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
Claims 1-19 are currently pending
Claims 1 and 9-10 are amended
Previously withdrawn claims 11-19 have been rejoined
Status of Amendments
The amendment filed 23 October 2025 has been fully considered, but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
Status of Objections and Rejections of the Office Action from 20 August 2025
The 103 rejections over Wang in view of Fujii and further in view of Wang ‘186, with evidence provided by Lu, are maintained in view of Applicant’s amendment and have been modified to address the new limitation.
The provisional double patenting rejection over copending Application No. 17/842,015 is maintained in view of Applicant’s amendment and has been modified to address the new limitations.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-19 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Examiner agrees that the initial restriction requirement of 2 June 2025 indicated all claims 1-19 as being generic with no requirement for withdrawn claims. Claims 11-19 were considered to be withdrawn based on the response to the restriction requirement of 18 July 2025 wherein the remarks indicate “claims 1-10 will be pending in this application,” thus meaning claims 11-19 would be withdrawn. Examiner acknowledges that confirmation of the intent of this action should have occurred before continuing examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "at least one battery cell according to claim 18." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 18 is rejected for being dependent from the rejected base claim.
Appropriate correction is required. For the purposes of this examination claim 17 will be considered to be dependent from claim 16, as was likely intended.
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, 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-10, 13-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20200313171 A1), hereinafter Wang, in view of Fujii (US 10505231 B2), hereinafter Fujii.
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches an electrode assembly, comprising a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate that are stacked [0111], wherein
a positive active material layer of the positive electrode plate is disposed opposite to a negative active material layer of the negative electrode plate, in this case on opposite sides of a separator [0107-0108 and 0111], the negative active material layer comprising a negative electrode body portion 1 (Fig. 1) and a negative electrode edge portion that has a dimension in a first direction of 1 micron to 25 microns, in this case considered to be the 1 to 25 micron portion on the end of the second anode region 4, connected to the negative electrode body portion 1 [0044], in this case indirectly connected through an intermediate portion comprising the remainder of the second anode region not containing the edge portion, the negative electrode edge portion being located at an end of the negative active material layer along the first direction, as seen in Fig. 1, the first direction being perpendicular to a stacking direction of the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate, and a thickness of the negative electrode edge portion being less than a thickness of the negative electrode body portion [0044]; and
the negative active material layer is configured in such a way that a capacity per unit area of the negative electrode edge portion, in this case the end of the second anode region, is greater than or equal to a capacity per unit area of the negative electrode body portion 1, in this case the first anode region [0006].
Wang is silent as to the alignment of the negative electrode edge portion in relation to the positive active material layer. However, Fujii teaches a lithium-ion secondary battery element comprising a positive electrode 10 and a negative electrode 30 wherein the negative electrode active material layer thin part 322 is disposed to face the positive electrode active material layer thin part 122 [Fujii 0065] through the separator. This is considered to be equivalent to at least part of the negative electrode edge portion overlapping the positive electrode active material layer.
Wang and Fujii are both considered to be equivalent to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrode assemblies with narrowing electrode edge portions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to stack the positive and negative electrodes of Wang in the same manner as taught by Fujii. Doing so would have more effectively reduced the expansion of the end of the battery element [Fujii 0066]. The combination of Wang and Fujii will hereinafter be referred to as modified Wang.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches a weight ratio of an active material of the negative electrode edge portion, in this case SiC-2000, to the negative electrode edge portion being greater than a weight ratio of the active material of the negative electrode body portion to the negative electrode body portion 1. In this case, embodiment 6 teaches the first anode region 1, the body portion, comprising 100% graphite and the second anode region 4, including the edge portion, comprising 95% graphite and 5% SiC-2000 (Wang Table 4)[Wang 0150].
Regarding claim 3, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches a gram capacity of an active material of the negative electrode edge portion being greater than a gram capacity of the active material of the negative electrode body portion 1. In this case, the gram capacity of SiC-2000 of the negative electrode edge portion is inherently greater than the gram capacity of SiC-2000 of the negative electrode body portion 1 because there is no SiC-2000 present in the negative electrode body portion 1. Further, SiC-2000 is taught to have a per gram capacity of 2000 mAh/g compared to the per gram capacity of 370 mAh/g for graphite (Wang Table 1). Therefore, a composition of 5% SiC-2000 and 95% graphite for the negative electrode edge portion, such as in embodiment 6 [Wang 0150], would have a greater total per gram capacity compared to the 100% graphite negative electrode body portion 1.
Regarding claim 6, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches the negative electrode plate comprising a negative current collector 3 [Wang 0051], the negative current collector comprising a negative coating region 1 and 4, in this case where the first and second anode regions are coated, and a negative tab 2, in this case a tab region [0044], at least a part of the negative active material layer is coated on the negative coating region 1 and 4, and the negative tab 3 is connected to an end of the negative coating region 1 and 4 along the first direction [0044]; and
the negative electrode edge portion is located on a side that is of the negative electrode body portion 1 and that is close to the negative tab 3 along the first direction, in this case oriented between the negative electrode body portion 1 and the negative tab 3, as seen in Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 7, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches the thickness of the negative electrode edge portion gradually decreasing along a direction that faces back from the negative electrode body portion 1 and that is parallel to the first direction, as seen in Wang Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 8, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang is silent as to a ratio of a dimension of the negative electrode edge portion to a dimension of the negative active material layer 1 and 4 being 0.01 to 0.2 in the first direction. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the dimensions of the negative electrode edge portion in relation to the negative active material layer 1 and 4 in order to optimize the degree of lithium deposition of the electrochemical device to enhance the safety of the electrochemical device [0047]. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 9, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches the positive active material layer comprising a positive electrode body portion 1 (Fig. 1) and a positive electrode edge portion that has a dimension in a first direction of 1 micron to 25 microns, in this case considered to be the 1 to 25 micron portion on the end of the second cathode region 4, connected to the positive electrode body portion 1 [0044], in this case indirectly connected through an intermediate portion comprising the remainder of the second cathode region not containing the edge portion, the positive electrode edge portion being located at an end of the positive active material layer along the first direction, as seen in Fig. 1, a thickness of the positive electrode edge portion being less than a thickness of the positive electrode body portion [0044], the positive active material layer being configured in such a way that a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode edge portion, in this case the end of the second cathode region, is greater than or equal to a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode body portion 1, in this case the first cathode region [0014].
Regarding claim 10, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches a weight ratio of an active material, in this case NCM811, of the positive electrode edge portion to the positive electrode edge portion being less than a weight ratio of the active material of the positive electrode body portion to the positive electrode body portion 1 and a gram capacity of an active material of the positive electrode edge portion being less than a gram capacity of the active material of the positive electrode body portion 1. In this case, embodiment 4 teaches the first cathode region 1, the body portion, comprising 100% NCM811 and the second cathode region 4, the edge portion, comprising 50% NCM811 and 50% NCM523 (Wang Table 3)[Wang 0132]. Further, NCM811 is taught to have a per gram capacity of 220 mAh/g compared to the per gram capacity of 180 mAh/g for NCM523 (Wang Table 2). Therefore, a composition of 50% NCM811 and 50% NCM523 for the positive electrode edge portion, such as in embodiment 4 [0132], would have a lesser total per gram capacity compared to the 100% NCM811 positive electrode body portion 1.
Regarding claim 13, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches the positive electrode plate comprising a positive current collector 3 [Wang 0067], the positive current collector comprising a positive coating region 1 and 4, in this case where the first and second cathode regions are coated, and a positive tab 2, in this case a tab region [0044], at least a part of the positive active material layer is coated on the positive coating region 1 and 4, and the positive tab 3 is connected to an end of the positive coating region 1 and 4 along the first direction [0044]; and
the positive electrode edge portion is located on a side that is of the positive electrode body portion 1 and that is close to the positive tab 3 along the first direction, in this case oriented between the positive electrode body portion 1 and the positive tab 3, as seen in Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 14, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang further teaches the thickness of the positive electrode edge portion gradually decreasing along a direction that faces back from the positive electrode body portion 1 and that is parallel to the first direction, as seen in Wang Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 15, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang is silent as to a ratio of a dimension of the positive electrode edge portion to a dimension of the positive active material layer 1 and 4 being 0.01 to 0.2 in the first direction. However, it would have been obvious to adjust the dimensions of the positive electrode edge portion in relation to the positive active material layer 1 and 4 in order to optimize the degree of lithium deposition of the electrochemical device to enhance the safety of the electrochemical device [0047]. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claims 16 and 19, modified Wang teaches a battery cell, as required by claim 16, comprising:
a shell, in this case a package [Wang 0111]; and
at least one electrode assembly, as also required by claim 19, wherein the electrode assembly is accommodated in the shell [Wang 0111], the electrode assembly comprises a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate that are stacked [Wang 0111], wherein
a positive active material layer of the positive electrode plate is disposed opposite to a negative active material layer of the negative electrode plate, in this case on opposite sides of a separator [Wang 0107-0108 and 0111], the negative active material layer comprising a negative electrode body portion 1 (Fig. 1) and a negative electrode edge portion, in this case the second anode region 4, connected to the negative electrode body portion 1 [0044], the negative electrode edge portion is located at an end of the negative active material layer along a first direction, as seen in Fig. 1, the first direction is perpendicular to a stacking direction of the positive electrode plate and the negative electrode plate, and a thickness of the negative electrode edge portion is less than a thickness of the negative electrode body portion [0044]; and
the negative active material layer is configured in such a way that a capacity per unit area of the negative electrode edge portion, in this case the second anode region 4, is greater than or equal to a capacity per unit area of the negative electrode body portion 1, in this case the first anode region [0006]; and/or,
the positive active material layer comprises a positive electrode body portion 1 (Fig. 1) and a positive electrode edge portion, in this case the second cathode region 4, connected to the positive electrode body portion 1 [0044], the positive electrode edge portion is located at an end of the positive active material layer along the first direction, as seen in Fig. 1, a thickness of the positive electrode edge portion is less than a thickness of the positive electrode body portion [0044], and the positive active material layer is configured in such a way that a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode edge portion, in this case the second cathode region 4, is greater than or equal to a capacity per unit area of the positive electrode body portion 1, in this case the first cathode region [0014].
Wang is silent as to the alignment of the negative electrode edge portion in relation to the positive active material layer. However, Fujii teaches a lithium-ion secondary battery element comprising a positive electrode 10 and a negative electrode 30 wherein the negative electrode active material layer thin part 322 is disposed to face the positive electrode active material layer thin part 122 [Fujii 0065] through the separator. This is considered to be equivalent to at least part of the negative electrode edge portion overlapping at least part of the positive electrode edge portion.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to stack the positive and negative electrodes of Wang in the same manner as taught by Fujii in a way that at least part of the negative electrode edge portion overlaps at least part of the positive electrode edge portion. Doing so would have more effectively reduced the expansion of the end of the battery element [Fujii 0066].
Claims 4-5 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Fujii, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 20200313186 A1), hereinafter Wang ‘186, as evidence provided by Lu et al. (Effect of carbon blacks on electrical conduction and conductive binder domain of next-generation lithium-ion batteries), hereinafter Lu.
Regarding claim 4, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang is silent as to the negative electrode edge portion comprising a first negative coating and a second negative coating. However, Wang ‘186 teaches an electrode assembly wherein the negative electrode edge portion comprises an undercoat layer as a first negative coating and an active material layer as a second negative coating [Wang ‘186 0076] that are stacked along the stacking direction. Embodiment 14 (Wang ‘186 Table 2) teaches the undercoat layer as being conductive carbon black, having a gram capacity of <170 (evidence provided by Lu Fig. 7f), and the active material layer as being graphite, having a gram capacity of 370 mAh/g (Wang Table 1). Therefore, a weight ratio of the graphite active material of the second negative coating to the second negative coating is inherently greater than a weight ratio of the graphite active material of the first negative coating to the first negative coating and a gram capacity of the graphite active material of the second negative coating is inherently greater than a gram capacity of the graphite active material of the first negative coating due to the lack of graphite present in the second negative coating. Further, a total gram capacity of the graphite second coating would also be greater than a total gram capacity of the conductive carbon black first coating based on the gram capacities taught by Wang and Lu.
Wang and Wang ‘186 are both considered to be equivalent to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrode assemblies with narrowing electrode edge portions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the undercoat taught by Wang ‘186. Doing so would have improved the kinetic performance of the electrode [Wang ‘186 0076].
Regarding claim 5, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang is silent as to the particle diameter of an active material of the negative electrode edge portion being less than a particle diameter of the active material of the negative electrode body portion 1. However, Wang ‘186 teaches an electrode assembly wherein an anode active material having a smaller median particle diameter Dv50 may be adopted to coat the anode thin region, and an anode active material having a larger median particle diameter Dv50 may be adopted to coat the anode body region [0066].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the active material of Wang with the particle diameter relationship taught by Wang ‘186. Doing so would have further enhanced the kinetic performance of the negative electrode edge portion [Wang ‘186 0066].
Regarding claim 11, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang is silent as to the positive electrode edge portion comprising a first positive coating and a second positive coating. However, Wang ‘186 teaches an electrode assembly wherein the positive electrode edge portion comprises an undercoat layer as a first positive coating and an active material layer as a second positive coating [Wang ‘186 0094] that are stacked along the stacking direction. Wang ‘186 teaches that the undercoat layer may be conductive carbon black [Wang ‘186 0094], having a gram capacity of <170 (evidence provided by Lu Fig. 7f), and the active material layer may be lithium cobalt oxide [Wang ‘186 0085], which may have a gram capacity of 140 mAh/g (Wang Table 2). Therefore, a weight ratio of the conductive carbon black active material of the second positive coating to the second positive coating is inherently less than a weight ratio of the conductive carbon black active material of the first positive coating to the first positive coating and a gram capacity of the conductive carbon black active material of the second positive coating is inherently greater than a gram capacity of the conductive carbon black active material of the first positive coating due to the lack of conductive carbon black present in the second positive coating. Further, a total gram capacity of the lithium cobalt second coating would also be less than a total gram capacity of the conductive carbon black first coating based on the gram capacities taught by Wang and Lu.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang to include the undercoat taught by Wang ‘186. Doing so would have weakened the kinetic performance of the cathode thin region [Wang ‘186 0092] which would allow the area to deintercalate ions slowly and reduce the probability of the formation of lithium dendrites, thereby enhancing the safety of the cell [Wang ‘186 0082].
Regarding claim 12, modified Wang teaches the electrode assembly according to claim 1. Wang is silent as to the particle diameter of an active material of the positive electrode edge portion being greater than a particle diameter of the active material of the positive electrode body portion 1. However, Wang ‘186 teaches an electrode assembly wherein a cathode active material having a smaller median particle diameter Dv50 may be adopted to coat the cathode body region, and a cathode active material having a larger median particle diameter Dv50 may be adopted to coat the cathode thin region [0084].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the active material of Wang with the particle diameter relationship taught by Wang ‘186. Doing so would have weakened the kinetic performance of the cathode thin region [Wang ‘186 0084] which would allow the area to deintercalate ions slowly and reduce the probability of the formation of lithium dendrites, thereby enhancing the safety of the cell [Wang ‘186 0082].
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Fujii, as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kawaguchi et al. (JP2018174098A), hereinafter Kawaguchi.
Modified Wang teaches the battery cell according to claim 16. Wang further teaches an electrochemical device including the battery cell of claim 16, as required by claim 17, such as in a lithium-ion battery [0084], and an electronic device comprising the electrochemical device [0103-0104], as required by claim 18. Modified Wang is silent as to the at least one battery cell, that is already in a shell, being further accommodated in a box. However, Kawaguchi teaches a power storage element comprising at least one power storage element 1, that is a wound electrode body 2 housed in case 3 (pg. 2, ¶ 6), being used in a power storage device 100 (Fig. 7 and pg. 2, ¶ 5).
Wang and Kawaguchi are both considered to be equivalent to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wound electrode assembly battery cells in electrochemical devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrochemical device of Wang to house each electrode assembly in a shell to form a battery cell and then further house at least one battery cell in a box to form a power storage device, or battery module, as taught by Kawaguchi. Doing so would have increased the output and the voltage of the setup (pg. 2, ¶ 5).
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 1-6 and 9-10 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 and 10-11 of copending Application No. 17/842,015 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
The combination of instant claims 1 and 9 along with, separately, instant claim 19 is nearly identical to the claim 1 of 17/842,015 with the main differences being that the instant claims 1 and 9 claim a dimension of the negative electrode edge portion as being 1 micron to 25 microns in the first direction and 17/842,015 further claims a wound structure, an area of the negative active material layer being larger than an area of the positive active material layer, the negative edge portion surrounding the negative body portion, and the positive active material layer comprising a body portion being surrounded by an edge portion. The specification of a dimension of the negative electrode edge portion being 1 micron to 25 microns in the first direction is not patentably distinct from the outermost 1 micron to 25 microns of the edge portion of 17/842,015. Further, the additional limitations in 17/842,015, though not present in the instant application, would not prevent claim 1 of 17/842,015 from reading on the combination of claims 1 and 9 and, separately, instant claim 19 of the instant application.
Instant claim 2 is nearly identical to claim 2 of 17/842,015 aside from 17/842,015 adding the limitation “such that the capacity per unit area of the negative edge portion is greater than that of the negative body portion.” However, this limitation is redundant compared to claim 1 of 17/842,015 that already claims the capacity per unit area of the negative edge portion being greater than that of the negative body portion.
Instant claim 3 is nearly identical to claim 3 of 17/842,015 aside from the same difference as claim 2 above.
Instant claim 4 is identical to claim 4 of 17/842,015.
Instant claim 5 is identical to claim 5 of 17/842,015.
Instant claim 6 is nearly identical to claim 6 of 17/842,015 aside from the instant claiming the negative electrode edge portion is located on a side of the negative electrode body portion that is close to the negative tab along the first direction. However, claim 1 of 17/842,015 already claims the negative electrode edge portion surrounding the negative electrode body portion, so the edge portion is expected to be on a side of the negative electrode body portion that is close to the negative tab along the first direction.
Instant claim 10 is identical to claims 10 and 11 of 17/842,015.
Instant claim 11 is identical to claim 12 of 17/842,015.
Instant claim 12 is identical to claim 13 of 17/842,015.
Instant claim 13 is nearly identical to claim 14 of 17/842,015 aside from the same difference as claim 6 above.
Instant claim 16 is nearly identical to claim 18 of 17/842,015 as from the same differences as the combination of claims 1 and 9 and, separately, claim 19 above and the instant use of “shell” in place of “case” in 17/842,015, which are considered to be equivalents.
Instant claim 17 is identical to claim 19 of 17/842,015.
Instant claim 18 is nearly identical to claim 20 of 17/842,015 aside from the instant use of “electrical device” instead of “electric apparatus” of 17/842,015, which are considered to be equivalents, and the instant adding the limitation that “the battery is configured to provide electrical energy,” which is redundant because one of ordinary skill in the art would expect a battery to provide electrical energy.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 103 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues that Wang teaches the edge region as being 3 mm to about 40 mm from the body portion, which falls outside the claimed range of 1 micron to 25 microns. Examiner agrees that Wang teaches the edge region as being 3 mm to 40 mm from the edge of the body region. However, this does not prevent one of ordinary skill in the art from defining their own edge portion to be the 1 to 25 microns at the end of the active material layer, provided that new defined edge portion meets the required limitations. Currently, the edge portion is required to be connected to the body portion in some way, located at an end of the active material layer along a first direction, have a dimension in the first direction of 1 to 25 microns, and have the correct respective relationships between multiple measurement values when compared to the body portion. The 1 to 25 micron portion at the end of the active material layer meets those limitations. Therefore, it still reads on the claimed edge portion. Further, the written definition of the edge region could technically be interpreted as meaning that the edge region merely starts that far away from the body portion, not necessarily that it encompasses the region up to that far away.
Regarding the double patenting rejection, Applicant remarks that the pending claims are patentably distinct in view of the claim amendments. Examiner disagrees for the same interpretation reason as stated above regarding the 103 rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN KENWOOD VAN KIRK whose telephone number is (703)756-4717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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.
/DUSTIN VAN KIRK/ Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722