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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/10/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This is a non-final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 02/10/2025. Claims 1 and 4 are currently amended. Claims 2-3, 7-9, and 12-17 remain withdrawn. Claims 1, 4-6, and 10-11 are presented for examination.
The 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections in the previous Office Action are withdrawn and new rejections are presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 6 recites “wherein the depressed portion is formed in at least one of the three surfaces of the electrode tab in a concavo-convex shape.” The instant specification does not define the term “a concavo-convex shape” but does state “In the case in which the depressed portion has a concavo-convex shape, the depressed portion has an advantage in that the depressed portion is capable of more securely holding the electrode tab such that the electrode tab cannot move in the dx direction, in the dy direction, and in a dθ direction.” Prior art will therefore be considered to read on claim 6 if it incudes a depressed portion that prevents movement in the dx, dy, and dθ directions.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5-6, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “wherein a single first depressed portion is inwardly formed in the outer edge of each of the first row of electrode tabs” (ll. 5-6), “a single second depressed portion is inwardly formed in the outer edge of each of the second row of electrode tabs” (ll. 7-8), “the inner edge of each of the first row of electrode tabs” (ll. 10-11), and “an inner edge of each of the second row of electrode tabs” (ll. 11-12). These limitations should read “each electrode tab of the first [or second] row of electrode tabs.”
Claims 5, 6, and 11 each recite “the depressed portion” but should instead recite “the first depressed portion,” “the second depressed portion,” or “the depressed portions” since parent claim 1 requires multiple depressed portions. For examination purposes, prior art will be considered to read on the limitations of claims 5, 6, and 11 if the electrode tabs in either or both rows have the claimed shapes.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 4-6 and 10 are 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 4 recites “wherein the depressed portions are simultaneously formed in an inner edge of each tab.” This limitation is indefinite because the term “simultaneously” is conventionally understood as meaning “at the same time.” The phrase “simultaneously formed” implies a method step in a claim that is otherwise directed toward an apparatus, thereby confusing the metes and bounds of the claim. For examination purposes, the limitation “simultaneously formed” has been interpreted as requiring that a depressed portion is present in both electrode tabs.
The claim 4 limitation “wherein the depressed portions are simultaneously formed in an inner edge of each tab” is also indefinite because it is unclear whether “an inner edge of each electrode tab” is the same inner edge introduced in parent claim 1 or whether the claim requires that the depressed portion is formed in an additional inner edge of each tab, such as one formed in one of the “arms” of each tab. For examination purposes, the limitation “an inner edge of each tab” is interpreted as referring to the same “inner edge” as described in claim 1.
Claims 5 and 6 each recite the limitation "the three surfaces of the electrode tab" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, “the three surfaces” have been interpreted as referring to the “outer edge,” the “top edge,” and the “inner edge” of each tab as described in lines 3-4 of parent claim 1.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "respective surfaces of the electrode tab perpendicular to the electrode assembly” in line 2. It is unclear what is meant by respective surfaces of each electrode tab when claim 1 recites that the depressions are “inwardly formed in the outer edge” of each electrode tab. For the purpose of examination, the “respective surfaces” have been interpreted as referring to the “outer edge” of each tab as required by parent claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yotsumoto (US 2012/0115021 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yotsumoto discloses an electrode assembly (stacked electrode body 3, FIG. 2, [0031]) comprising:
a plurality of electrode sheets (positive 6 and negative 7 electrode bodies) having outwardly protruding electrode tabs (positive 20 and negative 26) and a separator 8 interposed between the plurality of electrode sheets (FIG. 2, [0031]),
a first row of electrode tabs 20 being parallel to a second row of electrode tabs 26 (FIG. 3, [0037]), each tab including an outer edge, a top edge, and an inner edge (see annotation of Yotsumoto FIG. 3 below), wherein:
a single first depressed portion (through-hole 23) is inwardly formed in the top edge of each of the first row of electrode tabs to define first and second arms around the first depressed portion (FIG. 3, [0039]), the first and second arms extending equally across the first depressed portion (see annotation of Yotsumoto FIG. 3 below),
a single second depressed portion (through-hole 31) is inwardly formed in the top edge of each of the second row of electrode tabs to define third and fourth arms around the second depressed portion (FIG. 3, [0039]), the third and fourth arms extending equally across the second depressed portion (see annotation of Yotsumoto FIG. 3 below),
the inner edge of each of the first row of electrode tabs extending from the electrode sheets being adjacent and parallel to an inner edge of each of the second row of electrode tabs, the outer edge and the inner edge of each tab forming uninterrupted straight edges (see annotation of Yotsumoto FIG. 3 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
329
559
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotation of Yotsumoto FIG. 3
Yotsumoto teaches that the depressed portions 23/31 each comprise a through-hole body 24/32 and a slit 25/33 (FIG. 3, [0040]). The through-hole bodies are formed to have substantially the same area and shape as those of the cross-section of fastening member 15, which is inserted into the through-hole bodies to fix the electrode tabs to the electrode terminal of a battery (FIG. 2, [0033]). The slits reduce contamination ([0054]) and improve productivity ([0055]) during the battery manufacturing process.
Yotsumoto further teaches that the electrode assembly may further comprise positive electrode sheets 6e having outwardly protruding electrode tabs 20e (FIG. 12, [0064]; the negative electrode sheets and separators are not depicted but are arranged as depicted in FIGS. 2 and 3). Each of the tabs 20e includes a depressed portion 23e inwardly formed in an outer edge of the tab, with the top and inner edges forming uninterrupted straight edges. The negative electrode plate may have the same structure ([0066]).
Therefore, though Yotsumoto does not disclose an embodiment wherein the first and second depressed portions are inwardly formed in the outer edges of each electrode tab in the first and second rows of electrode tabs, with the top edge and the inner edge of each tab forming uninterrupted straight edges, a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to have modified the electrode assembly of Yotsumoto FIG. 3 such that the depressed portions are formed in the outer edges of each tab, with the inner edge of each tab forming uninterrupted state edges, as shown in the positive electrode sheet 6e in FIG. 12. It has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, modified Yotsumoto teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1, wherein the depressed portions are simultaneously formed in an outer edge of each electrode tab (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 5, modified Yotsumoto teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Modified Yotsumoto does not teach wherein the depressed portion is formed in at least one of the three surfaces of the electrode tab in a triangular shape. However, in another embodiment Yotsumoto teaches that the depressed portion may be formed in a triangular shape ([0061]). It therefore would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that have further modified the electrode assembly in Yotsumoto FIG. 3 by forming the electrode tabs to have a triangular shape as disclosed by Yotsumoto for preventing rotation of the electrode sheets ([0061]). It has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 6, modified Yotsumoto teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Yotsumoto further teaches wherein the depressed portion formed in at least one of the three surfaces of the electrode tab in a concavo-convex shape ([0058]) as interpreted by the Office (see Claim Interpretation above).
Regarding claim 10, modified Yotsumoto teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1, wherein the depressed portions are simultaneously formed in respective surfaces of the electrode tab perpendicular to the electrode assembly (outer edges, see claim 1 and claim interpretation), and the depressed portions are symmetric to each other (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 11, modified Yotsumoto teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. As Yotsumoto teaches that the electrode tabs are fixed in place by a fastening member inserted through the through-holes that correspond to the “depressed portions” of the claimed invention ([0042]), modified Yotsumoto meets “wherein the depressed portion is configured so as to have a shape capable of forming one or more catching portions in the electrode tab.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE C. DISNEY whose telephone number is (703)756-1076. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 MT.
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, Tiffany Legette-Thompson can be reached on (571) 270-7078. 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.
/C.C.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723