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 .
The Applicant has amended independent claim 1. The pending claims are claims 1-5.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al., US 20160177136.
Regarding claim 1, Park et al., teaches a non-aqueous electrolyte secondary battery (abstract; 0005; 0070) comprising: a wound (0064) electrode assembly (0064) in which a band-shaped positive electrode (planar shape; 0014) and a band-shaped negative electrode (planar shape; 0014) are wound with a separator (separation film; 0064) interposed therebetween (0064): and a metallic exterior housing body (metal can; 0003) (metal case; 0003) that houses the electrode assembly (0003) wherein the positive electrode or the negative electrode is exposed on an outermost circumference surface of the electrode assembly (0052), and a fixing tape (seal tape; abstract) having a substrate layer (base layer; 0008-0013) and an adhesive layer (adhesive layer; 0005; 0013-0015) is attached to the positive electrode or the negative electrode by means of the adhesive layer (0013; 0017): and a surface of the substrate layer (base layer; 0008-0010) opposite to the adhesive layer (substrate or base layer 12) (adhesive layer 11) has a surface roughness (Ra) (Table 3) of 193-213 um (Table 3).
Park et al., does not teach “a region having a width of at least 1 mm from the end part.”
However, Park et al., teaches the substrate layer having a surface roughness greater than 40 um (Table 3; Ra of 193-213 um). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would adjust the width of the substrate from the end part in order to obtain a surface roughness greater than 40 um.
Regarding claim 2, Park et al., teaches wherein the exterior housing body is in cylindrical form (0067; 0069; 0072).
Regarding claim 3, Park et al., teaches wherein the positive electrode (0064-0065) has a positive electrode current collector (0065) and a positive electrode mixture layer (0064-0066) formed on a surface of the positive electrode current collector (0064-0066); the negative electrode (0064; 0066) has a negative electrode current collector (0065-0066) and a negative electrode mixture layer (0064) formed on a surface of the negative electrode current collector (0066); and the positive electrode current collector or the negative electrode current collector is exposed on the outermost circumference surface of the electrode assembly (0052; 0064-0065).
Regarding claim 4, Park et al., teaches wherein the negative electrode current collector (0065-0066) is exposed on an entire surface of the outermost circumference surface of the electrode assembly (0052).
Regarding claim 5, Park et al., teaches wherein a surface roughness (Ra) of an entire surface of the substrate layer (base layer; 0008-0010) has a surface roughness (Ra) (Table 3) of 193-213 um (Table 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Park teaches the surface roughness of the adhesive layer that attaches to the electrode assembly and not the substrate layer.”
However, the adhesive layer attached to the electrode assembly can be equivalent to the adhesive layer attached to the substrate layer because the substrate layer is one portion of the electrode assembly.
The Applicant argues that, “Park at least fails to provide for the aspects of base claim 1 as to “a surface of the substrate layer opposite to the adhesive layer has a surface roughness (Sa) of 40 um or more on a region having a width of at least 1 mm from the end part”.
However, Park et al., teaches a surface of the substrate or base layer 12 opposite to the adhesive layer 11 (Fig. 1). With respect to the surface roughness, and regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
The Applicant argues that the roughness of the adhesive layer that attaches to the electrode assembly and not the substrate layer and …amended claim 1 describes the substrate layer as different from the adhesive.
However, Park et al., teaches the substrate layer is a base layer (12) which is different from the adhesive layer (11) (Fig. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1288. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-4pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
ANGELA J. MARTIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/ANGELA J MARTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights