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 .
Status of Claims
The Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 06/09/2026, has been entered. Claim 1 is amended; claims 2-4 and 15 stand as originally or previously presented; claims 5-13 are withdrawn; and claim 14 is canceled. Support for the amendments is found in the original filing, and there is no new matter.
Upon considered said amendments and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C.103 rejection set forth in Office Action mailed 03/09/2026 has been withdrawn. Amended and new grounds of rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 citing to newly cited art are set forth below as necessitated by the claim amendments.
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 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heo et al. (US 20200161617 A1, hereinafter Heo), in view of Higuchi (US 20190006123 A1), cited in IDS filed 07/28/2023.
Regarding Claim 1, Heo discloses the limitations for an electrode assembly (Heo, electrode assembly, Abstract) in which a negative electrode, a separator, and a positive electrode are repeatedly stacked (Heo, a plurality of positive electrodes and a plurality of negative electrodes, alternately and repeatedly stacked; a plurality of separators between the positive electrodes and the negative electrodes, [0011], Annotated Figure 11 below),
the electrode assembly comprising: an electrode stack in which a negative electrode, a separator, and a positive electrode are repeatedly stacked in a vertical stacking direction to form a plurality of unit cells (Heo, a plurality of positive electrodes and a plurality of negative electrodes, alternately and repeatedly stacked; a plurality of separators between the positive electrodes and the negative electrodes, [0011], Annotated Figure 11 below),
the electrode stack having two side surfaces at opposite sides of the electrode stack; and a film covering a first one of the side surfaces of the electrode stack, the film being bonded with an adhesive to the first one of the side surfaces (Heo, arranging a fixing member including an adhesive layer and an insulating member on a sidewall of the electrode assembly, [0024], Annotated Figure 11 below; the Examiner notes that the fixing member has an adhesive layer, as claimed, and an insulating member, corresponding to the claimed film),
the adhesive extends discontinuously along all of the unit cells in the vertical stacking direction, such that each of the unit cells is bonded to the film separately (Heo, the fixing member is applied by using the nozzle-type applicator and may be formed discontinuously at a regular interval along the direction Y crossing the sidewall or a longitudinal direction X of the sidewall, [0075]), wherein
the film continuously covers an entire area of the first one of the side surfaces of the electrode stack (Heo, insulating member covers entire side surface, Annotated Figure 11 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
604
924
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Heo is silent regarding ends of the two or more of the separators are bonded to each other to form a bonding portion, and the adhesive is located between the bonding portions of adjacent ones of the unit cells.
Higuchi discloses an electrode assembly (Higuchi, electrode laminate, Abstract) in which a negative electrode, a separator, and a positive electrode are repeatedly stacked (Higuchi, the positive electrodes, the separators, and the negative electrodes are laminated in this order a plurality of times in the stacking direction, [0032]), wherein ends of the two or more of the separators are bonded to each other to form a bonding portion (Higuchi, the lateral ends of the separators 33 which are adjacent to each other with the positive electrode 31 interposed there between are connected to each other to form a bag-shaped separator 33a, [0027], Figure 3), and the adhesive is located between the bonding portions of adjacent ones of the unit cells (Higuchi, the separators 33 can be connected to each other by bonding using a bonding agent, [0046]).
Higuchi teaches that a power storage device can have high energy density and efficiency, and the power storage device can be miniaturized by connecting the separators (Higuchi, [0034]).
Heo and Higuchi are analogous to the current invention as they are all directed towards a stacked electrode assembly.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to connect the ends of two or more separators of Heo using a bonding agent, as taught by Higuchi, in order to increase energy density and efficiency.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Heo discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Heo discloses the limitations for an electrode assembly (Heo, electrode assembly, Abstract), wherein the film is a first film, the electrode assembly further comprising a second film covering a second one of the side surfaces, the second film being bonded with the adhesive to the second one of the side surfaces defined (Heo, second insulating member covers entire second side surface, Annotated Figure 11 above).
Regarding Claim 3, Heo discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Heo discloses the limitations for an electrode assembly (Heo, electrode assembly, Abstract), wherein the adhesive is one selected from of a flowable resin, a heat curable adhesive, or a UV curable resin material (Heo, in the forming of the solution-type adhesive layer, the curing may include thermosetting or UV curing, [0022-0023]).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Heo discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Heo discloses the limitations for an electrode assembly (Heo, electrode assembly, Abstract), wherein the film has a length in a vertical stacking direction of the electrode stack longer than a height of the first one of the side surfaces of the electrode stack in the vertical stacking (Heo, length of the tape is longer than the height of the electrode stack, Annotated Figure 11 above) and
first and second opposite ends of the film extend from the first one of the side surfaces and are folded and bonded to a lowermost surface and an uppermost surface of the electrode stack, respectively (Heo, insulating member bonded to top and bottom surface of the electrode stack, and the insulating member may be attached to contact upper and lower surfaces of the electrode assembly, [0021], Annotated Figure 11 above).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Heo discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above. Modified Heo discloses the limitations for an electrode assembly (Heo, electrode assembly, Abstract), wherein the second film continuously covers an entire area of the second one of the side surfaces of the electrode stack (Heo, second insulating member covers entire second side surface, Annotated Figure 11 above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, Pages 5-6, filed 06/09/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Heo et al. (US 20200161617 A1, hereinafter Heo), in view of Higuchi (US 20190006123 A1), cited in IDS filed 07/28/2023.
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 KEVIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:50 - 7:50 ET.
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, NICHOLAS A SMITH can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/K.N./Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/OSEI K AMPONSAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights