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
The amendment filed February 17, 2026 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1, 3-11, 13-20 are pending with claims 1 and 11 amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to unexpected results have been considered but are not convincing.
Applicant argued there are two conditions (T2-Z)/2<R<T1/2+0.3 and/or 0.3<D<0. Applicant further noted that “If any one of these conditions is satisfied, the good safety test results are achieved.”. The claims however require both of these conditions using “and” to denote the requirement. There is no “or” option. For this reason it is difficult to ascertain if the instant invention demonstrates surprising and unexpected results given the data discussed previously. Again the data is not commensurate in scope with the claims of record.
Specifically, Applicant has not made an effective argument as to why the relationships (T2−Z)/2≤R≤T1/2+0.3 and 0.3<D<0.9 are essential to the battery ‘passing’ the drop and tumbling tests as showcased in Table 1. According to Embodiment 10, the (T2−Z)/2≤R≤T1/2+0.3 relationship was not satisfied yet the battery was able to pass all of the safety tests. In addition, embodiments 1-3 did not satisfy the conditions of relationship 0.3<D<0.9 yet, the battery was able to pass all of the safety tests performed. The relationship 0<T2−T1<0.2 was satisfied within Embodiments 1-10 and as a result the battery passed all safety tests, but the same relationship was satisfied within Comparative Embodiment 1, yet the battery did not pass any safety tests. The applicant has not yet communicated the criticality of claimed dimensional values such as T1, T2, D, and R due to their inability to provide data that supports why the dimensional values within the battery helps pass the safety tests. The significance of the dimensional values listed must be supported by data and/or in order to be effective in overcoming the rejections of record.
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, 6-11, 13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kono (JP2001325925A) in further view of Satoh (US20020055047A1) and Kim (US20110091764A1).
As to claims 1 and 11, Kono teaches a sealed battery (battery cell) in which a power generating element (electrode assembly) is housed and sealed (par. [0001]).
Kono discloses, a housing 14 accommodating the power generating element assembly 11; wherein the housing 14 comprises:
a top and bottom of the sealed battery package equivalent to a first and second surface (see figure below), wherein the distance between the top and bottom of the sealed battery in the thickness direction is represented by H2 mm;
a fusion edge 17C (equivalent to a first lateral edge) with an arc shape connected to the bottom of the sealed battery (par. [0018]),
a side (equivalent to a third surface) connected to the fusion edge (fig. 1A - left & right sides of sealed battery package 14) and configured to enclose at least a part of a fusion edge of the power generating element assembly (par. [0016]). The side/third surface labeled in the image below comprises
a first edge B1 and a second edge B2 opposite each other along the H1 direction, the first edge B1 is connected the bottom/lowest portion of the fusion edge 17C (first lateral edge) as evident in fig. 1B; and
a second fusion edge 17A (second lateral edge) comprising a first base point 18 and a second base point 19, wherein the fusion margins are folded back at a predetermined position along the width direction from the edge, using as a first base point, and then folded back at a position where the fusion resin layers are separated using as a second base point, so as to be in close contact with the outer surface of the sealed battery package, (par. [0019]). The second base point (equivalent to ending edge) is connected to the edge (see figure below). Kono further teaches the size of the sealed battery package can be any arbitrary dimension (par. [0026]).
Kono fails to disclose a thickness of the battery cell/power generating element, a radius of the fusion edge, and a distance between the second edge of the third surface.
Satoh teaches a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, comprising a case 1 having a wall thickness not larger than 0.3 mm (par. [0060]) to obtain a high weight energy density and a high-volume energy density (par. [0159]).
Further modified Kono discloses a gap generated near the cross-sectional base ends of the fusion margins inside the sealed battery package. Kono fails to disclose distance between the second lateral edge and the electrode assembly close to the second lateral edge.
Satoh teaches a nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, comprising a case 1 having a wall thickness not larger than 0.3 mm (par. [0060]) to obtain a high weight energy density and a high-volume energy density (par. [0159]). The seal point is approximately 2x the wall thickness in terms of distance. Resulting in a seal point distance from the electrode assembly to be approximately 0.6 mm. The approximate distance falls within the limitations set.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the wall thickness/distance dimension of Satoh's invention to Kono's fusion margin gaps to obtain a high weight energy density and a high-volume energy density (par. [0159]).
Kim teaches a pouch-type secondary battery having a structure that is impact resistant (par. [0009]. Kim teaches sealing portions including wing portions that are bent and rounded to form air cushions that reduce damage due to impact to the battery (par. [0049] - [0050]). These rounded portions have a curvature radius that is set to be smaller than that of the edges to form the air cushions. It is known for one of ordinary skill to adjust the radius of the lateral edge R to satisfy the requirements/limitations of (T2-Z)/2≤R≤T1/2+0.3 because Kim discloses rounded wing portions (R) to form air cushions that reduce damage due to impact to the battery (par. [0049] - [0050]).
Kono teaches the overall thickness of the sealed battery (T2) as H2. Satoh and Kono combined teach the thickness of an electrode assembly by subtracting Kono's H2 measurement of the maximum thickness of the sealed battery by Satoh's defined thickness for a laminate film (housing) of a pouch battery (T1) wherein Kono iterates that the size of the sealed battery package can be any arbitrary dimension (par. [0026]). Kono further teaches the height of the bent fusion margin represented by H1 (Z).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the thickness dimension of the housing taught by Satoh and the curvature property of Kim's invention to Kono's housing and fusion margins to produce a cell (par. [0097]) and reduce damage due to impact (par. [0050]).
In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). Moreover, "The normal desire of scientists or artisans to improve upon what is already generally known provides the motivation to determine where in a disclosed set of percentage ranges is the optimum combination of percentages." In re Peterson, 315 F.3d at 1330, 65 USPQ2d at 1382. In this case, the references teach that the wall thickness of the pouch, the curvature property can be seen as result effective variables to be adjusted to obtain a high weight energy density and a high-volume energy density battery and provide cushioning to the battery. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to adjust the curvature property and wall thickness because it has been held by the courts that optimization of a results effective variable is not novel. In re Boesch, 617 F2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPА 1980).
As to claims 3 and 13, modified Kono teaches the height of the sealed battery H2 and the height of the bent fusion margin H1 wherein the height of the sealed battery H2 is greater than the height of the bent fusion margin (H1< H2) which is the equivalent to Z ≤H.
As to claims 6 and 16, modified Kono teaches a laminate film casing with a thickness between 1 µm and 1 mm which modifies the possible dimensions of H2. T2 can be defined as the maximum thickness of the sealed battery H2. T1 is defined as H2 minus the thickness of the laminate film casing to reveal the thickness of the electrode assembly. The modified thickness of H2 follows the restrictions of the limitation presented in claims 6 and 16.
As to claims 7 and 17, modified Kono discloses the fusion margin is bent at a first base point and a second base point into a generally S-shaped cross section (par. [0025]). The fusion margin is folded flush to the wall of the sealed battery 10.
As to claims 8 and 18, modified Kono discloses the power generating element is of a wound type in which a positive electrode and a negative electrode, which are stacked with a separator interposed therebetween (par. [0016]).
As to claims 9 and 19, modified Kono discloses a sealed battery having a package for a sealed battery which houses a flat-shaped power generating element in which positive and negative electrodes are stacked with an electrolyte layer interposed therebetween (par. [0009]).
As to claims 10 and 20, modified Kono discloses a flat-shaped power generating element 11 (par. [0009]) wherein the sealed battery package is formed from a metal resin composite film laminated with a metal foil core material made of aluminum foil (par. [0017]) and the power generating element is of a wound type (par. [0016]).
Claims 4-5, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kono
(JP2001325925A), Satoh (US20020055047A1), and Kim (US20110091764A1) as applied to claims above
and further in view of Kawai (US20190273237A1).
As to claims 4-5 and 14-15, modified Kono teaches Z as H1 and H2 as T2 and H. Kono further teaches the fusion margins 17A, 17C have a bent height H1 that is between half and one-half the maximum thickness H2 of the sealed battery (par. [0019]). Kono's teachings permit H1 to be less than H2 by 0.5- 1.5x the dimension, satisfying the limitation presented in claims 4 and 14. Kawai further teaches a laminate film casing with a thickness between 1 µm and 1 mm to form a flexible pouch par. ([0103]). The thickness range of Kawai's laminate film casing minus modified Kono's H2 thickness will provide a sealed battery thickness within the limitation listed in claims 5 and 15.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the thickness range of Kawai's invention to modified Kono's laminate film casing to form a flexible pouch par. ([0103]) and ultimately provide a dimension that satisfies 0.2H2<H1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARBARA GILLIAM whose telephone number is (571)272-1330. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM - 4:00 PM& 2nd Friday 7:00 AM - 3:00 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, Srilakshmi Kumar can be reached at 571-272-7769. 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.
BARBARA L GILLIAM
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/BARBARA L GILLIAM/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1727