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 .
This is a final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 04/02/2026. Claims 1 and 2 are currently amended. Claims 3-5 are newly added. Claims 1-5 are pending review in this action. The previous 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to Claim 1. New grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendments are presented below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1). For clarity, the examiner highlights that Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1) is different from Kohira et al. (US 2017/0110699 A1) which was relied upon as prior art in the previous office action (Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026).
The examiner notes that although Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1) shares a common Applicant with the instant application, it qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as it was published on 03/01/2018 which is before the effective filing date of the instant application (03/16/2020).
Regarding Claim 1, Kohira discloses a cylindrical battery (nonaqueous electrolyte secondary battery, 10) comprising: an electrode assembly (18) in which a positive electrode (positive electrode plate, 15) and a negative electrode (negative electrode plate, 16) are wound with a separator (17) interposed between the positive electrode (positive electrode plate, 15) and the negative electrode (negative electrode plate, 16), an electrolyte (electrolytic solution), and a bottomed cylindrical exterior housing can (22) that houses the electrode assembly (18) and the electrolyte (electrolytic solution) (Figure 1, [0025, 0036]). Kohira further discloses a sealing assembly (sealing unit, 11) that seals an opening of the exterior housing can (22) (Figure 1, [0025]). Kohira further discloses that the sealing assembly (sealing unit, 11) has a rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) in which an annular thin part (sloping region, 12a) is formed, and an annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14), wherein the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) includes a vent part (vent hole, 13b) surrounded by the annular thin part (sloping region, 12a) (Figures 1 and 2, [0026-0028]). Kohira further discloses that the vent part (vent hole, 13b) includes an engaging part (see annotated Figure 2 below) that extends toward an outer side in a radial direction from a location on an electrode assembly (18) side of the annular thin part (sloping region, 12a), the annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14) is disposed between an inner surface (i.e., lower surface) of the annular thin part (sloping region, 12a) and an outer surface (i.e., upper surface) of the engaging part (see annotated Figure 2 below) (Figure 2, [0026]). Kohira further discloses that an outer surface (i.e., upper surface) of the annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14) is disposed to face the inner surface (i.e., lower surface) of the annular thin part (sloping region, 12a), and the engaging part (see annotated Figure 2 below) extends beneath at least a radially inner portion of an inner surface (i.e., lower surface) of the annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14), the inner surface (i.e., lower surface) facing the electrode assembly (18) (Figure 2, [0026]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
401
807
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2 (Kohira US 2018/0062124 A1)
Regarding Claim 2, Kohira further discloses that a tip position (see annotated Figure 2 above) of the engaging part (see annotated Figure 2 above) is located on the outer side of the vent part (vent hole, 13b) in the radial direction of the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) with respect to the annular thin part (sloping region, 12a) (Figure 2). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
Regarding Claim 3, Kohira further discloses that the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) further includes a flange part (see annotated Figure 2 above) formed on an outer side of the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) in the radial direction of the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) with respect to the annular thin part (sloping region, 12a) (Figure 2). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
Regarding Claim 4, Kohira further discloses that the flange part (see annotated Figure 2 above) has a step face (formed with outer peripheral projection, 12c) at an inner peripheral side of a bottom face of the flange part (see annotated Figure 2 above) (Figure 2, [0028]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1), as applied to Claim 4 above.
The examiner notes that although Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1) shares a common Applicant with the instant application, it qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as it was published on 03/01/2018 which is before the effective filing date of the instant application (03/16/2020).
In Regards to Claim 5 (Dependent Upon Claim 4):
Kohira discloses the cylindrical battery according to Claim 4 as set forth above.
Kohira does not explicitly disclose that the step face (formed with outer peripheral projection, 12c) is configured to suppress gas venting from between an outer face (in the radial direction) of the annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14) and the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13). However, Kohira discloses that the outer peripheral projection (12c) which helps form the step face (formed with outer peripheral projection, 12c) allows the metal plate (13) of the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) to be fitted via the annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14) (Figure 2, [0028]). Kohira further discloses that the sealing assembly (sealing unit, 11) seals the opening end of the bottomed cylindrical exterior housing can (22) (Figure 1, [0025]).
The examiner notes that the claim limitation requiring that the step face is configured to suppress gas venting from between an outer face of the annular insulating plate and the rupture disk is a functional limitation that does not appear to provide any additional structure to the claimed cylindrical battery that would distinguish over Kohira since Kohira discloses that the flange part (see annotated Figure 2 above) has a step face (formed with outer peripheral projection, 12c) at an inner peripheral side of a bottom face of the flange part (see annotated Figure 2 above) which is a structure that is substantially the same as the claimed flange part and step face of the instant invention, thus the step face of Kohira would be expected to be fully capable of suppressing gas venting from between an outer face of the annular insulating plate (annular insulating member, 14) and the rupture disk (valve member, 12, and metal plate, 13) (MPEP 2114). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 04/02/2026, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1). For clarity, the examiner highlights that Kohira et al. (US 2018/0062124 A1) is different from Kohira et al. (US 2017/0110699 A1) which was relied upon as prior art in the previous office action (Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026).
The examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s comments in the Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks (submitted on 04/02/2026) regarding the Kohira et al. (US 2017/0110699 A1) reference relied upon in the previous office action and which was disclosed by the Applicant on the IDS dated 09/07/2022. The examiner notes that all of the documents listed on the IDS dated 09/07/2022, including Kohira et al. (US 2017/0110699 A1), was considered by the examiner on 02/03/2025 as noted in the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/07/2025. At the time of the mailing of the Non-Final Rejection (dated 02/07/2025), Isozaki et al. (US 2003/0031919 A1) appeared to be the prior art closest to the instant claim set. After the mailing of the Non-Final Rejection (dated 02/07/2025) Independent Claim 1 was amended (see claim set dated 10/10/2025), and following further search and consideration Kohira et al. (US 2017/0110699 A1) appeared to be the prior art closest to the amended claim set and was thus relied upon to reject the claim in the Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026.
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 EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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.
/E.E.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights