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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed October 9th 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-8 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendment to Claim 7 have overcome the Examiner’s objection previously set forth.
Applicant’s amendments to Claim 1 have overcome the 102 rejection of Claim 1 in view of Ko, and the 103 rejection of Claim 1 in view of Lee further in view of Ko. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kaga et al. US 2020/0014062 A1. New rejections follow.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko et al. US 2019/0363389 A1 in further in view of Kaga et al. US 2020/0014062 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Ko discloses a unit cell manufacturing apparatus (lamination apparatus) [0010] comprising:
An electrode reel (Item 111 Figure 1) that unwinds an electrode sheet (Item 11 Figure 1) [0038]
Wherein the electrode sheet is configured to be a plurality of electrodes
A separator reel (Item 112 Figure 1) that unwinds a separator sheet (Item 12 Figure 1)
Wherein the separator is configured to be stacked with the electrodes
This is further illustrated in Ko Annotated Figure 1:
PNG
media_image1.png
407
740
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ko Annotated Figure 1
Ko further discloses that the stack is formed by stacking the plurality of electrodes with the separator sheet (shown as Item 10 in Figure 1) while the plurality of electrodes are spaced apart in a longitudinal direction of the separator, as illustrated in Annotated Figure 1 above.
Ko further discloses a sealer (support member) is provided on the top and bottom of the stacked electrodes (Figure 1 Item 120) [0036]. Ko discloses that the apparatus further comprises a heating member and a rolling member (Figure 1 Items 130 & 150, respectively), wherein the heating member heats the electrode assembly [0049] and the rolling member presses the support member and the electrode assembly [0057] such that the electrodes and separators are bonded to each other [0057]. Thus, Ko discloses that the sealer is configured to press to stack of the electrodes and separators, and applies heat and pressure to the edges of the electrode assembly.
However, Ko fails to disclose that the sealer is configured to apply heat and pressure only to corners of the electrodes or only to corners and edges of the electrodes.
Kaga discloses a battery cell sheet assembly apparatus [Abstract] similar to that of Ko (see Figure 1). Kaga further discloses a sealer (heat seal unit Figure 1 Item 111) [0048] that has a frame-like shape (as shown in Figure 1) and seals the outer periphery of the electrode sheet assembly by applying heat and pressure (heat seal unit heats and pressurizes the sealing portion around the outer periphery of the electrode sheet assembly) [0052-0053].
Kaga discloses that the apparatus described above provides an electrode sheet for a battery with no decrease in battery performance [0014].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the sealer of Kaga in the apparatus of Ko to provide an electrode sheet for a battery with no decrease in battery performance. Thus modified Ko discloses a sealer that applies heat and pressure to only the corners and edges of the electrode.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Ko discloses that the sealer (Kaga’s heat seal unit) is a rectangular frame shape (see Kaga Figure 1) that comprises a first body and a second body extending from the first body in a longitudinal direction of the second body that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the separator sheet, as shown in Kaga Annotated Figure 1 below.
PNG
media_image2.png
367
804
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kaga Annotated Figure 1
Regarding Claim 4, Ko discloses a laminator (transfer member Figure 1 Item 110) that is configured to laminate the stack (laminates electrodes and separators) [0039].
Regarding Claim 7, as shown in Annotated Figure 1 below, Ko discloses a center electrode reel that unwinds to create a plurality of center electrodes formed by cutting, an upper separator reel that unwinds to create an upper separator sheet that stacks on the upper surface of the center electrode, and a lower separator reel that unwinds to create a lower separator sheet that stacks on the lower surface of the center electrode:
PNG
media_image3.png
455
746
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Ko Annotated Figure 1
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko and Kaga as applied to Claim 2 above, and in further view of Kim et al. KR 2018/0028714 A (herein referred to as Kim ‘714). Citations to Kim ‘714 are mapped to the English machine translation provided.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Ko is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 2, however is silent as to the sealer comprising a first protrusion and a second protrusion as recited in the claim.
Kim ‘714 discloses a pair of sealing blocks for sealing the outer periphery of an electrode assembly [0046], similar to that of modified Ko, wherein the sealing blocks comprise sealing protrusions that extend from a surface of the sealing block and that are elongated in the longitudinal direction of the sealing blocks [0048-0049], see Kim ‘714 Annotated Figures 1 & 2:
PNG
media_image4.png
318
858
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kim ‘714 Annotated Figures 1 & 2
Kim ‘714 discloses that a sealing apparatus comprising protrusions such as this prevent wrinkles in the sealing of the electrode assembly which can cause issues in the manufacturing of a battery [0022].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the sealing protrusions of Kim ‘714 on the sealer of modified Ko, as modified by Kaga’s sealer, to provide a sealing apparatus that prevents wrinkles when sealing an electrode assembly and thereby prevents issues in manufacturing a battery.
Thus, as shown below in Modified Ko Annotated Figure 1, modified Ko discloses that the sealer has a first protrusion protruding downward from a lower surface of the first body and elongated in a longitudinal direction of the first body parallel to the longitudinal direction of the separator sheet, and a second protrusion protruding downward from a lower surface of the second body and elongated in the longitudinal direction of the second body:
PNG
media_image5.png
647
961
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Modified Ki Annotated Figure 1
Claims 5 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko and Kaga as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Ogawa et al US 2017/0263970 A1.
Regarding Claim 5, Ko discloses that the apparatus comprises a laminator (transfer member) and a heater (heating member Figure 1 Item 130) that heats the electrode assembly and a press (rolling member) that presses the electrode assembly [0039]. Ko fails to disclose that the laminator specifically comprises a heater configured to apply heat and pressure to the entire surface of the stack.
Ogawa discloses an apparatus for laminating a secondary battery [Abstract] that comprises a laminating member (rollers R2 & R3 Figure 1) that applies pressure to the electrode assembly [0046] as well as heats the electrode assembly [0046]. Ogawa discloses that the rollers R2 & R3 can be one unified body [0044]. Thus, Ogawa discloses a laminator (rollers R2 & R3) that heats and applies pressure to the entire surface of the stack.
Ogawa discloses that a roller that both heats and applies pressure to the electrode assembly enables softening of the materials to have sufficient sealing of the assembly when pressure is applied [0047], which reduces the loss of raw materials due to overflow of electrolyte during pressing [0049].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to replace the transfer member of Ko with the rollers of Ogawa to achieve a laminator that heats and applies pressure to the electrode assembly to sufficiently seal the electrode assembly and reduce the loss of raw materials during assembly.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Ko discloses that the laminator is a heating roller (Ogawa discloses that the heated pressing members R2 & R3 are rollers [0046]) that applies heat and pressure while rotating.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko and Kaga as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Kim et al US 2014/0363729 A1 (herein referred to as Kim ‘729).
Regarding Claim 8, Ko is relied upon for the reasons given above in addressing Claim 7. In addition Ko further discloses an upper electrode reel that unwinds an upper electrode sheet to create an upper electrode that is stacked on the upper surface of the upper separator sheet, as shown in Ko Annotated Figure 1.
PNG
media_image6.png
480
747
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Ko Annotated Figure 1
Ko fails to specifically disclose a lower electrode reel that unwinds a lower electrode sheet to create lower electrodes, that stack on the lower surface of the lower separator.
Kim ‘729 discloses a laminated cell structure comprising alternating layers of anodes, cathodes, and separators, wherein the cathode has one more layer than the anode or the anode has one more layer than that cathode [0015], thus Kim ‘729 discloses a laminated cell structure with a center electrode (one of the cathode or the anode), and upper electrode (the other of the anode or the cathode), and a lower electrode (the other of the anode or the cathode).
Kim ‘729 discloses that a battery with this configuration has improved stability [0025-0027].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate the suggested layering structure of Kim ‘729 in the apparatus of Ko to provide a lower electrode to achieve a battery with improved stability.
Thus, modified Ko discloses a lower electrode stacked on the lower surface of the lower separator.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground 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.
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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA E GOULD whose telephone number is (571)270-1088. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-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, Jeffrey T. Barton can be reached on (571) 272-1307. 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.
/A.E.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/JEFFREY T BARTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1726 7 January 2026