DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/25/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 09/25/2025, has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 12 is new. Claims 1-12 are now pending in this application.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita (EP1202371A1) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 1,
Matsushita teaches a battery cell (illustratively Fig. 1, casing 1, electrode assembly 2) comprising:
an electrode assembly (illustratively Fig. 1, electrode assembly 2) including a plurality of electrode tabs (illustratively Fig. 1, negative and positive electrode terminals 7a and 10a);
an electrode lead to which the plurality of electrode tabs are connected (Fig. 6, negative and positive electrode leads 13 and 14);
a protective member (Fig. 6, wherein A-shaped cover covers a portion of leads 13/14 and thus protect them; [0104]) accommodating a welded portion (Fig. 6, where A shaped member accommodate welded portion where 10a and 7a contact 13 and 14; [0004]) to which the plurality of electrode tabs and the electrode lead are welded therein (Fig. 6, where A shaped member accommodate welded portion where 10a and 7a contact 13 and 14; [0004]);
and a case accommodating the electrode assembly and the protective member therein (illustratively Fig. 1, casing 1),
wherein the protective member (Fig. 6, A-shaped member) includes a first cover (Fig. 6, left side of A-shaped member) disposed on one side (Fig. 6, left side) of the welded portion (Fig. 6, near 7a/10a) and a second cover (Fig. 6, right side of A-shaped member) disposed on the other side (see Fig. 6) of the welded portion and coupled to the first cover (see Fig. 6 where the A shaped member is integrally formed and thus coupled at the top portion of the A);
wherein the first cover and second cover are coupled to each other (see Fig. 6 and above),
However, it is unclear as to whether the first cover (Fig. 6, left side of A-shaped member) and second cover (annotated Fig. 6, right side of A-shaped member) press the welded portion ([0026], “electrode fixing means”, [0026]/[0075], “abutment portion”, wherein the tapered abutment portion (see “outer accommodating portion” in annotated Fig. 6 which overlaps with 10a/7a where the welded portion is located) from both sides of the welded portion (wherein tapered abutment portion does not necessarily press the welded portion 10a/7a, see Fig. 21A illustratively) .
However, in an alternate embodiment, Matsushita teaches wherein the first cover and the second cover (Fig. 22, 69 on top and bottom, see also Fig. 24/25, 71/74 on top and bottom) press ([0101-0104], “fixing means” wherein “spring-like structure” and the geometry of spacers 71/74 clearly press on the welded portion) the welded portion (Fig. 22, joint between 7a and 13a/Fig. 24 contact portion near 10a/7a) from both sides of the welded portion (top and bottom sides). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the folded tab structure of Fig. 22, or the rigid geometry of the spacers 71/74 in Fig. 24/25, wherein spacers press the welded portion from both sides, as Matsushita teaches this configuration to provide better resiliency for the electrode leads and provides an improved fixing means for terminals 10/7a ([0100]-[0104]).
Regarding claim 2,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the protective member (Fig. 6, A-shaped member) includes an inner accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, inner accommodating portion) accommodating the plurality of electrode tabs (the negative and positive electrode terminals 7a, 10a”) disposed between the electrode assembly 2 and the welded portion (Fig. 6, where 7a/10a contact 13/14) and an outer accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, outer accommodating portion) accommodating the welded portion (annotated Fig. 6, wherein the outer accommodating portion accommodates where 7a/10a contacts 13/14).
Regarding claim 3,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the inner accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, inner accommodating portion with A-shape) has a cross-sectional area decreasing toward (wherein an A-shape has a decreasing cross-sectional area towards the tip) the outer accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, outer accommodating portion).
PNG
media_image1.png
752
659
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the first cover (annotated Fig. 6, first cover) includes a first outer cover (annotated Fig. 6, outer side of first cover) forming the outer accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, outer accommodating portion) and the second cover (annotated Fig. 6, second cover) includes a second outer cover (annotated Fig. 6, outer side of second cover) forming the outer accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, outer accommodating portion) but fails to teach an extension extending from the first outer cover toward the second cover and a protrusion protruding from the second outer cover and coupled to an extension. However, in another embodiment, Matsushita teaches an extension (Fig. 2, bottom extension accommodating 30) and a protrusion (Fig. 2, top protrusion accommodating 29). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the electrode abutting portion of the spacer, the bottom surface of the A, or illustratively Fig. 26B 77f, to be two pieces connected by locking portions within the extension and protrusion as Matsushita teaches the embodiment thereof as suitable in the art. A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including non-preferred embodiments (MPEP 2123.I.).
Regarding claim 5,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 4 (see rejection of claim 4 above), wherein the extension (Fig. 2, extension accommodating 30) extends from both sides of the first outer cover (annotated Fig. 6, wherein the bottom part of the A shape, and thus the extension, see rejection of claim 4 above, extends away from both the top and bottom side of first surface), and each of the extensions (Fig. 2, extension accommodating 30, see 112(b) rejection above) has a locking hole (Fig. 2, 30) into which the protrusion (Fig. 2, 29) is inserted (see [0067]).
Regarding claim 6,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above), wherein the protrusion 29 protrudes further in a direction away from the first cover (Fig. 2, 29 and annotated Fig. 6 wherein the bottom portion of the A protrudes away from the first cover, see rejection of claim 4 above).
Regarding claim 9,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the first cover includes a first outer cover forming the outer accommodating portion (see rejection of claim 2 above) and an extension extending from the first outer cover toward the second cover (see rejection of claim 4 above), the second cover includes a second outer cover forming the outer accommodating portion (see rejection of claim 2 above), and the extension includes a locking protrusion (Fig. 2, protrusion on 30; see [0067]) supporting the second outer cover (see rejection of claim 4 above), while coming into contact with a rear surface of the second outer cover [0060], when the first cover is coupled to the second cover (see Fig, 6, integrally formed A-shape).
Regarding claim 12,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the protective member (see annotated Fig. 6, A-shaped member) includes an outer accommodating portion (annotated Fig. 6, outer accommodating portion) including an accommodating space (see annotated Fig. 6, space 52/53 accommodating 7a/10a) for accommodating the welded portion (Fig. 6, portion where 7a and 10a contacts 13/14 and is welded [0004]), and a thickness of the accommodating space (Fig. 6, width of 53) is less than or equal to a thickness of the welded portion (wherein the width of 53 is less than the width of 7a and 10a, and thus the width of the welded portion, see [0004]).
Claims 7, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita (EP1202371A1) in view of Fang (TW201144977A) (refer to enclosed translation for citations).
Regarding claim 7,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above), wherein, when the first cover and the second cover are coupled to each other (see rejection of claim 1 above), but fails to teach the extension is elastically deformed while in contact with the protrusion and then is restored to an original state thereof when the protrusion is inserted into the locking hole.
However, Fang teaches an extension (Fig. 1, sides of cover 42 and 41; [0015]) is elastically deformed (Fig. 1, sides of cover 42 and 41, elastically deformed by external force at the time of installation; [0015]) while in contact with the protrusion (Fig. 3, plurality of hooks 423) and then is restored to an original state thereof when the protrusion is inserted into the locking hole (wherein, after the external force is applied and hooks 423 are locked into the case, the hooks are no longer being pushed by the case and thereby the extension is no longer elastically deformed; Fang, [0012]). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate an elastic locking mechanism, as taught by Fang, into the battery of Matsushita, wherein the extension is elastically deformed while in contact with the protrusion and then is restored to an original state thereof when the protrusion is inserted into the locking hole, such that a strong battery sealing with an extended lifespan is realized (Fang; [0005]).
Regarding claim 10,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above), but fails to teach wherein the first cover and the second cover are coupled to each other in a sliding manner.
Fang teaches wherein the first cover (Fig. 1, 41) and the second cover (Fig. 1, 42) are coupled to each other in a sliding manner ([0011], “sliding”). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate wherein the first cover and second cover are coupled to each other in a sliding manner, as a sliding sealing structure is taught by Fang to be an advantageous for sealing lifespan and waterproofing [0002-0005].
Regarding claim 11,
Matsushita teaches the battery cell of claim 10 (see rejection of claim 10 above), wherein the first cover includes a first outer cover forming the outer accommodating portion (see rejection of claim 2 above) and a rail protruding from an inner surface of the first outer cover (Fang Fig. 3, 412, wherein 412 protrudes from an inner surface of the first outer cover), the second cover includes a second outer cover forming the outer accommodating portion (Fang Fig. 1, 42, wherein 42 accommodates the electrode assembly 20) and a rail groove formed on an outer surface of the second outer cover (Fang Fig. 5, 421; [0012], the examiner notes that the term “outer surface” is a relative term depending on the perspective of the viewer) and the first cover and the second cover are slidably coupled to each other through the rail and the rail groove [0012].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that by contrast, referring to Fig. 4 of Matsushita (EP 1202371) below, a space is formed between Frame 19 of Matsushita and the joining portion, and there is no direct contact with the joining portion. However, this argument is moot as Fig. 4 is no longer relied upon for this limitation (see rejection of claim 1 above). Instead Figs. 22, 24/25 are relied upon for these features (see rejection of claim 1 above) wherein the electrode terminals are fixed and thus pressed by the abutment portion of the spacers, which overlaps with 10a/7a where the welded portion is located (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Applicant argues regarding the laminate sheet are moot in light of the updated rejection that no longer relies on the laminate sheet for any point of reference.
Applicant argues that all claims should be allowed based off allowable independent claims. However, the rejections on all claims have been sustained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US2024006693A1, relevant to a separately formed protective member 11 that does not cover the entire electrode assembly.
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 PAUL WYROUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-4806. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10am-5pm.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PAUL CHRISTIAN ST WYROUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights