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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/10/2022, 08/10/2022, 10/27/2025, 06/11/2026 and 07/24/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-16, in the reply filed on 06/03/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the present claims are directed to a single inventive concept deserving full substantive consideration on the merits. This is not found persuasive because Group I is directed to a terminal rivet for a terminal, classified in H01M 50/557. Group II is directed to a method of fastening a terminal rivet to a terminal plate to form a battery terminal of a secondary cell, classified in H01M 50/567. Regardless of search method, invention of different limitations will require different search strategies, and the times to consider the relevancy of collective references would increase proportionally as well.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 17 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 06/03/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nemoto et al. (“Nemoto”, US 20180130995 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nemoto teaches a terminal rivet for a terminal (Nemoto, Figs. 1-7, [0004], [0043], e.g., the rivet member and the terminal be joined together; the second terminal 15 acts like a rivet), wherein the terminal rivet comprises:
a first shaft portion configured to extend through a through-hole of a terminal plate of the terminal (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 below), [0037], [0041], e.g., an insertion hole 14c through which the shaft part 15c of the second terminal 15 (to be described later) is inserted; a leading end 15c1 of the shaft part 15c is crushed and riveted around the insertion hole 14c on the outer side of the first terminal 14), and
a first flange comprising a protruding portion extending a distance above a remaining surface portion of the first flange, the protruding portion being configured to extend into the terminal plate in a riveted state (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 below), [0041], [0059], e.g., a leading end 15c1 of the shaft part 15c is crushed and riveted around the insertion hole 14c on the outer side of the first terminal 14; at least a portion of the shaft part 15c reaches into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14).
PNG
media_image1.png
668
842
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Nemoto teaches the protruding portion is plastically deformed in the riveted state (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14).
Regarding claim 3, Nemoto teaches wherein the deformation is such that an outer circumferential surface of the portion extending through the through-hole of the terminal plate is inclined radially outwards with respect to a central longitudinal axis of the terminal rivet (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7, [0059], e.g., the leading end 15c1 of the shaft part 15c has a cylindrical shape; as shown in FIG. 7, a rotating member 60 is pressed against the cylindrical leading end 15c1 of the shaft part 15c while being moved along the leading end 15c1 in a circumferential direction; the rotating member 60 crushes the cylindrical leading end 15c1 of the shaft part 15c sequentially in the circumferential direction; a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14).
Regarding claim 4, Nemoto teaches wherein the protruding portion is annular in shape (Nemoto, Figs. 3-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 3-7, the protruding portion is annular in shape)).
Regarding claim 6, Nemoto teaches wherein the protruding portion extends continuously around a circumference of the first flange (Nemoto, Figs. 3-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 3-7, the protruding portion extends continuously around a circumference of the first flange)).
Regarding claim 7, Nemoto teaches wherein the protruding portion is positioned at a radially outer edge of the first flange (Nemoto, Figs. 3-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 3-7, the protruding portion is positioned at a radially outer edge of the first flange)).
Regarding claim 8, Nemoto teaches wherein, in the riveted state, the protruding portion is positioned radially outside a portion of the terminal plate with respect to a central axis of the terminal rivet (Nemoto, Figs. 3-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 3-7, in the riveted state, the protruding portion is positioned radially outside a portion of the terminal plate with respect to a central axis of the terminal rivet)).
Regarding claim 9, Nemoto teaches wherein the protruding portion is positioned at a radial distance spaced from the inner circumference of the first flange (Nemoto, Figs. 3-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 3-7, the protruding portion is positioned at a radial distance spaced from the inner circumference of the first flange)).
Regarding claim 10, Nemoto teaches a second shaft portion that forms at least a portion of the first flange (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 below), [0043], e.g., the second terminal 15 acts like a rivet; (as shown in Figs. 4-7, a second shaft portion that forms at least a portion of the first flange)).
PNG
media_image2.png
668
844
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Nemoto teaches a second flange configured to abut against a gasket of the terminal through which the second shaft portion extends (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0033], e.g., the first insulating material 12 is also called a gasket, and keeps the mounting hole 11c sealed; the cylindrical part 12b has an inside diameter according to the outside diameter of a shaft part 15c provided in the second terminal 15 so that the shaft part 15c can be inserted through the cylindrical part 12b; the reception part 12c is provided in a lower surface of the first insulating material 12; the reception part 12c is a part having a recess matching the shape of the base part 15a of the second terminal 15 and used to position the base part 15a; (as shown in Figs. 4-7, a second flange configured to abut against a gasket of the terminal through which the second shaft portion extends)).
Regarding claim 12, Nemoto teaches wherein the first and second shaft portions are made from the same material (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0032], [0043], e.g., copper or a copper alloy is used for the second terminal 15; the second terminal 15 acts like a rivet).
Regarding claim 13, Nemoto teaches wherein the first and second shaft portions are made of copper or a copper alloy (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0032], [0043], e.g., copper or a copper alloy is used for the second terminal 15; the second terminal 15 acts like a rivet).
Regarding claim 14, Nemoto teaches a second flange configured to abut against a gasket of the terminal (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0033], e.g., the first insulating material 12 is also called a gasket, and keeps the mounting hole 11c sealed; the reception part 12c is provided in a lower surface of the first insulating material 12; the reception part 12c is a part having a recess matching the shape of the base part 15a of the second terminal 15 and used to position the base part 15a; (as shown in Figs. 4-7, a second flange configured to abut against a gasket of the terminal)).
Regarding claim 15, Nemoto teaches wherein the rivet consists of a single integral piece of material (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 4-7, the rivet consists of a single integral piece of material)).
Regarding claim 16, Nemoto teaches wherein the terminal rivet is made of copper or a copper alloy (Nemoto, Figs. 4-7, [0032], [0043], e.g., copper or a copper alloy is used for the second terminal 15; the second terminal 15 acts like a rivet).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nemoto et al. (“Nemoto”, US 20180130995 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Nemoto teaches wherein the protruding portion is one piece (Nemoto, Figs. 3-7 (see annotated Fig. 4 above), [0059], e.g., a portion of the shaft part 15c is plastically deformed and introduced into the recess 14c2 opening in the inclined surface 14c1; in the step of riveting the first terminal 14 and the second terminal 15, at least a portion of the shaft part 15c should reach into the recess 14c2 formed in the inclined surface 14c1 of the first terminal 14; (as shown in Figs. 3-7, the protruding portion is one piece)).
Nemoto does not teach wherein the protruding portion consists of several discrete parts.
However, making the protruding portion separable, e.g., consists of several discrete parts, is within the skill of a person of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-16 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 and 10-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11450933. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter of claims 1-16 of the present application are fully anticipated by claims 1-8 and 10-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11450933.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIXIA ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5697. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Tuesday 9-5.
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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/HAIXIA ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights