs [0007]. Regarding claim 18, as best understood, the second lead 7 on the second plate 4 is sandwiched between the pair of second insulating glue layers 8 in a thickness direction of the first plate and the second plate, refer to fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to form a second insulating layer on the positive film, across the separator, opposite the negative lead on Sugita, as taught by Atsuo, for the benefit preventing a short circuit at the negative lead as well.
Further, Applicant’s argument “reduces the lithium precipitation build-up on the second plate where the second recess is located near the second lead” is not commensurate with the claims. The claims do not require that the second insulating glue layer reduce lithium precipitation build-up on the second plate where the second recess is located near the second lead.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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