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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1 and 4-5 have been amended; support for claim 1 is found in previously presented claims 2-3, the amendment to claims 4-5 were to change claim dependency.
Claims 2-3 have been cancelled.
Claim 19 has been added, support is found in Figure 5. No new matter has been added.
Claims 1 and 4-19 are currently pending and have been examined on the merits in this office action.
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.
Claims 1, 6-15 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2015/0180082 A1) in view of Endo et al. (US 2003/0108787 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jung discloses a method for manufacturing an electrode assembly, the method comprising:
A stacking process of alternately stacking a plurality of unit cells, each of which comprises an electrode and a separator, and a separator sheet, wherein the separator sheet is folded in a zigzag shape to locate the plurality of unit cells between folds of the separator sheet, thereby forming an electrode assembly in the separator sheet that is stacked in the zigzag shape (Figure 1-2; separator sheet 3 comprising a zigzag, [0005]; Figure 3-6; [0046-0051] first and second unit cells 100/200 each comprise a separator, an anode and a cathode; and has a separator 40 in a zigzag structure),
a lamination process of pressing both surface of the electrode assembly having a flat shape (Figures 7-8 compression of the electrode assembly; Figure 5 laminators L1/L2, [0011] heat and pressure applied to the electrode assembly),
wherein, in the stacking process, the separator sheet is alternately folded in a left and right direction among four directions of the electrode assembly, the four directions being front, back, left and right directions, and wherein the plurality of unit cells are alternately stacked to left and right sides whenever the separator sheet is folded (Figure 4; separator sheet 40 having unit cells 100/200 on left to right sides of the folded separator 40).
Jung is silent with respect to wherein a lamination process of heating and pressing both surface of the electrode assembly having a flat surface through a pair of heating presses to bond the plurality of unit cells and the separator sheet to each other, wherein, in the lamination process each of the pair of heating presses having a surface formed in a rounded shape are pressed together wherein pressing the electrode assembly to form the electrode assembly in the rounded shape, and wherein in the lamination process, the electrode assembly is pressed to have a curvature in the front and rear direction among the four direction of the electrode assembly.
Endo discloses a method of producing a curved electrode assembly and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of battery electrode manufacturing. Endo discloses wherein a flat type battery element 2b is inserted between a recessed heater block 21 and a protruding heater block 22 to bond the flat type battery element and form a curved battery cell and to form a battery that has an extremely low possibility of short circuiting at the end of the electrode (Figure 7-9; [0073-0077], abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to include the lamination process taught by Endo having the recessed heater block and protruding heater block that presses the electrodes/unit cells to form unit cells/electrodes having a curved shape to reduce the risk of a short circuiting from occurring as well as achieving excellent battery characteristics. Jung’s electrode stack can be orientated within the blocks of Endo such that the electrode stack is pressed to have a curvature in the front and rear directions among the four direction of the electrode assembly. Endo discloses the benefit of having a curved cell and method of forming a curved cell in order to prevent shorting of the cell. Thus through the combination, the curve forming lamination process of Endo can be added after the stacking process of Jung in order to create a curved electrode stack wherein the electrode stack is pressed to have a curvature in the front and rear directions among the four direction of the electrode assembly having a reduced risk of short circuiting. Therefore, all the claim limitations of claim 1 are rendered obvious in view of the combination.
Regarding claim 6, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Endo further discloses comprising a shape maintenance process of surrounding the electrode assembly using a shape maintenance housing so that the electrode assembly formed through the lamination process is maintained in the rounded shape (Endo Figure 6-11 and Figure 2; electrode assembly is inserted into the laminate film 3 to maintain the shape).
Regarding claim 7, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 6. Endo further discloses wherein an inside of the shape maintenance housing has a shape corresponding to the rounded shape of the electrode assembly (Endo Figure 6-11 and Figure 2; electrode assembly is inserted into the laminate film 3 to maintain the shape).
Regarding claim 8, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Jung further discloses before the stacking process, a unit cell formation process of stacking the electrode and the separator to heat and press the electrode and the separator is performed so that each of the plurality of unit cells is formed in the rounded shape (Jung Figure 3-4; unit cell formation step is done; through the modification of claim 1, the unit cells can undergo the thermal compression step taught by Endo to create a curved unit cell that can then undergo the zigzag stacking of Jung). Thus the unit cells can be formed of a rounded shape before or after the stacking process in order to create a curved electrode assembly as presented through the modification of claim 1. Additionally, the order in which the unit cell or electrode stack undergoes the curve forming process can be changed by a skilled artisan as the curve forming process can be done to the unit cells or the stacked electrode assembly as both would form a curved battery. It has been held that “selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results” (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 9, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 8. Endo further discloses wherein in the unit cell formation process, the plurality of unit cells are formed so that each of the plurality of unit cells has a curvature radius corresponding to a curvature radius of the electrode assembly to be formed through the lamination process (Endo Figure 6-11 pressing of battery cells). Thus through the combination the plurality of layers of Jung can be pressed and stacked on each other and thus would have the same curvature radius as other cells in the stack.
Regarding claim 10, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 9. Modified Jung further discloses wherein in the stacking process, the separator sheet is in close contact with the plurality of unit cells to correspond to the rounded shape of each of the plurality of unit cells and is folded in the zigzag shape (Jung Figures 3, 6-7, 12, 13 separator is in close contact with the unit cells; Endo discloses the formation of the curved unit cell in the modification of claim 1 thus through the modification all the claim limitations are rendered obvious).
Regarding claim 11, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Jung further discloses wherein the unit cells comprise a stack consisting of multiple anode/cathode layers with multiple separator materials, see figures 3-4. Applicant defines a unit cell being a mono-cell having only a single positive electrode, negative electrode and separator while Jung discloses a unit cell having multiple separators and electrode layers. However, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to adjust the unit cell of Jung such that each unit cell only has a positive electrode, separator, and a negative electrode. This structure is a basic form of a unit cell thus the claim limitations of claim 11 would have been obvious in view of basic knowledge of battery cells possessed by a skilled artisan.
Regarding claim 12, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Jung further discloses wherein in the stacking process, the separator sheet and the plurality of unit cells are stacked without being bonded to each other (Figures 1-6; after stacking is done then compression occurs in figures 7-8 therefore the unit cells are not bonded in the stacking process).
Regarding claims 13-14, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Jung further discloses an electrode assembly and secondary battery manufactured through the method of claim 1 (Jung [0063-0069] method of manufacturing an electrode assembly; [0085-0087] secondary battery having the electrode assembly).
Regarding claim 15, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 13. Jung further discloses wherein the plurality of unit cells, each of which comprises the electrode and the separator (Figures 3-4 and 6; plurality of unit cells with electrodes and separators); and the separator sheet (separator sheet 40 in Figure 6), wherein the separator sheet is folded in a zigzag shape to locate the plurality of unit cells alternatively between the fold of the separator sheet, respectively so that the separator sheet is interposed between adjacent unit cells when the electrode assembly is pressed to form a stack of the plurality of unit cells and separator sheet (Jung Figures 6-8 the unit cells are provided between folded in the separator sheet and is further pressed in Figures 7-8 of Jung and through the modification of claim 1 are pressed to seal and form a curved shape as taught by Endo).
Regarding claim 18, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Jung is silent with respect to wherein the electrode has a tab extending from an end of the electrode and wherein the tab extends outward from the heat presses. Endo further discloses wherein the electrode assembly has a tab that extends out of the electrode assembly and wherein during the lamination process, an end of the tab is located outward of one end of the surface of each of the pair of heating presses formed in the round shape (Endo Figures 2, 6 and 11 tabs are seen to not contain the curved shape thus the tabs would have extended out from an end of the heating blocks).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to incorporate electrode tabs as taught by Endo into the battery of Jung such that the electrode tabs can extend out of the electrode assembly and be used to provide electrical connection/power to devices. Thus through the combination, the battery of Jung can have tabs that extend out of the electrode assembly and in the lamination method, can extend out of the heated blocks while being pressed as taught by Endo. Thus all the claim limitations of claim 18 are rendered obvious through the combination.
Regarding claim 19, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Jung discloses wherein the front and rear direction is an extending direction of the tab (see modification of claim 1 wherein the electrode stack of Jung is oriented in the blocks of Endo such that the electrode stack is curved in the front and rear direction in which the electrode tabs extend ).
Claims 4-5 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2015/0180082 A1) in view of Endo et al. (US 2003/0108787 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Miyake (US 2016/0226055 A1).
Regarding claims 4-5, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Modified Jung is silent with respect to the length of the electrode assembly and wherein the curvature radius of the electrode assembly and upper and lower presses are 90-200 mm.
Miyake discloses a secondary battery and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor. Miyake discloses wherein the electrode assembly has a length of 50 mm and a width of 41 mm (Figure 22A-22B; [0289-0290]). Miyake further discloses wherein the electrode assembly and battery can be a curved secondary battery having a radius of curvature of greater than 40 mm and less than or equal to 150 mm so that the reliability can be kept high and for an increased space efficiency (Figure 16D; [0239-0242]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to adjust the length and width of the electrode assembly of Jung to have a length of 50 mm and a width of 41 mm as the size of the electrode assembly is not inventive and can be changed by a skilled artisan. Jung is silent with respect to the specific dimensions of the electrode assembly, therefore, a skilled artisan can look to Miyake for relative dimensions of the size of the electrode assembly. Thus the size of the electrode assembly is rendered obvious in view of Miyake. The size of an article is not a matter of invention. See In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Additionally, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the curved electrode and presses of modified Jung to have a radius of curvature of 40-150 mm as disclosed by Miyake in order to improve the space efficiency and can insure that the reliability can be kept high. Endo is silent with respect to the specific curvature radius dimensions, thus Miyake is relied upon to disclose typical radius of curvature dimensions. Examiner notes that claim 4 discloses the curvature radius of the electrode assembly while claim 5 discloses the curvature radius of the upper and lower presses. The combination of claim 1 discloses wherein the electrode assembly is curved according to the shape of the heater blocks of Endo. Thus the modification to create a curvature radius for the electrode assembly to be between 40-150 mm would also cause the heater blocks of Endo to have the same curvature radius as the electrode assembly as the electrode assembly is curved according to the heater blocks. Thus the modification to of a curvature radius to be between 40-150 mm would apply both to the heater block shape and the electrode assembly. Thus all the claim limitations of claims 4-5 are rendered obvious in view of the combination. In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 16, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 15. Jung discloses wherein the separator sheet comprises folds that are folded in the zigzag shape, however, is silent with respect to a separator having a winding portion that surrounds the stack as a whole.
Miyake discloses a secondary battery and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor. Miyake discloses an electrode assembly having a separator 103 formed of a zig zag shape in which electrodes are provided between the folds of the separator and wherein the separator has an overlap section that wraps around the whole stacking electrode assembly and welded with itself such that the whole electrode assembly is covered with the separator in the stacking direction ([0213-0220] Figures 13A-13b; Figure 14C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the separator 40 of Jung such that the separator has an extension portion that folds around the electrode assembly to form a separator overlap region which can be welded together to form a secured electrode stack as disclosed by Miyake. The resulting modification would read as the winding portion that surrounds the stack as a whole and would have been obvious in order to form a secured electrode stack as well as providing electrical insulation to the battery stack. Thus all the claim limitations of claim 16 are rendered obvious in view of the modification.
Regarding claim 17, modified Jung discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Jung discloses wherein the separator sheet comprises folds that are folded in the zigzag shape, however, is silent with respect to wherein in the stacking process, a portion of the separator sheet is wound to surround the electrode assembly at a whole to form a winding portion.
Miyake discloses a secondary battery and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor. Miyake discloses an electrode assembly having a separator 103 formed of a zig zag shape in which electrodes are provided between the folds of the separator and wherein the separator has an overlap section that wraps around the whole stacking electrode assembly and welded with itself such that the whole electrode assembly is covered with the separator in the stacking direction ([0213-0220] Figures 13A-13b; Figure 14C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the separator 40 of Jung such that the separator has an extension portion that folds around the electrode assembly to form a separator overlap region which can be welded together to form a secured electrode stack as disclosed by Miyake. The resulting modification would read as the winding portion that surrounds the stack as a whole and would have been obvious in order to form a secured electrode stack as well as providing electrical insulation to the battery stack. Thus all the claim limitations of claim 17 are rendered obvious in view of the modification.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amended claims are not taught as Endo discloses a curved method in which the electrode assembly is curved in the left and right direction instead of the front and rear direction. This argument is not persuasive as the rejection has been updated as a skilled artisan can configure the electrode stack between the blocks of Endo such that the curve happens in the direction of the electrode tabs through the combination of claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fauteux (US 2005/0019652 A1)- discloses an electrode assembly and method of manufacturing the same wherein the electrode stack has a fan-fold orientation.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Adam J Francis whose telephone number is (571)272-1021. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7 am-4 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571)270-7871. 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.
/ADAM J FRANCIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728