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 10 have been amended; support for claims 1 and 10 are found in Figure 1.
Claims 2 and 11 have been cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-18 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, 3-7, 10, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 102324360 B1-having priority date of 08/17/2015) in view of Han (US 2016/0043354 A1) and Ryu et al. (US 2014/0199581 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Lee discloses an electrical apparatus ([0003] battery used in motor driving sources for electric and hybrid vehicles) , comprising a cell, the cell comprising:
an electrode assembly (Figure 1; electrode assembly 30);
a housing comprising a housing body accommodating the electrode assembly and a sealing portion connected to the housing body (Figures 1-2; exterior pouch case material 20 being sealed with sealing part 25), wherein the housing body comprises a first side surface and a second side surface opposite to the first side surface (Figures 1-2; housing having a first, second, third, and fourth side), and in a width direction of the housing, the sealing portion extends from the first side surface to the second side surface (Figure 2; the sealing portion extends around the battery exterior and extends from a first side to a second side, the tab region and the bottom region opposite the tab region), the housing is a packaging bag, the packaging bag comprises a first packaging film and a second packaging film, the electrode assembly id disposed between the first packaging film and the second packaging film (Figure 1; exterior material comprising a top sheet 20a and a bottom sheet 20b with the electrode assembly between the top and bottom sheet and heat sealed; [0076], [0039-0040]), wherein the first packaging film and the second packaging film are heat sealed to form the sealing portion ([0039-0040]),
a plurality of tabs protruding from the sealing portion along a length direction of the housing, wherein the plurality of tabs comprise a first tab and a second tab arranged side by side (Figures 1-2, electrode leads 60/70);
a first sealant having a first side and a second side opposite to the first side in the width direction of the housing, the first sealant sealably connecting the first tab to the sealing portion (Figure 1-2; first sealant is read as the insulating film 80; second sealant is read as the second insulating film 80 and connects the tabs to the sealant portions and has a portion that is formed outside the sealing portion 25; the first and second sealant has a portion that is outside and separate from the sealing portion), wherein the first sealant is separate from the sealing portion (Figure 1-2; insulating films 80 contain regions that are separate from the sealing portion and are not part of the sealing region), and in the length direction of the housing, an outer periphery of the sealing portion does not exceed an outer periphery of the first sealant (Figures 1-2; the insulating film extends outside of the sealing region thus the first sealing portion would not exceed the first sealant as the first sealant is disposed outside of the first sealant region); and
a second sealant, separate from the sealing portion, having a first side and a second side opposite to the first side in the width direction of the housing, the second sealant sealably connecting the second tab to the sealing portion, wherein a portion of the second sealant is disposed outside the sealing portion (Figure 1-2; first sealant is read as the insulating film 80; second sealant is read as the second insulating film 80 and connects the tabs to the sealant portions and has a portion that is formed outside the sealing portion 25; the first and second sealant has a portion that is outside and separate from the sealing portion);
wherein the sealing portion between the first side of the first sealant and the first side surface is a first sealing portion, the sealing portion between the second side of the first sealant and the first side of the second sealant is a second sealing portion, and in the length direction of the housing, a width of the first sealing portion is greater than a width of the second sealing portion (Figure 2 below; second sealing portion has the slit part 26 and would have a smaller width than the first sealing portion).
PNG
media_image1.png
589
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lee discloses wherein the width of the first sealing portion at the first side surface appears to be the same as the width of the second sealing portion, and is silent with respect to wherein the width of the first sealing portion at the first side surface is greater than the width of the second sealing portion.
Ryu discloses a secondary battery and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of batteries. Ryu discloses wherein the sealing region between the anode and cathode leads can have a cutout region 300 that may be formed to have a decreased width within the sealing region between the electrode leads in order to form a region in which gas can be exhausted from the battery casing when the pressure within the battery casing exceeds a threshold pressure (Figure 4; [0054-0055]). This sealing region having a decreased width is formed between the electrode leads to control the release of gas from the battery housing. Examiner further notes that the width of the other sealing region on the outer sides of the electrode leads have a larger width so as to prevent and control the location of the release of the gases from the battery casing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to incorporate the teaching of Ryu such that the central region of the sealing portion between the electrode leads have a width that is thinner than the rest of the sealing portion such that gas can be released between the central region between the leads as taught by Ryu. The resulting modification would result in the second sealing portion having a width that is thinner than the width of the first sealing portion at the first side surface in order to control the location of the release of gases as taught by Ryu.
Lee discloses wherein the top and bottom exterior casing is heat sealed together however, is explicitly silent with respect to wherein the exterior films are melted together.
Han discloses a secondary battery including an electrode assembly being held within a pouch. Han is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of battery cells. Han discloses wherein the pouch 120 has a body portion 121 the seals the electrode assembly and wherein wing portions 122 and terrace portions 123 are coupled together by melting adhesion to heat seal the battery casing together ([0042] and Figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to incorporate the teaching of Han of heat sealing by melting of the pouch casing layers in order to fuse the top sheet and lower sheet of Lee’s battery casing together. It is the examiner’s opinion that the heat sealing taught by Lee would read on the melting of the housing portions together that form the sealing region, however, Han is being relied upon to explicitly teach heat sealing by melting and thus the combination of Lee, Ryu and Han would render obvious all the claim limitations of claims 1 and 10.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations of claims 1 and 10. Lee further teaches wherein, in the length direction of the housing, the width of the first sealing portion is greater than a width of the sealing portion between the first tab and the second tab (Figure 2; width the first sealing portion is greater than the width of the second sealing portion as the width of the second sealing portion has the slit region and thus has a smaller width).
PNG
media_image1.png
589
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 4 and 13, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations of claims 1 and 10. Lee further teaches wherein the sealing portion between the second sealant and the second side surface is a third sealing portion, and in the length direction of the housing, a width of the third sealing portion is greater than the width of the second sealing portion (Figure 2 below; third sealing portion has a width that is larger than the width of the second sealing portion as the width of the second sealing portion has the slit region and thus has a smaller width).
PNG
media_image1.png
589
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 5 and 14, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations of claims 4 and 13. Lee further teaches wherein, in the length direction of the housing, an outer periphery of the third sealing portion does not exceed an outer periphery of the second sealant exposed outside the second sealing portion (Figure 2; third sealing portion does not exceed the outer periphery of the second sealant that is exposed outside the second sealing portion).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations of claims 5 and 14. Lee further teaches wherein, in the length direction of the housing, the width of the third sealing portion is greater than a width of the sealing portion between the first tab and the second tab (Figure 2; width of the first sealing portion and third sealing portion is greater than the width of the second sealing portion).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, modified Lee discloses all the claim limitations of claim 4 and 13. Lee further discloses wherein the sealing portion further comprises a fourth sealing portion, and in the width direction of the housing, the second sealing portion between the first sealant and the second sealant extends along a protrusion direction of the first tab or the second tab to form the fourth sealing portion (Figure 2; no slit is formed in the middle region between the tabs and could split the portion into two regions thus based on the structure of claims 7/16 and Figure 5 of the instant specification a second and fourth sealing region can be formed in the middle portion of the tabs). This interpretation is consistent with Applicant’s Figure 5 and fourth sealing portion being a region above the second sealing portion.
PNG
media_image2.png
589
648
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 8-9, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 102324360 B1-having priority date of 08/17/2015) in view of Han (US 2016/0043354 A1) and Ryu et al. (US 2014/0199581 A1) as applied to claims 7 and 16 above, and further in view of Park (KR 101200469 B1).
Regarding claims 8-9 and 17-18, modified Lee teaches all the claim limitations of claims 7 and 16. Lee discloses wherein the fourth sealing portion can be equal to the first/second sealant exposed outside the second sealing portion, however, is silent with respect to a length of the fourth sealing portion is less than a distance between an end of the first sealant close to the second tab and an end of the second sealant close to the first tab and a sum of the width of the second sealing portion and a width of the fourth sealing portion is less than the width of the first sealing portion or the third sealing portion.
Park discloses a secondary battery having differential sealing width and is analogous to the instant invention as being related to sealing region of a secondary battery. Park discloses wherein a sealing portion 210 has a middle region between electrode leads having a differential sealing width having a smaller width and length than other regions of the sealing portion to control the sealing effect and capacity of the battery cell (Park Figure 3; [0011-0012]). Park teaches of a thicker sealing region applied to lead portions to and having a differential sealing width in remaining portions improves the durability and prevents leakage of water and moisture thus safety and long term storage characteristic can be improved. Additionally, the widths of the sealing portion of the secondary batteries can be designed to an optimum size to balance the capacity and sealing effect (Park [0016]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the second and fourth sealing portions of Lee to have smaller widths and lengths than the first and second sealing regions in order to optimize the capacity and sealing effect of the battery sealing portion as taught by Park. A skilled artisan would use teaching that a differential sealing width in a region of the sealing portion can affect the capacity, sealing effect, durability and long term storage characteristics to optimize the width and length of the fourth and second sealing portions to achieve the desired balance of sealing effect and capacity as taught by Park. The modification would render obvious the claim limitations of claims 8-9 and 17-18. See MPEP 2144.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amended claims overcome the rejection of record, however, the rejection has been updated rendering the arguments moot.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Han et al. (US 2018/0090727 A1)- discloses a pouch type rechargeable battery having a sealing portion arranged at an edge of the exterior material and encloses the battery cells wherein terminals extend out of the pouch casing.
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 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
Prosecution Insights