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 .
Response to Amendment
This is a final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 2/19/2026. Claims 1, 11-12, 14 and 21 are currently amended. Claims 8-9 are cancelled. Claims 1-7 and 10-22 are pending in this action of which claims 16-20 are withdrawn.
The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections in the previous Office Action are withdrawn.
New grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendments are presented below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art fails to teach or suggest that the second length is different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned.
Examiner has determined that claims 1 and 11, as amended, raise a new matter issue under 35 USC 112(a) in that there is no support for the difference between the first length and the second length causing ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned. Such a description is found for the electrode stacks but not for the curved battery cells themselves.
However, Examiner has taken into consideration the scope of the amended claim and find that the deficient limitation argued above to be obvious. In particular, Wuensch teaches that the dimensions and shapes of the curved battery cells may be adapted to the space in which the particular battery cells are accommodated [par. 0019]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the first and second battery cells of Wuensch such that the second length is different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned in order to adapt to the space in which the particular battery cells are accommodated.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-7, 10-15 and 21-22 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.
Claims 1 and 21 are each amended to recite that the first curved battery cell has a first length, the second curved battery cell has a second length different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned. Applicant’s Remarks filed 2/19/2026 cite paragraphs [0045] and [0048] of the original specification for support. However, the cited paragraphs seem to describe forming first and second curved electrode stacks having different lengths such that their respective ends are substantially aligned. While there is support in the specification the curved battery cells having different arc lengths to account for tolerances present in the curved battery cells for maintaining adhesion between the curved surfaces thereof or between the curved surfaces of the battery pack housing and the curved battery cell, there is no description that providing difference arc lengths of the two curved battery cells necessarily causes their respective ends to be aligned.
Claims 2-7, 10-15 and 22 are similarly rejected for including subject matter of respective claims 1 and 21.
Claim 11 is amended to recite that the first electrode stack includes the first length and the second electrode stack includes the second length. However, there is no support in the specification that the first and second electrode stacks may include the same lengths as the first and second curved battery cells. For examination purposes, the instant claim is interpreted to have recited, “the first electrode stack includes a first stack length and the second electrode stack includes a second stack length”.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-7, 14-15 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensch (US 2008/0003505 A1), in view of DeKeuster (US 2016/0093849 A1) and Choi (US 2018/0145294 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Wuensch teaches a method (i.e. carrying out the disclosed design, see Abstract) comprising:
forming a first curved battery cell (the first “rechargeable element” 17, located against the wall of housing 11, of the lithium rechargeable 16’’ located in the side of the device) having a first curvature and a first length; and forming a second curved battery (the second rechargeable element 17, located away from the wall of the housing 11, of cell group 16’’) having a second curvature different from the first curvature and a second length, the second curvature being complementary to the first curvature such that a concave inner radius of curvature of the second curved battery cell matches a convex outer radius of curvature of the first curved battery cell ([0019], fig. 1) {NOTE: When a battery cell is bent to be curved, it forms an overall curvature defined by inner and outer radii of curvature which are necessarily different. When a second battery cell is curved so as to be stacked on the first curved battery cell such that it’s inner concave radius of curvature matches the convex outer radius of curvature of the first battery cell, it can be concluded that the first curvature and the second curvature of the respective first and second battery cells are different (i.e., in their respective degrees of curvature). In this regard, Wuensch discloses in Fig. 1 that the first and second battery cells 17 are curved and stacked such that the inner concave radius of curvature of the second battery cell matches the convex outer radius of curvature of the first battery cell, and thus, the first and second curved battery cells necessarily have different curvatures. That is, the degree of curvatures must be different for each of the battery cells};
forming a battery pack housing (“machine housing” 11, [0019], fig. 1);
placing the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell in the battery pack housing 11, wherein the battery pack housing includes a third curvature, the third curvature complementary to at least one of the first curvature or the second curvature, and wherein the first curved battery cell is a radially inner curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell is a radially outer curved battery cell (the cells 17 of group 16’’ are bent transversely so as to lie flat against, i.e. complement, the radially Inner curve of the side of the housing, [0019], fig. 1).
Wuensch discloses that the ends of the first and second curved battery cells are substantially aligned, but fails to explicitly disclose that the second length is different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned. However, Wuensch teaches that the dimensions and shapes of the curved battery cells may be adapted to the space in which the particular battery cells are accommodated [par. 0019]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the first and second battery cells of Wuensch such that the second length is different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned in order to adapt to the space in which the particular battery cells are accommodated.
Wuensch teaches that the battery cells are secured in the housing through one of a variety of method such as bonding or casting ([0006], [0027]), but Wuensch does not specifically teach applying adhesive layers to the cells and housing.
DeKeuster teaches a battery pack comprising cells 90 and housing 62, with spacers 94 between individual cells 90 ([0047], fig. 4). Specifically, DeKeuster teaches that the spacer 94 may be an adhesive foam tape that adheres adjacent cells to each other ([0048]).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply an adhesive foam tape, such as that taught by DeKeuster, as a first adhesive in the method of Wuensch to adhere the first curved battery cell to the second curved battery cell. Such a person would have reasonably expected the adhesive foam to secure the battery cells to each other. The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143).
Choi teaches a battery pack in which batteries 100 are adhered to a housing frame 130 using a double-sided adhesive tape 120 ([0071], [0072], figs. 4 and 6). Specifically, Choi teaches applying a double-sided adhesive tape as an adhesive layer to adhere the terrace portion 110 of the cells to the portion 131 of the housing frame 130 ([0074], fig. 6).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a double-sided adhesive tape, as taught by Choi, to adhere and secure the first curved battery cell to a radially inner surface of the battery pack housing of Wuensch. Such a person would have reasonably expected the tape of Choi to be suitable for securing the first cell of Wuensch to the housing of Wuensch since Choi teaches the tape as a means of fixing the cell to a frame ([0072], [0074] of Choi). The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143).
Wuensch further teaches forming a gap in the battery pack housing 11 between the second curved battery cell 17 and the radially outer surface of the battery pack housing 11 (as shown in fig. 1, a gap exists between the second curved cell and the radially outer surface of the housing 11).
Wuensch teaches that the gap serves to allow airflow between cells for cooling ([0020]), but Wuensch is silent as to the thickness of the gap as a percentage of the combined thickness of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell.
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the size of the gap of Wuensch in order to ensure adequate airflow and cooling of the battery cells. Such a person would have reasonably expected a larger gap to provide more airflow, and thus more cooling, and would have optimized the size of the gap for optimal cooling. See MPEP § 2144.05, II.
Regarding Claims 6 and 7, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch as modified by DeKeuster teaches that the first adhesive layer comprises a double-sided foam tape that functions as a spacer (see [0048] of DeKeuster). Wuensch as modified by Choi teaches that the second adhesive layer comprises a double-sided adhesive film tape (see [0074] of Choi).
Since the second adhesive layer of DeKeuster is a foam tape, the second adhesive layer will be thicker and less rigid than the first adhesive layer of Choi, which is a double-sided adhesive film tape. Correspondingly, the first adhesive (double-sided adhesive film tape) is thinner and more rigid than the second adhesive layer (double-sided adhesive foam tape).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above.
Wuensch fails to explicitly teach wherein the first curved battery cell has a first length L2, and the second curved battery cell has a second length L1 determined according to:
PNG
media_image1.png
64
164
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein R2 represents an inner radius of curvature of the first curved battery cell and T2 represents a thickness of the first curved battery cell. However, the claimed formula merely describes the geometrically ideal relationship for two stacked arcs according to the first and second curvatures. That is, the standard formula for arc length is L = rθ, where θ is in radians. For the inner cell, L2 = R2θ. For the outer cell, its radius is the inner cell’s radius plus its thickness, or R1 = R2 + T2. Thus, L1 = (R2 + T2)θ. Solving the first equation for θ results in θ = L2/R2. By way of substitution, L1 = (R2 + T2) x L2/R2, or, L1 = L2 x (R2 + T2) /R2. Thus, since Wuensch discloses the second curved battery cell is stacked on the first curved battery cell, as in claim 1, it can be concluded that the second curved battery cell has a second length L1 determined according to the claimed formula.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above.
Wuensch teaches that the first and second curved battery cells have identical thickness ([0019], fig. 1), but Wuensch also teaches that the length may be adjust to fit the space of the housing ([0019]).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the first and second curved cells of Wuensch with different thicknesses, in order to adapt the cell group of Wuensch to fit a particular application. Such a person would reasonably have expected the battery cells of Wuensch to be successfully formed with different thicknesses to fit a desired application. Additionally, the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 21, Wuensch teaches a method (i.e. carrying out the disclosed design, see Abstract) comprising:
forming a first curved battery cell (a “rechargeable element” 17, located away from the wall of housing 11, of the upper lithium rechargeable 16’ located in the top of the device) having a first curvature and a first length; and forming a second curved battery (the uppermost rechargeable element 17, located against the wall of the housing 11, of cell group 16’) having a second curvature different from the first curvature and a second length different from the first length, the second curvature being complementary to the first curvature such that a concave inner radius of curvature of the second curved battery cell matches a convex outer radius of curvature of the first curved battery cell ([0019], fig. 1) {NOTE: When a battery cell is bent to be curved, it forms an overall curvature defined by inner and outer radii of curvature which are necessarily different. When a second battery cell is curved so as to be stacked on the first curved battery cell such that it’s inner concave radius of curvature matches the convex outer radius of curvature of the first battery cell, it can be concluded that the first curvature and the second curvature of the respective first and second battery cells are different (i.e., in their respective degrees of curvature). In this regard, Wuensch discloses in Fig. 1 that the first and second battery cells 17 are curved and stacked such that the inner concave radius of curvature of the second battery cell matches the convex outer radius of curvature of the first battery cell, and thus, the first and second curved battery cells necessarily have different curvatures. That is, the degree of curvatures must be different for each of the battery cells};
forming a battery pack housing (“machine housing” 11, [0019], fig. 1);
placing the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell in the battery pack housing 11, wherein the battery pack housing 11 includes a third curvature (the rounded top), the third curvature complementary to at least one of the first curvature or the second curvature, and wherein the first curved battery cell is a radially inner curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell is a radially outer curved battery cell (the cells 17 of group 16’ are bent transversely so as to lie flat, i.e. complement, the radially outer curve of the top of the housing, [0019], fig. 1).
Wuensch discloses that the ends of the first and second curved battery cells are substantially aligned, but fails to explicitly disclose that the second length is different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned. However, Wuensch teaches that the dimensions and shapes of the curved battery cells may be adapted to the space in which the particular battery cells are accommodated [par. 0019]. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled artisan to have modified the first and second battery cells of Wuensch such that the second length is different from the first length, and a difference between the first length and the second length causes ends of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell to be aligned in order to adapt to the space in which the particular battery cells are accommodated.
Wuensch teaches that the battery cells are secured in the housing through one of a variety of method such as bonding or casting ([0006], [0027]), but Wuensch does not specifically teach applying adhesive layers to the cells and housing.
DeKeuster teaches a battery pack comprising cells 90 and housing 62, with spacers 94 between individual cells 90 ([0047], fig. 4). Specifically, DeKeuster teaches that the spacer 94 may be an adhesive foam tape that adheres adjacent cells to each other ([0048]).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply an adhesive foam tape, such as that taught by DeKeuster, as a first adhesive in the method of Wuensch to adhere the first curved battery cell to the second curved battery cell. Such a person would have reasonably expected the adhesive foam to secure the battery cells to each other. The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143).
Choi teaches a battery pack in which batteries 100 are adhered to a housing frame 130 using a double-sided adhesive tape 120 ([0071], [0072], figs. 4 and 6). Specifically, Choi teaches applying a double-sided adhesive tape as an adhesive layer to adhere the terrace portion 110 of the cells to the portion 131 of the housing frame 130 ([0074], fig. 6).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply a double-sided adhesive tape, as taught by Choi, as a second adhesive layer to adhere and secure the second curved battery cell to a radially outer surface of the battery pack housing of Wuensch. Such a person would have reasonably expected the tape of Choi to be suitable for securing the first cell of Wuensch to the housing of Wuensch since Choi teaches the tape as a means of fixing the cell to a frame ([0072], [0074] of Choi). The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143).
Wuensch further teaches forming a gap in the battery pack housing 11 between the first curved battery cell and the radially inner surface of the battery pack housing 11 (as shown in fig. 1, a gap exists between the first curved cell of the upper lithium rechargeable 16’ and the radially inner surface of the housing 11).
Wuensch teaches that the gap serves to allow airflow between cells for cooling ([0020]), but Wuensch is silent as to the thickness of the gap as a percentage of the combined thickness of the first curved battery cell and the second curved battery cell.
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the size of the gap of Wuensch in order to ensure adequate airflow and cooling of the battery cells. Such a person would have reasonably expected a larger gap to provide more airflow, and thus more cooling, and would have optimized the size of the gap for optimal cooling. See MPEP § 2144.05, II.
Regarding Claim 22, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch as modified by DeKeuster teaches that the first adhesive layer comprises a double-sided foam tape that functions as a spacer (see [0048] of DeKeuster). Wuensch as modified by Choi teaches that the second adhesive layer comprises a double-sided adhesive film tape (see [0074] of Choi).
Since the second adhesive layer of DeKeuster is a foam tape, the second adhesive layer will be thicker than the first adhesive layer of Choi, which is a double-sided adhesive film tape. Correspondingly, the first adhesive (double-sided adhesive film tape) is thinner than the second adhesive layer (double-sided adhesive foam tape).
Claim(s) 2-5, 10 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensch (US 2008/0003505 A1), DeKeuster (US 2016/0093849 A1), and Choi (US 2018/0145294 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Notten (US 2003/0039883 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch further teaches that forming the first curved battery cell comprises curving a standard flat, rectangular or round element 17 that is selected from typically available cells ([0019]) and does not further discuss forming individual electrode stacks, processing the stacks to form the curvature, attaching the stacks, and sealing the stacks in a curved casing.
Notten teaches a method for forming a curved battery cell (Abstract, [0001] to [0004], figs. 3-7). Specifically, Notten teaches forming a first electrode stack and a second electrode stack (lamination layers) each comprising a cathode layer, an anode layer on the cathode layer, and an interposed separator layer ([0025], [0027], [0041]), processing the electrode stacks to form the desired cell curvature ([0023], [0024], [0041]), attaching the first electrode stack to the second electrode stack ([0027], [0041], [0054], fig. 5), and sealing the first and second electrode stack in a first curved cell casing ([0013], [0053], fig. 7; the softpack is a conformal casing that takes on the curve of the electrode stacks, and the evacuation of the casing is understood to include sealing to preserve the vacuum).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the first curved cell of Wuensch by forming a first and second electrode stack each having respective anode, cathode and separator layers, processing the stacks to form the first curvature, attaching the first and second electrode stacks, and sealing the stacks in a curved casing, according to the method for forming a curved cell of Notten. Such a person would have reasonably expected the method of Notten to provide a curved cell suitable for the method of Wuensch, since Wuensch teaches that typically available cells may be used and the teaching of Notten constitute a known method of providing a curved electrode assembly (see [0019] of Wuensch). The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143, 2144).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch further teaches that forming the first curved battery cell comprises curving a standard flat, rectangular or round element 17 that is selected from typically available cells ([0019]) and does not further discuss forming individual electrode stacks, processing the stacks to form the curvature, attaching the stacks, and sealing the stacks in a curved casing.
Notten teaches a method for forming a curved battery cell (Abstract, [0001] to [0004], figs. 3-7). Specifically, Notten teaches forming one electrode stack and another electrode stack (lamination layers) each comprising a cathode layer, an anode layer on the cathode layer, and an interposed separator layer ([0025], [0027], [0041]), processing the electrode stacks to form the desired cell curvature ([0023], [0024], [0041]), attaching the two electrode stacks to each other ([0027], [0041], [0054], fig. 5), and sealing the two electrode stacks in a curved cell casing ([0013], [0053], fig. 7; the softpack is a conformal casing that takes on the curve of the electrode stacks, and the evacuation of the casing is understood to include sealing to preserve the vacuum).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the second curved cell of Wuensch by forming a third and a fourth electrode stack, processing the stacks to form the second curvature, attaching the third and fourth electrode stacks, and sealing the stacks in a second curved casing, according to the method for forming a curved cell of Notten. Such a person would have reasonably expected the method of Notten to provide a curved cell suitable for the method of Wuensch, since Wuensch teaches that typically available cells may be used and the teaching of Notten constitute a known method of providing a curved electrode assembly (see [0019] of Wuensch). The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143, 2144).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch as modified by Notten teaches forming the electrode stacks and processing the stack to form the desired curvature ([0023] and [0041] of Notten). Notten further teaches that processing the electrode stacks include pressing the electrode stacks into molds having the respective desired curvature ([0023] and [0041] of Notten).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch as modified by Notten teaches forming the electrode stacks and attaching the respective pairs of electrode stacks ([0027], [0041], [0054] and fig. 5 of Notten). Notten teaches that the pairs of electrode stacks are each respectively adhered with a polymeric adhesive, which constitutes the third adhesive with respect to the first and second electrode stack, and a fourth adhesive with respect to the third and fourth electrode stack ([0016] to [0019], [0024], [0054] and fig. 5 of Notten).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch as modified by Notten teaches that the respective pairs of electrode stacks are sealed in their respective cell casings, such that the first curved cell casing comprises the first curvature of the first curved battery cell and the second curved cell casing comprises the second curvature of the second curved battery cell ([0013], [0053], and fig. 7 of Notten; the softpack casing conforms to the curvature of the cell).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch as modified by Notten teaches that the length of the electrode stacks in each pair are substantially the same length ([0041] and figs. 3-5 of Notten).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch further teaches that the cells have a standard commercial thickness, such as 3 mm and up ([0019]).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a thickness of at least 10 mm for each of the electrode stacks of modified Wuensch, since a thickness of at least 10 mm overlaps the disclosed range of at least 3 mm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the ranges disclosed by the reference because selection of overlapping portion of ranges has been held to be a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05.I). Such a person would have reasonably expected a stack size of 10 mm and up to be a suitable thickness, since such a thickness falls within the range of Wuensch.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wuensch (US 2008/0003505 A1), DeKeuster (US 2016/0093849 A1), Choi (US 2018/0145294 A1), and Notten (US 2003/0039883 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Suzawa (JP 2016/134199 A).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Wuensch discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Wuensch discusses the modification of cell size to fill available space ([0019] of Wuensch, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the first electrode stack includes a first stack length, and the second electrode stack includes a second stack length, and the third electrode stack includes a third stack length, the fourth electrode stack includes a fourth stack length, and the third length is different from the fourth length. However, Suzawa, from the same field of endeavor, teaches a method for forming a curved battery cell ([0020], fig. 14). Specifically, Suzawa teaches that the electrodes of the electrode stacks (each electrode stack containing a cathode layer and an anode layer) may be formed either with the same length ([0030], fig. 1) or with different lengths ([0200] to [0202], fig. 14).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the electrodes in each cell of Wuensch, as modified by Notten, to have electrodes with different lengths as taught by Suzawa, such that the electrode stacks have different lengths (the electrode stack length being the average length of the anode and the cathode in the stack). Such a person would have been motivated to form the electrodes and resulting electrode stacks with different lengths in order that the edges might be aligned after curving the stacks, which helps to increase the capacity per volume (energy density) of the battery cell ([0202] of Suzawa). Such a person would also have understood that such a modification would be compatible with the teachings of Wuensch that the cell dimensions may be adjusted based on the available space ([0019] of Wuensch). The combination of familiar elements is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results (see MPEP § 2143).
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 HAROON S SHEIKH whose telephone number is (571)270-0302. The examiner can normally be reached 9-6.
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, 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 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.
HAROON S. SHEIKH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1751
/Haroon S. Sheikh/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751