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
Applicant’s amendments filed June 29, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended; support for the amendments can be found at least in Figures 2 and 7. Claims 1-13 remain pending and have been examined on their merits in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 29, 2026 have been fully considered but are considered moot in view of the new grounds of rejection below in view of Applicant’s amendments to the independent claims 1 and 9.
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 1-4, 9-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pyo et al. (KR 20190093397 A, citations from corresponding Published U.S. Patent Application US 20200168941 A1), hereinafter referred to as Pyo, in view of Yoon et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 20180342710 A1), hereinafter referred to as Yoon.
Regarding claim 1, Pyo teaches an electrode assembly (“a electrode assembly”) (see e.g., Abstract). Pyo teaches the positive electrode 1, the separator, and the negative electrode 2 are stacked and then cut into radical units (see e.g., paragraph [0008]) to form individual cells 100 (see e.g., paragraph [0047]), wherein a plurality of folded unit cells 100 are stacked to constitute an electrode assembly (“a unit stack part having a stacked structure comprising a plurality of radical units”) (see e.g., paragraph [0050]). Pyo teaches the unit cell 100 is in a state in which the separators 30 are spread from each other at both ends thereof, first sealing (primary sealing) is performed between the separators 30 at an edge portion thereof to seal the edge portion (“wherein each of the radical units is formed by alternately stacking electrodes and separators and comprises a first inner sealing part in which a plurality of separators alternately and vertically stacked with the electrodes are sealed to each other on a side surface of each of the electrodes”) (see e.g., paragraph [0047] and Figure 3). Pyo teaches a second sealing comprising adhering the edge portions of the separators of each of the unit cells to each other after each of the unit cells are folded (“an outer sealing part formed outside the unit stack part” and “wherein the outer sealing part is formed by bonding the separators of the plurality of radical units to each other”) (see e.g., paragraph [0052] and Figure 6).
Pyo does not explicitly teach wherein the outer sealing part is outside the first inner sealing parts and farther from side surfaces of each of the electrodes than the first inner sealing parts.
However, Yoon teaches a method of manufacturing a battery (see e.g., Abstract). Yoon teaches sealing an electrode assembly in the battery includes a primary sealing and a secondary sealing of the electrode assembly (see e.g., paragraph [0011]). Yoon teaches the secondary sealing is adjacent to the primary sealing area and is between the primary sealing area and the edges of the electrode assembly (“wherein the outer sealing part is formed by bonding the separators of the plurality of radical units to each other outside the first inner sealing parts and farther from side surfaces of each of the electrodes than the first inner sealing parts”) (see e.g., paragraphs [0011] and [0018] and Figure 3) in order to prevent physical contact and collision between the electrodes and fundamentally prevent generation of a short circuit caused thereby (see e.g., paragraph [0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the second sealing of the separators of each of the unit cells of Pyo to be performed adjacent to another sealing and closer to the edge of the electrode assembly, as taught by Yoon, in order to prevent physical contact and collision between the electrodes and fundamentally prevent generation of a short circuit caused thereby (see e.g., paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 2, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the separators are sealed during the primary sealing so that the separators remain outside of the primary sealing portion (“wherein the first inner sealing parts are sealed so that the separators remain outside the first inner sealing parts”) (see e.g., Pyo Figure 6A). Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches a primary sealing area adjacent to the secondary sealing area that seals the edges of the electrode assembly (“the outer sealing part is formed by bonding the separators remaining outside the first inner sealing parts”) (see e.g., Yoon paragraphs [0011] and [0018] and Figure 3).
Regarding claim 3, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Pyo teaches the radical unit is formed with a bi-cell and half-cell, wherein the bi-cell 101 is the positive electrode/the separator/the negative electrode/the separator/the positive electrode are sequentially stacked and a half-cell 102 in which the separator/the negative electrode/the separator are sequentially stacked are alternately disposed to be continuous (“wherein the radical unit is a mono-cell in which a first separator of the plurality of separators, a first electrode, a second separator of the plurality of separators, and a second electrode are stacked”) (see e.g., paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 4, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 3, as previously described.
Pyo teaches the unit cell 100 is in a state in which the separators 30 are spread from each other at both ends thereof, first sealing (primary sealing) is performed between the separators 30 at an edge portion thereof to seal the edge portion (“wherein the first inner sealing part is formed by sealing the first and second separators vertically stacked on the first electrode to each other on a side surface of the first electrode”) (see e.g., paragraph [0047] and Figure 3).
Regarding claim 9, Pyo teaches a method for manufacturing an electrode assembly (“method for manufacturing an electrode assembly”) (see e.g., Abstract). Pyo teaches the positive electrode 1, the separator, and the negative electrode 2 are stacked and then cut into radical units (see e.g., paragraph [0008]) to form individual cells 100 (see e.g., paragraph [0047]), wherein a plurality of folded unit cells 100 are stacked to constitute an electrode assembly (“alternately stacking electrodes and separators to manufacture a radical unit; stacking a plurality of radical units to form a unit stack part”) (see e.g., paragraph [0050]). Pyo teaches the unit cell 100 is in a state in which the separators 30 are spread from each other at both ends thereof, first sealing (primary sealing) is performed between the separators 30 at an edge portion thereof to seal the edge portion (“wherein, in the manufacturing of each radical unit, after the electrodes and the separators are alternately stacked, the plurality of separators alternately and vertically stacked with the electrodes are sealed to each other on a side surface of each of the electrodes to form a first inner sealing part”) (see e.g., paragraph [0047] and Figure 3). Pyo teaches a second sealing comprising adhering the edge portions of the separators of each of the unit cells to each other after each of the unit cells are folded (“an outer sealing part formed outside the unit stack part” and “wherein the outer sealing part is formed by bonding the separators of the plurality of radical units to each other”) (see e.g., paragraph [0052] and Figure 6).
Pyo does not explicitly teach wherein the outer sealing part is outside the first inner sealing parts and farther from side surfaces of each of the electrodes than the first inner sealing parts.
However, Yoon teaches a method of manufacturing a battery (see e.g., Abstract). Yoon teaches sealing an electrode assembly in the battery includes a primary sealing and a secondary sealing of the electrode assembly (see e.g., paragraph [0011]). Yoon teaches the secondary sealing is adjacent to the primary sealing area and is between the primary sealing area and the edges of the electrode assembly (“wherein the outer sealing part is formed by bonding the separators of the plurality of radical units to each other outside the first inner sealing parts and farther from side surfaces of each of the electrodes than the first inner sealing parts”) (see e.g., paragraphs [0011] and [0018] and Figure 3) in order to prevent physical contact and collision between the electrodes and fundamentally prevent generation of a short circuit caused thereby (see e.g., paragraph [0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the second sealing of the separators of each of the unit cells of Pyo to be performed adjacent to another sealing and closer to the edge of the electrode assembly, as taught by Yoon, in order to prevent physical contact and collision between the electrodes and fundamentally prevent generation of a short circuit caused thereby (see e.g., paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 10, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the separators are sealed during the primary sealing so that the separators remain outside of the primary sealing portion (“wherein the first inner sealing parts are sealed so that the separators remain outside the first inner sealing parts”) (see e.g., Pyo Figure 6A). Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches a primary sealing area adjacent to the secondary sealing area that seals the edges of the electrode assembly (“the outer sealing part is formed by bonding the separators remaining outside the first inner sealing parts”) (see e.g., Yoon paragraphs [0011] and [0018] and Figure 3).
Regarding claim 12, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the separators are sealed during the primary sealing so that the primary sealing of the separators is next to the side surface of the electrodes (“wherein in each radical unit, the plurality of separators alternately and vertically stacked with the electrode of the first inner sealing part are sealed directly to each other and next to a side surface of each of the electrodes”) (see e.g., Pyo Figure 6A).
Regarding claim 13, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the separators are sealed during the primary sealing so that the primary sealing of the separators is next to the side surface of the electrodes (“wherein in each radical unit, the plurality of separators alternately and vertically stacked with the electrode of the first inner sealing part are sealed directly to each other and next to a side surface of each of the electrodes”) (see e.g., Pyo Figure 6A).
Claims 5-8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pyo et al. (KR 20190093397 A, citations from corresponding Published U.S. Patent Application US 20200168941 A1) in view of Yoon et al. (Published U.S. Patent Application US 20180342710 A1), and further in view of Ho et al. (KR 20160133243 A), hereinafter referred to as Ho.
Regarding claim 5, Pyo, as modified by Yoon and Ho, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, does not explicitly teach wherein the unit stack part further comprises an auxiliary unit stacked at the uppermost end of the plurality of radical units, and the auxiliary unit is a half-cell in which a separator, a third electrode, and a separator are stacked.
However, Ho teaches the unit stack may further include at least one of the first auxiliary units that has an electrode at one end and a separator at the other end (“wherein the unit stack part further comprises an auxiliary unit stacked at the uppermost end of the plurality of radical units, and the auxiliary unit is a half-cell in which a separator, a third electrode, and a separator are stacked”) (see e.g., paragraph [0083] and Figure 14). Ho teaches the auxiliary unit provides further separation from the positive electrode and the negative electrode as the cathode may cause a reaction with an aluminum layer of the battery case (see e.g., paragraph [0092]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the battery Pyo, as modified by Yoon, to include an auxiliary unit, as taught by Ho, in order to provide further separation from the positive electrode and the negative electrode as the cathode may cause a reaction with the battery case (see e.g., paragraph [0092]).
Regarding claim 6, Pyo, as modified by Yoon and Ho, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 5, as previously described.
Ho teaches the separation membranes of the basic unit are bonded to each other at a predetermined sealing region and the separation membranes of the auxiliary unit are bonded to a different region of the adjacent basic unit (“wherein the auxiliary unit comprises a second inner sealing part formed by sealing the separators vertically stacked on the third electrode to each other on a side surface of the third electrode”) (see e.g., paragraph [0089]).
Regarding claim 7, Pyo, as modified by Yoon and Ho, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 6, as previously described.
Ho teaches the separation membranes of the basic unit are bonded to each other at a predetermined sealing region and the separation membranes of the auxiliary unit are bonded to a different region of the adjacent basic unit (“wherein the second inner sealing part is sealed so that the separator remains outside the second inner sealing part”) (see e.g., paragraph [0089]). Ho teaches the region in which bonding between the separators 112 and 114 included in different basic unit bodies is defined as a sealing region S of the electrode assembly is formed outside of the bonding region of the separation membranes of the auxiliary unit (“the outer sealing part is formed by sealing the separators remaining outside the first inner sealing part of the radical unit and the second inner sealing part of the auxiliary unit together”) (see e.g., Figures 13 and 23).
Regarding claim 8, Pyo, as modified by Yoon, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 1, as previously described.
Pyo teaches the unit cells is formed by laminating cells formed of a bi-cell 101 in which the positive electrode/the separator/the negative electrode/the separator/the positive electrode (“the radical unit is a C-type bi-cell, in which a separator, a first electrode, a separator, a second electrode, a separator, and a first electrode are stacked”) are sequentially stacked and a half-cell 102 in which the separator/the negative electrode/the separator are sequentially stacked are alternately disposed to be continuous (see e.g., paragraph [0046]).
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, does not explicitly teach the unit stack part is formed by alternately stacking the C-type bi-cell and the A-type bi-cell.
However, Ho teaches the radical unit 110c is a separator 112, and electrode 113, a separator 114, an electrode 111, and followed by another separator 112 (“the radical unit is a C-type bi-cell, in which a separator, a first electrode, a separator, a second electrode, a separator, and a first electrode are stacked”) (see e.g., Figure 4). Ho teaches the radical unit 110d is a separator 114, an electrode 111, a separator 112, an electrode 113, and followed by another separator 114 are stacked (“or an A-type bi-cell, in which a separator, a second electrode, a separator, a first electrode, a separator, and a second electrode are stacked”) (see e.g., Figure 5). Ho teaches the cell 110c is stacked alternately with the cell 110d (“the unit stack is formed by alternately stacking the C-type bi-cell and the A-type bi-cell”) (see e.g., Figure 6) in order to significantly improve the productivity of the unit stack section and simplify the assembly process by aligning the basic units with great precision (see e.g., paragraph [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the electrode assembly of Pyo, as modified by Yoon, to alternately stack a C-type bi-cell and A-type bi-cell, as taught by Ho, in order to significantly improve the productivity of the unit stack section and simplify the assembly process by aligning the basic units with great precision (see e.g., paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 11, Pyo, as modified by Yoon and Ho, teaches the instantly claimed invention of claim 9, as previously described.
Pyo, as modified by Yoon, does not explicitly teach wherein the unit stack part further comprises an auxiliary unit stacked at the uppermost end of the plurality of radical units, and the auxiliary unit is a half-cell in which a separator, a third electrode, and a separator are stacked.
However, Ho teaches the unit stack may further include at least one of the first auxiliary units that has an electrode at one end and a separator at the other end (“wherein the unit stack part further comprises an auxiliary unit stacked at the uppermost end of the plurality of radical units, and the auxiliary unit is a half-cell in which a separator, a third electrode, and a separator are stacked”) (see e.g., paragraph [0083] and Figure 14). Ho teaches the auxiliary unit provides further separation from the positive electrode and the negative electrode as the cathode may cause a reaction with an aluminum layer of the battery case (see e.g., paragraph [0092]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill would modify the battery Pyo, as modified by Yoon, to include an auxiliary unit, as taught by Ho, in order to provide further separation from the positive electrode and the negative electrode as the cathode may cause a reaction with the battery case (see e.g., paragraph [0092]).
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 Katherine N Higgins whose telephone number is (703)756-1196. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays - Thursdays 7:30-4:30 EST, Fridays 7:30 - 11:30 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 T 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.
/KATHERINE N HIGGINS/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights