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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 May 26, 2026, has been entered.
3. The Applicant's amendments filed on May 26, 2026, were received. Claims 1, 9 and 12 have been amended. Claims 6, 8, 11 and 15 have been cancelled. Claims 22-25 have been added as new. Therefore, Claims 1-5, 7, 9-10, 12-14 and 16-25 are pending in this office action.
4. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action issued on February 26, 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. Information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted May 26, 2026, has been received and considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. The rejection of Claims 1-3, 5-8, 11-12 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takeuchi et al. (US 2007/0231685 A1), has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 8-10 of the Remarks dated May 26, 2026.
7. Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 13, 16 and 19-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujiwara et al. (US 2009/0197160 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figures 6-7, a battery cell, comprising: an electrode assembly (10), including a cell body and an electrode tab, called positive and negative electrode current collector tabs (11, 12), provided to at least one of both sides of the cell body (paragraphs 0093-0094); a cell case, called a laminate battery case (25), configured to accommodate the electrode assembly (10) therein (paragraph 0090); an electrode lead, called positive and negative electrode current collector terminals (15, 16), drawn out of the cell case (25) by a predetermined length and connected to the electrode assembly (10) through the electrode tab (11, 12) (paragraph 0094); and a tab protection module, called a spacer (30), accommodated in the cell case (25) and configured to cover at least a part of the electrode tab (11, 12), wherein the tab protection module (30) is configured such that at least a part thereof is in close contact with the cell body (paragraph 0094; See Figures).
With regard to Claim 2, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figures 6-7, wherein a coupling portion, called an overlapped part (35), between the electrode tab (11, 12) and the electrode lead (15, 16) is located in an inner space of the tab protection module (30) (paragraph 0094; See Figures).
With regard to Claim 3, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figures 6-7, wherein a part of the electrode tab (11, 12) adjacent to the coupling portion (35) is at least partially bent (paragraph 0094; See Figures).
With regard to Claim 5, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figures 6-7, wherein the tab protection module (30) is configured to have a shape corresponding to an inner surface of the cell case (25) facing the tab protection module (30) (paragraph 0094; See Figures).
With regard to Claim 7, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figures 6-7, wherein the tab protection module (30) has an inherent slot through which the electrode lead (15, 16) passes, and the slot inherently has a greater height than the electrode lead so that it can pass through (paragraphs 0094-0095; See Figures).
With regard to Claim 7, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figures 7-9, wherein the tab protection module (30) includes: a first protection cap (30) provided to at least one side of the cell body and configured to at least partially cover an upper side of the electrode tab (11, 12); and a second protection cap (30) provided to at least one side of the cell body and connected to the first protection cap (30), the second protection cap (30) being configured to at least partially cover a lower side of the electrode tab (11, 12), wherein the first protection cap (30) and the second protection cap (30) are assembled with each other in an upper and lower direction of the electrode tab (11, 12) to at least partially surround the electrode tab (11, 12) (paragraphs 0094-0097; See Figures).
With regard to Claim 16, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figure 7, wherein the cell case (25) includes a bent portion (corner) in a region corresponding to the electrode tab (11, 12), and wherein the tab protection module (30) is configured to be in close contact with the bent portion (corner) (paragraphs 0094-0097; See Figure).
The recitation, "formed by bending in multiple stages in a region corresponding to the electrode tab", is considered a product-by-process limitation. Product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
With regard to Claim 19, Fujikawa et al. disclose a battery module, comprising at least one battery cell noted above (paragraph 0017).
With regard to Claim 20, Fujikawa et al. disclose a battery pack, comprising at least one battery module noted above (paragraph 0017).
With regard to Claim 21, Fujikawa et al. disclose a vehicle, comprising at least one battery pack noted above (paragraph 0133).
With regard to Claim 22, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figure 7, and the annotated figure below, wherein a slit is defined between the tab protection module (30) and the cell body (paragraphs 004-0097).
With regard to Claim 23, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figure 7, and the annotated figure below, wherein the tab protection module (30) includes a cap body and a cap wing, wherein the cap body at least partially covers the electrode tab (11,12), and wherein the cap wing abuts the cell body (paragraphs 0094-0097).
With regard to Claim 24, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figure 7, and the annotated figure below, wherein the cell body includes a planar surface being in close contact with the tab protection module (30) (paragraphs 0094-0097).
PNG
media_image1.png
211
292
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 25, Fujikawa et al. disclose in Figure 6, wherein the electrode tab (11, 12) has a width along a lateral dimension of the electrode assembly (10) that is smaller than a width of the cell body along the lateral dimension (paragraphs 0094-0097).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. The rejection of Claims 4 and 13-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeuchi et al. (US 2007/0231685 A1), as applied to Claims 1-3, 5-8, 11-12 and 16-21 above, has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 8-10 of the Remarks dated May 26, 2026.
9. Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiwara et al. (US 2009/0197160 A1), as applied to Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 13, 16 and 19-25 above.
With regard to Claim 4, Fujikawa et al. disclose the battery cell in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the at least partially bent part of the electrode tab is configured to be coupled to the electrode lead in a multiple-folded state. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the at least partially bent part of the electrode tab to be coupled to the electrode lead in a multiple-folded state, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 14, Fujikawa et al. disclose the battery cell in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the first protection cap and the second protection cap are assembled with each other through hook-coupling, any one of the first protection cap and the second protection cap has a fastening hook for the hook coupling, and the other of the first protection cap and the second protection cap has a hook groove into which the fastening hook is fitted. The recitation, "assembled with each other through hook-coupling, any one of the first protection cap and the second protection cap has a fastening hook for the hook-coupling, and the other of the first protection cap and the second protection cap has a hook groove into which the fastening hook is fitted", is considered a product-by-process limitation. Product-by process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. "Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
11. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art, Fujiwara et al. (US 2009/0197160 A1), do not teach or fairly suggest wherein the bent portion includes: a first inclined portion configured to face the electrode tab; and a second inclined portion configured to be in close contact with the tab protection module and having a greater inclination angle than the first inclined portion based on the electrode lead; and wherein the bent portion further includes a connection portion configured to connect the first inclined portion and the second inclined portion to each other and to be in close contact with the tab protection module in an upper and lower direction.
Reasons for Allowance
12. Claims 9-10 and 12 are allowed.
13. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the closest prior art, Takeuchi et al. (US 2007/0231685 A1) and Fujiwara et al. (US 2009/0197160 A1), teach a battery cell, comprising: an electrode assembly including a cell body and an electrode tab provided to at least one of both sides of the cell body; a cell case configured to accommodate the electrode assembly therein; an electrode lead drawn out of the cell case by a predetermined length and connected to the electrode assembly through the electrode tab; and a tab protection module accommodated in the cell case and configured to cover at least a part of the electrode tab, wherein the tab protection module is positioned apart from the electrode lead, wherein the tab protection module is configured to be coupled in close contact with an inner surface of the cell case facing the tab protection module. The closest prior art do not teach, fairly suggest or render obvious wherein the cell case includes a protruding portion formed to protrude toward the electrode assembly, and the tab protection module includes a recessed portion having a shape corresponding to the protruding portion and formed to be recessed from an outer surface of the tab protection module to accommodate at least a part of the protruding portion.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
14. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed May 26, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-3, 5-8, 11-12 and 16-21 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takeuchi et al. (US 2007/0231685 A1), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Fujiwara et al. (US 2009/0197160 A1).
Conclusion
15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARIE O APICELLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 5:00PM 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/KARIE O'NEILL APICELLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights