DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the November 12th, 2025 arguments and remarks (“Remarks”).
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior
Office 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
In response to the amendments received on November 12th, 2025:
Claims 1-4 and 6-21 are pending in the current application. Claims 1-2, 6-7, 9, 16, and 18 are amended. Claim 5 is cancelled. Claim 21 is newly added.
Claims 1, 16, and 18 are amended to describe an adhesive pattern applied to an inner surface of the first lateral wall and second lateral wall.
Claim 2, 7, and 9 include minor amendments to improve clarity.
Claim 6 is amended to remove limitations presented in Claim 1 as amended.
Claim 21 is newly added to specify a type of pattern formed by the adhesive.
Paragraph [0070] of the specification is amended to include reference character 700 depicted in Figure 7. Accordingly, the amendment overcomes the objection to the drawings and the objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendment finds support in the disclosure including originally filed claims, specification, and drawings. No new matter has been added.
Applicant’s amendments have changed the scope of the invention and the new grounds of rejection are necessitated by amendment.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 35 U.S.C. 103 as described below:
1-3, 8, 12-13, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1). The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Claims 5-6, 9-10, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1). The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Guen (U.S. Pat. No. 20170162853 A1). The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Yoshitake et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20120301759 A1). The rejection is withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Kim (U.S. Pat. No. 10535846 B2). The rejection is withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Murashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20200411910 A1). The rejection is withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed November 12th, 2025 have been fully considered as further described below:
Applicant presents arguments to Claims 1, 16, and 18 in which are based on the claims as amended. Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1, 16, and 18 have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The new grounds of rejection are necessitated by amendment.
Cited Prior Art
Previously Cited Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) (“Harayama et al.”)
Previously Cited Guen (U.S. Pat. No. 20170162853 A1) (“Guen”)
Previously Cited Yoshitake et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20120301759 A1) (“Yoshitake et al.”)
Previously Cited Kim (U.S. Pat. No. 10535846 B2) (“Kim”)
Previously Cited Murashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20200411910 A1) (“Murashi et al.”)
Sato et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20210036375 A1) (“Sato et al.”)
Honda (U.S. Pat. No. 20170309946 A1) (“Honda”)
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.
Figures provided in previous office actions may be excluded below.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8-10, 12-13, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Sato et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20210036375 A1) and further in view of Honda (U.S. Pat. No. 20170309946 A1).
[AltContent: textbox (Fig. 5 (Harayama et al.))]
PNG
media_image1.png
875
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
740
586
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Fig. 1 (Harayama et al.))]Regarding Claim 1, as the prior art may not use the same terminology as the claim language, figures are annotated to show portions equivalent to those features claimed. Harayama et al. teaches a device comprising a battery housing (case) including wide surfaces (36) (equivalent to a first lateral wall opposite to a second lateral wall) (para. 23, 43, annotated Fig. 1); and an insulator (insulator film (10)) disposed within the battery housing between the battery housing and the active battery component (electrode body 80) (para. 43, Fig. 1). Harayama et al. teaches the insulator (insulator film (10)) fixed (joined such as by application of an adhesive) to inner surfaces (inner walls 30a) of the wide surfaces (36) (corresponding to a first lateral wall and a second lateral wall) of the battery housing (para. 43, Fig. 5) to fix a portion of the insulator film to the inner surface of the first lateral wall and the portion of the insulator is fixed to the inner surface of the second lateral wall. Harayama et al. further teaches inserting the wound electrode body in the battery housing (para. 11).
Harayama et al. does not teach the adhesive applied in a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections. Harayama et al. does not teach the electrode body as a battery stack.
Sato et al. teaches an adhesive for a battery wherein the adhesive is applied in a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections ([0079] teaches a dotted adhesive material disposed on an affixing surface in a pattern such as striped, dotted, or lattice). Said method of forming the adhesive provides sufficient adherence between battery components ([0079]-[0082]). Sato et al. further teaches a secondary battery comprising a battery stack in which is enclosed in a battery case (para. 162). The electrode body can be stacked, folded, or wound as determined necessary (para. 3) by a person of ordinary skill in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the adhesive of Harayama et al. to comprise a pattern (such as a dotted pattern) formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections, and the electrode body in the form of a battery stack as taught by Sato et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide sufficient adherence between battery components as described above. Further, modifying the electrode body to have a stacked structure is within the level of one ordinary skill in the art; the wound electrode body of Harayama et al. requires bending and deforming to form the wound structure, providing increased tension and stress at the bending points; a stacked electrode body eliminates the need for bending the components of the electrode body, reducing the applied stress while further providing superior space utilization.
Harayama et al. does not teach the sections of adhesive spreading together from pressure of a battery stack inserted into the insulator.
Honda teaches an adhesive layer used in battery manufacturing formed by applying pressure to an adhesive material having a flat, line, or dot shape, allowing the adhesive material to flatly spread (para. 211). Pressure application by pressing a battery component allows the adhesion layer to be thinly and uniformly spread in a wide region providing increased adhesive force and electrical conductivity (para. 178).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sections of adhesive of Harayama et al. as modified by Sato et al. to include pressure application in which pressure can allow spreading of the adhesive to form an adhesive layer as taught by Honda. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to allow the pressure from inserting the wound battery (battery stack as modified by Sato et al.) into the insulator of Harayama et al. to perform the pressure application and allow the adhesive sections to spread together to form an adhesive layer based on the applied prior art. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the teachings of Honda useful in providing increased adhesive force and electrical conductivity.
Regarding Claim 2, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As Harayama et al. does not use the same terminology as the claim language, Figure 5 is annotated to show portions equivalent to a first lateral wall, second lateral wall, and exposed portion. An end of the insulator (10) is fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to the inner surface (30a) of the first lateral wall at a location a distance from an end of the first lateral wall wherein the distance defines an exposed portion (area where insulator (10) is not present) of the first lateral wall (para. 43, Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 3, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As Harayama et al. does not use the same terminology as the claim language, Figure 5 is annotated to show portions equivalent to a first lateral wall, second lateral wall, and exposed portion. An end of the insulator (10) is fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to the inner surface (30a) of the second lateral wall at a location a distance from an end of the second lateral wall in which the distance defines an exposed portion (area where insulator (10) is not present) of the second lateral wall (para. 43, Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 6, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As described in Claim 1, Harayama et al. teaches the insulator (insulator film (10)) fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to inner surfaces (inner walls 30a) of the wide surfaces (36) (corresponding to a first lateral wall and a second lateral wall) of the battery housing (para. 43, Fig. 5) in which a portion of the insulator film would be fixed to an inner surface of the first lateral wall and the portion of the insulator is fixed to an inner surface of the second lateral wall.
Further, Harayama et al. teaches the battery housing comprising narrow surfaces (38) equivalent to a third lateral wall and a fourth lateral wall as shown annotated Figure 1 (Fig. 1, para. 43). Harayama et al. teaches a configuration comprising the insulator fixed to the inner wall of the battery provides benefits such as reducing performance deterioration caused by interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material (para. 7-8). Although Harayama et al. teaches an alternative embodiment in which the insulator film is not joined to the narrow surfaces (third lateral wall, fourth lateral wall) only the wide surfaces (36) (equivalent to a first lateral wall and second lateral wall) of the battery housing, “the disclosure of desirable alternatives does not necessarily negate a suggestion for modifying the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention. In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 73 USPQ2d 1141 (Fed. Cir. 2004)” (see MPEP 2143.01, I). Therefore, the teachings of Harayama et al. would not discourage one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the adhesive to the third and fourth lateral wall as Harayama et al. teaches joining the insulator to the inner walls (which can include all four sides comprising a first, second, third, and fourth lateral wall) of the battery housing.
Further, a method of applying the adhesive across an inner surface of the first, second, third, and fourth lateral wall would have been obvious to try (see MPEP 2143.I.E). There is a recognized problem in the art in which Harayama et al. teaches interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material reducing the quality of a battery and deteriorating performance (para. 7-8). Harayama et al. suggests a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized problem in which include joining the insulator to inner walls (can include all four sides comprising a first, second, third, and fourth lateral wall) of a battery housing via application of an adhesive. One of ordinary skill in the art would consider the application of an adhesive to include applying a small amount or completely coating the adhesive across an inner surface of the inner walls. It would have been obvious to try the known methods of applying the adhesive material with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the adhesive across an inner surface of all four walls to further secure the insulator to the battery housing, further reducing movement or displacement of the insulator and preventing interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material.
Regarding Claim 8, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As shown in annotated Figure 5, the insulator (10) comprises a bottom side, a first side with a portion of the first side fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to the inner surface (30a) of the first lateral wall, and the first side extending from the bottom side to the opening of the insulator at an upper end side; further, the insulator includes an equivalent second side with a portion of the second side fixed to the inner surface of the second lateral wall, and the second side extending from the bottom side to the insulator opening at an upper end (para. 42-43, Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 9, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Harayama et al. teaches a configuration in which the insulator is fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to inner walls of wide surfaces (36) (equivalent to a first lateral wall and second lateral wall) of the battery housing (case main body (32)) (para. 43) in which it would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art to imply the bottom side is free of the joining material or adhesive. As shown in annotated Figure 5, the insulator comprises a first side with a portion of the first side fixed to the inner surface of the first lateral wall by the adhesive and second side with a portion of the second side fixed to the inner surface of the second lateral wall by adhesive (para. 43, Fig. 5). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Harayama et al. to provide a battery with improved quality by reducing performance deterioration caused by interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material (para. 7-8).
Regarding Claim 10, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Harayama et al. teaches the battery housing comprising narrow surfaces (38) equivalent to a third lateral wall and a fourth lateral wall as shown annotated Figure 1 (Fig. 1, para. 43). As described in Claim 1, Harayama et al. teaches the insulator (insulator film (10)) joined to inner surfaces (inner walls (30a)) of the wide surfaces (36) (corresponding to an equivalent first lateral wall and a second lateral wall) of the battery housing (para. 43, Fig. 5) in which a first side is fixed to an inner surface and a second side is fixed to an inner surface of the second lateral wall as shown in annotated Figure 5. Further, Harayama et al. teaches the battery housing comprising narrow surfaces (38) equivalent to a third lateral wall and a fourth lateral wall as shown annotated Figure 1 (Fig. 1, para. 43).
Harayama et al. teaches a configuration comprising the insulator fixed to the inner wall of the battery provides benefits such as reducing performance deterioration caused by interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material (para. 7-8). Although Harayama et al. teaches an alternative embodiment in which the insulator film is not joined to the narrow surfaces (third lateral wall, fourth lateral wall) only the wide surfaces (36) (equivalent to a first lateral wall and second lateral wall) of the battery housing, “the disclosure of desirable alternatives does not necessarily negate a suggestion for modifying the prior art to arrive at the claimed invention. In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 73 USPQ2d 1141 (Fed. Cir. 2004)” (see MPEP 2143.01, I). Therefore, the teachings of Harayama et al. would not discourage one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the adhesive to the third and fourth lateral wall as Harayama et al. teaches joining the insulator to the inner walls (which can include all four sides comprising a first, second, third, and fourth lateral wall) of the battery housing.
Further, a method of applying the adhesive to the third and fourth lateral wall would have been obvious to try (see MPEP 2143, I, E). There is a recognized problem in the art in which Harayama et al. teaches interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material reducing the quality of a battery and deteriorating performance (para. 7-8). Harayama et al. suggests a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions to the recognized problem in which include joining the insulator to inner walls (can include all four sides comprising a first, second, third, and fourth lateral wall) of a battery housing via application of an adhesive. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further include a third side of the insulator fixed to an inner surface of the third lateral wall, and a fourth side of the insulator fixed to an inner surface of the fourth lateral wall. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the adhesive connecting all four sides of the insulator to all four respective walls to further secure the insulator to the battery housing, further reducing movement or displacement of the insulator and preventing interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material.
Regarding Claim 12, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Harayama et al. teaches the insulator having a bottomed pouch-like shape equivalent to a pouch shaped insulator (para. 42). Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 13, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As taught by Harayama et al. and shown in Figures 1 and 5, the insulator is a pouch shaped insulator in which is a single continuous material (para. 43, Figs. 1 and 5). As Harayama et al. does not teach the presence of seams or gaps within the construction of the insulator, the insulator is equivalent to a seamless insulator. Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 16, as the prior art may not use the same terminology as the claim language, figures are annotated to show portions equivalent to those features claimed. Harayama et al. teaches a device comprising a battery case (housing) 30 including wide surfaces 36 (equivalent to a first lateral wall opposite to a second lateral wall) (para. 23, 43, annotated Fig. 1). Further, Harayama et al. teaches a manufacturing method of the battery housing (comprising a first lateral wall and a second lateral wall) including a step of accommodating (inserting) the insulator film and electrode body (active battery component) in the battery housing, fixing (joining) the insulator to the inner wall (surface) of the battery case (in which a portion of the insulator film would be fixed to an inner surface of the first lateral wall and an inner surface of the second lateral wall as shown in annotated Figure 5) (para. 11). “Selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results,” In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946) (see MPEP 2144.04, IV, C).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to insert the active battery component as final step to further prevent interference between the insulator film and negative electrode collector terminal during the joining step of fixing the insulator to the battery housing. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Harayama et al. to provide a battery with improved quality by reducing performance deterioration caused by interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material (para. 7-8).
Harayama et al. does not teach the adhesive applied in a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections. Harayama et al. does not teach the electrode body as a battery stack.
Sato et al. teaches an adhesive for a battery wherein the adhesive is applied in a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections ([0079] teaches a dotted adhesive material disposed on an affixing surface in a pattern such as striped, dotted, or lattice). Said method of forming the adhesive provides sufficient adherence between battery components ([0079]-[0082]). Sato et al. further teaches a secondary battery comprising a battery stack in which is enclosed in a battery case (para. 162). The electrode body can be stacked, folded, or wound as determined necessary (para. 3) by a person of ordinary skill in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the adhesive of Harayama et al. to comprise a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections, and the electrode body in the form of a battery stack as taught by Sato et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide sufficient adherence between battery components as described above. Further, modifying the electrode body to have a stacked structure is within the level of one ordinary skill in the art; the wound electrode body of Harayama et al. requires bending and deforming to form the wound structure, providing increased tension and stress at the bending points; a stacked electrode body eliminates the need for bending the components of the electrode body, reducing the applied stress while further providing superior space utilization.
Harayama et al. does not teach the sections of adhesive spreading together from pressure of a battery stack inserted into the insulator.
Honda teaches an adhesive layer used in battery manufacturing formed by applying pressure to an adhesive material having a flat, line, or dot shape, allowing the adhesive material to flatly spread (para. 211). Pressure application by pressing a battery component allows the adhesion layer to be thinly and uniformly spread in a wide region providing increased adhesive force and electrical conductivity (para. 178).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sections of adhesive of Harayama et al. as modified by Sato et al. to include pressure application in which pressure can allow spreading of the adhesive to form an adhesive layer as taught by Honda. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to allow the pressure from inserting the wound battery (battery stack as modified by Sato et al.) into the insulator of Harayama et al. to perform the pressure application and allow the adhesive sections to spread together to form an adhesive layer, based on the teachings and modifications by Sato et al. and Honda. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the teachings of Honda useful in providing increased adhesive force and electrical conductivity.
Regarding Claim 17, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 16 above. Harayama et al further teaches the method comprising a cover 34 provided on the battery housing (case main body 32), fixing (sealing) the cover to an exposed portion (as shown in annotated Figure 5) of the batter housing (para. 50, Fig. 5), As shown in annotated Figure 5, an end of the insulator (10) is fixed to the inner surface (30a) of the first lateral wall at a location a distance from an end of the first lateral wall in which the distance defines an exposed portion (area where insulator (10) is not present) of the first lateral wall (para. 43, Fig. 5). One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Harayama et al. to provide a battery with improved quality by reducing performance deterioration caused by interference between the insulator film and the negative electrode active material (para. 7-8).
Regarding Claim 18, Harayama et al. teaches a battery cell (single cells 100, lithium-ion secondary battery for use in an electric vehicle, para. 70-72) comprising a battery housing (case (30)) including wide surfaces (36) (equivalent to a first lateral wall opposite to a second lateral wall) (para. 23, 43, annotated Fig. 1); and an insulator (10) disposed between the battery housing and the active battery component (electrode body (80)) (para. 43, Fig. 1). Harayama et al. teaches the insulator (insulator film (10)) fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to inner surfaces (inner walls 30a) of the wide surfaces (36) (corresponding to a first lateral wall and a second lateral wall) of the battery housing (para. 43, Fig. 5) in which a portion of the insulator film would be fixed to an inner surface of the first lateral wall and the portion of the insulator is fixed to an inner surface of the second lateral wall. Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Harayama et al. does not teach the adhesive applied in a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections. Harayama et al. does not teach the electrode body as a battery stack.
Sato et al. teaches an adhesive for a battery wherein the adhesive is applied in a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections ([0079] teaches a dotted adhesive material disposed on an affixing surface in a pattern such as striped, dotted, or lattice). Said method of forming the adhesive provides sufficient adherence between battery components ([0079]-[0082]). Sato et al. further teaches a secondary battery comprising a battery stack in which is enclosed in a battery case (para. 162). The electrode body can be stacked, folded, or wound as determined necessary (para. 3) by a person of ordinary skill in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the adhesive of Harayama et al. to comprise a pattern formed from sections of adhesive and openings between the sections, and the electrode body in the form of a battery stack as taught by Sato et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide sufficient adherence between battery components as described above. Further, modifying the electrode body to have a stacked structure is within the level of one ordinary skill in the art; the wound electrode body of Harayama et al. requires bending and deforming to form the wound structure, providing increased tension and stress at the bending points; a stacked electrode body eliminates the need for bending the components of the electrode body, reducing the applied stress while further providing superior space utilization.
Harayama et al. does not teach the sections of adhesive spreading together from pressure of a battery stack inserted into the insulator.
Honda teaches an adhesive layer used in battery manufacturing formed by applying pressure to an adhesive material having a flat, line, or dot shape, allowing the adhesive material to flatly spread (para. 211). Pressure application by pressing a battery component allows the adhesion layer to be thinly and uniformly spread in a wide region providing increased adhesive force and electrical conductivity (para. 178).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sections of adhesive of Harayama et al. as modified by Sato et al. to include pressure application in which pressure can allow spreading of the adhesive to form an adhesive layer as taught by Honda. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to allow the pressure from inserting the wound battery (battery stack as modified by Sato et al.) into the insulator of Harayama et al. to perform the pressure application and allow the adhesive sections to spread together to form an adhesive layer, based on the teachings and modifications by Sato et al. and Honda. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the teachings of Honda useful in providing increased adhesive force and electrical conductivity.
Regarding Claim 19, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 18 above. As Harayama et al. does not use the same terminology as the claim language, Figure 5 is annotated to show portions equivalent to a first lateral wall, second lateral wall, and exposed portion. An end of the insulator (10) is fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to the inner surface (30a) of the first lateral wall at a location a distance from an end of the first lateral wall in which the distance defines an exposed portion (area where insulator (10) is not present) of the first lateral wall (para. 43, Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 20, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 18 above. As taught by Harayama et al. and shown in Figures 1 and 5, the insulator is a pouch shaped insulator in which is a single continuous material (para. 43, Figs. 1 and 5). As Harayama et al. does not teach the presence of seams or gaps within the construction of the insulator, the insulator is equivalent to a seamless insulator. Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 21, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As applied to Claim 1, the adhesive of Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. to include a pattern such as a dotted pattern to provide sufficient adherence between battery components (Sato et al., [0079]-[0082]). Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Sato et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20210036375 A1), and further in view of Honda (U.S. Pat. No. 20170309946 A1) and Guen (U.S. Pat. No. 20170162853 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Harayama et al. teaches a cover (34) attached (fixed) to the opening on the top surface of the case main body (32) (equivalent to an exposed portion of the first lateral wall and an exposed portion of the second lateral as shown in annotated Fig. 5) so as to close the opening (para. 35, Fig. 5).
Harayama et al. does not teach the cover electrically coupled to the exposed portion.
[AltContent: textbox (Fig. 1 (Guen et al.))][AltContent: textbox (Fig. 2 (Guen et al.))]
PNG
media_image3.png
616
691
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
612
627
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As shown in annotated Figure 1, Guen teaches a battery comprising a cover (cap assembly (130)) coupled to a case (120) (at portions equivalent to a first lateral wall, a second lateral wall opposite to the first lateral wall) (Fig. 1, para. 41). Further, the cover (cap plate (131)) and the housing (case (120)) (comprising an equivalent first lateral wall and second lateral wall) are coupled together and may have the same polarity (Fig. 1-2, para. 41-43) based on electrical connection between the first electrode tab and bottom surface of the cover and connection between the cover and housing. Guen teaches benefits of the configuration of the secondary battery as claimed including reducing the number of components and lowering the internal resistance by shortening the electrical paths between the tabs and terminals (para. 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the claimed invention to modify the device of Harayama et al. to include the cover electrically coupled to the case or housing of the battery cell as taught by Guen. When performing the described modification, it would have been obvious to electrically couple the cover to an exposed portion of the first lateral wall and an exposed portion of the second lateral wall in which are located at a top end portion of the battery housing where the cover is applied. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide an alternative structure of a pouch shaped battery in which reduces the number of components and lowers the internal resistance as taught by Guen.
Regarding Claim 15, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Harayama et al. teaches the insulator (insulator film (10)) configured to insulate the active battery component (electrode body (80)) from the battery housing (case (30)) (para. 42, Fig. 2).
Harayama et al. does not teach the battery housing having a first polarity; and wherein the insulator insulates an electrode of the active battery component of a second polarity from the battery housing.
Guen teaches a battery housing (case (120)) and cover (cap plate (131)) having the same polarity (first polarity) as the first electrode current collector tab (111b) (Fig. 2, para. 43). The first electrode plate (111) may serve as either the positive or negative electrode while the second electrode plate (112) has opposite polarity to the first electrode plate (para. 28). Guen further teaches an insulator (134, 135) electrically insulating the second terminal (having a second polarity) from the cover (cap plate) (para. 45). Guen teaches benefits of the secondary battery claimed including reducing the number of components and lowering the internal resistance by shortening the electrical paths between the tabs and terminals (para. 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Harayama et al. to further include the battery housing having a first polarity and the insulator insulating an electrode of the active battery component of a second polarity from the battery housing as taught by Guen. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide an alternative structure of a pouch shaped battery in which reduces the number of components and lowers the internal resistance. When performing the described, the insulator film of Harayama et al. would inherently function to insulate the electrode of the active battery component of a second polarity from the battery housing due to its location and positioning between said components.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Sato et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20210036375 A1), and further in view of Honda (U.S. Pat. No. 20170309946 A1) and Yoshitake et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20120301759 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As described in Claim 1, Harayama et al. teaches the insulator (insulator film (10)) fixed (joined such as by adhesive) to inner surfaces (inner walls 30a) of the wide surfaces (36) (corresponding to a first lateral wall and a second lateral wall) of the battery housing (para. 43, Fig. 5) in which a portion of the insulator film would be fixed to an inner surface of the first lateral wall. Further, the insulator (10) can be joined to the battery housing (30) by an adhesive material (para. 43). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the adhesive material on the first lateral wall corresponding to a first portion.
[AltContent: textbox (Fig. 13 (Yoshitake et al.))]
PNG
media_image5.png
823
459
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Harayama et al. does not teach a second portion of the first lateral wall free of adhesive.
Yoshitake et al. teaches an insulation cover (27) comprising second portions (convex lateral frames (31)) in which are not in contact with the battery housing (case (4)) (Fig. 13, para. 62-66) forming a second portion. Yoshitake et al. teaches the configuration described providing an electric storage device with an improved resistance to vibration when used in a running vehicle (para. 83).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Harayama et al. to include a second portion in which is not in contact with the battery housing as described by Yoshitake et al. to provide an electric storage device with an improved resistance to vibration when used in a running vehicle. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to avoid applying adhesive to the second portion as described as the second portion of Yoshitake et al. is not in contact with the electrode body.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Sato et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20210036375 A1), and further in view of Honda (U.S. Pat. No. 20170309946 A1) and Kim (U.S. Pat. No. 10535846 B2).
Regarding Claim 11, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above.
[AltContent: textbox (Fig. 2 (Kim))]
PNG
media_image6.png
420
557
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Harayama et al. does not teach an air gap between the battery housing and the insulator with the air gap providing insulation between the battery housing and the active battery component.
Kim teaches an air gap (air insulation layer (142)) disposed between the battery housing (case (140)) and the insulator (insulation bag (160)). The air gap provides insulation between the battery housing and the active battery component (electrode assembly (110) (para. 38, Fig. 2). Kim teaches the configuration described can prevent or substantially prevent the electrode assembly 110 of the secondary battery 100 according to an embodiment of the present invention from being brought into contact with the inner wall of the case 140, thereby improving the stability and durability of the secondary battery (para. 38, Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Harayama et al. to include an air gap between the battery housing and the insulator with the air gap providing insulation between the battery housing and the active battery component as taught by Kim. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide additional insulation and space between the battery housing and the active battery component to improve the stability and durability of the secondary battery as taught by Kim.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harayama et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20160204393 A1) in view of Sato et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20210036375 A1), and further in view of Honda (U.S. Pat. No. 20170309946 A1) and Murashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20200411910 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Harayama et al. is modified by Sato et al. and Honda teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. As shown in annotated Figure 5, an end of the insulator (10) is fixed to the inner surface (30a) of the first lateral wall at a location a distance from an end of the first lateral wall in which the distance defines an exposed portion (area where insulator (10) is not present) of the first lateral wall; further, an end of the insulator (10) is fixed to the inner surface (30a) of the second lateral wall at a location a distance from an end of the second lateral wall in which the distance defines an exposed portion (area where insulator (10) is not present) of the second lateral wall (para. 43, Fig. 5). As shown in Figure 5, the length of insulator extends from a bottom surface to a top end surface approximately to a height of the electrode assembly; therefore, the distance between an end of the first and second lateral walls and the insulator is approximately the distance between the electrode (60) and an end surface of the first and second lateral walls (Fig. 5). This is further supported by Harayama et al. teaching the insulator functioning to separate and insulate the battery housing from the electrode (para. 6). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a top end of the insulator at a top end length of the electrode to avoid excessive use of material and reduce manufacturing costs caused by extending the insulator past the electrode.
[AltContent: textbox (Fig. 5 (Murashi et al.))]
PNG
media_image7.png
619
600
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Harayama et al. does not teach the distance of one to two millimeters as claimed.
Murashi et al. teaches a distance between an electrode (5) and the lid (2) (corresponding to an end surface of a first and second lateral wall) defined as a distance “A” as less than 2 mm (Fig. 5, para. 61-62). Murashi et al. further teaches the battery module configuration provides a vehicle excellent in vibration resistance (para. 80).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery of Harayama et al. to include a distance between an end of the battery housing (equivalent to an end of a first lateral wall and second lateral wall) and the electrode of less than 2 mm as taught by Murashi et al. When performing the described modification, it would be obvious to include the distance between the insulator and a top end of the battery housing (equivalent to end portions of the first and second lateral walls) approximately equal to less than 2 mm, similar to and overlapping the claimed range of one to two millimeters. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP § 2144.05, I). As Harayama et al. is silent to a specific distance between the end of the first and second lateral wall and the insulator forming an exposed potion, one of ordinary skill in the art would look to existing prior art for a suitable distance when reproducing the invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the teachings of Murashi et al. useful in providing a vehicle excellent in vibration resistance.
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 CHRISTINA RENEE DAULTON whose telephone number is (703)756-5413. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, ULA RUDDOCK can be reached at (571) 272-1481. 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.
/C.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729