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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 09/30/25 is acknowledged. Accordingly, non-elected Claims 11-14 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the negative electrode being having a structure” should be written as “the negative electrode having a structure.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “wherein the a respective stepped structure” should be written as “wherein a respective stepped structure.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the respective uncoated portion." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the respective uncoated portion." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tajima (US 2017/0033327).
Regarding Claim 1, Tajima teaches a secondary battery (“pouch-shaped battery cell”) comprising an electrode assembly received in a flexible exterior case (“electrode assembly received in a pouch-shaped battery case”) (Abstract, [0060]-[0064], [0086]-[0097]). As illustrated in Figures 1A-1D (and the annotated Figures below), Tajima teaches that the electrode assembly comprises a positive electrode (comprising a positive current collector (12) having a positive electrode active material (18) thereon) and a negative electrode (comprising a negative current collector (14) having a negative electrode active material thereon), wherein each of said electrodes has a structure in which a length of the electrode in an overall “width direction” is less than a length of the electrode in an overall “length” direction ([0060]-[0064], [0086]-[0097]). While the electrode assembly is illustrated, for simplicity sake, as comprising one positive electrode and one negative electrode, Tajima explicitly teaches that the electrode assembly is structured such that a plurality of said positive electrodes and said negative electrodes each having said structure (“the electrode assembly comprises positive electrode and negative electrodes”) are received in the flexible exterior case ([0098]). As illustrated in Figures 1A-1D (and the annotated Figures below), each of the positive and negative electrodes has an “uncoated portion” which is not coated with an electrode active material (“electrode mixture”) and extends parallel to outer peripheries of the electrode in the overall width direction or outer peripheries of the electrode in the overall length direction, and has a “coated portion” which is coated with an electrode active material and is disposed at a remaining portion of the electrode excluding the uncoated portion ([0060]-[0064], [0086]-[0097]). As illustrated in Figures 3, 5A, 5C (and the annotated Figures below), a “stepped structure” is formed as result of thermocompression bonding at a part of the flexible exterior case adjacent to the uncoated portion, wherein the stepped structure is recessed inwards from adjacent portions of the flexible exterior case.
PNG
media_image1.png
404
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
525
708
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
483
532
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1A-1D and the annotated Figures (See Claim 1), Tajima teaches that positive lead terminals (16) (“positive electrode tabs”) and negative lead terminals (16) (“negative electrode tabs”) protrude from an outer periphery of the electrode assembly in the overall width direction ([0089]).
Regarding Claim 3, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1A-1D and the annotated Figures (See Claim 1), each of the positive and negative electrodes has a first coated portion and a second coated portion disposed at opposite sides of the uncoated portion. As illustrated in Figures 2A-2B, each of the positive and negative electrodes is folded at a respective uncoated portion ([0109]).
Regarding Claim 4, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 3, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1A-1D and the annotated Figures (See Claim 1), Tajima teaches that a positive lead terminal (16) (“positive electrode tab”) or a negative lead terminal (16) (“negative electrode tab”) protrudes from one of the first coated portion or the second coated portion of each electrode ([0089]).
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 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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima (US 2017/0033327), and further in view of Park et al. (US 2003/0099880).
Regarding Claim 5, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
Tajima does not explicitly teach that each of the positive and negative electrode has a respective insulating member overlying outer surfaces of a part of a respective uncoated portion and a portion of each respective coated portion, wherein each insulating member serves as a border portion extending between the respective uncoated portion and the respective coated portion.
However, Park teaches a pouch-type secondary battery (Abstract, [0040]). As illustrated in Figure 5, Park teaches that the battery comprises positive electrodes and negative electrodes, wherein each of said electrodes comprises a respective coated portion and a respective uncoated portion, wherein a respective short circuit preventing unit is positioned so as to overly outer surfaces of a part of said respective uncoated portion and a portion of each respective coated portion, wherein the short circuit preventing unit serves as a border portion extending between the respective uncoated and coated portion ([0041]-0048]). Park teaches that the short circuit preventing unit is an insulating tape (500) made of a polymer resin having high heat resistance ([0048]). Park teaches that the short circuit preventing unit helps prevent short circuits resulting from contact between positive and negative electrodes when, for example, a separator shrinks during battery operation ([0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to each positive and negative electrode of Tajima, ensure that a respective short circuit preventing unit (i.e. insulating tape) (“insulating member”), as taught by Park, overlies outer surfaces of a part of a respective uncoated portion and a portion of each respective coated portion, wherein each respective short circuit preventing unit serves as a border portion extending between the respective uncoated portion and the respective coated portion, given that the provision of such a short circuit preventing unit would help prevent short circuits resulting from contact between positive and negative electrodes when, for example, a separator shrinks during battery operation.
Regarding Claim 6, Tajima, as modified by Park, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 5, as previously described.
As previously described (See Claim 5), the short circuit preventing unit is an insulating tape (“insulation tape”).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima (US 2017/0033327), and further in view of Park et al. (WO 2019/045447, using the provided English machine translation for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 7, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2A-2B, Tajima teaches that each of the positive and negative electrodes is folded at a respective uncoated portion (i.e. a folding line is present, at least in part, each respective uncoated portion) ([0109]).
Tajima does not explicitly teach that a wrinkled folding line extends along each uncoated portion.
However, Park teaches a secondary battery ([4]). As illustrated in Figures 6-11, Park teaches that the secondary battery comprises a folding line (i.e. folded right side of Figures 6-11). As illustrated in Figures 6-11, Park teaches that a bending part (115) is formed so as to extend along at least a portion of the folding line, wherein the shape of the bending part (e.g. zig-zag, S-shape, stepped shape) is maintained by a shape maintaining portion (118) ([73], [80]). Park teaches that the provision of the bending part helps prevent further wrinkle-induced deterioration along the folding line ([80]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to Tajima, form a bending part (“wrinkled folding line”), as taught by Park, which extends along at least a portion of the folding line of each respective uncoated portion, given that the provision of such a bending part would help prevent further wrinkle-induced deterioration along said folding lines.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima (US 2017/0033327), and further in view of Chang et al. (KR 20050030295, using the provided English machine translation for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 8, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 3, 5A, 5C, and the annotated Figures (See Claim 1), the flexible exterior case comprises a first battery case (See, for example Figures 5A, 5C, wherein the flexible exterior case extends in an upward thickness direction relative to the illustrated orientation of the battery), wherein the stepped structure is formed at a portion of the first battery case, and wherein the stepped structure is attached, at least in part, to an uppermost electrode of the electrode assembly.
Tajima does not explicitly teach that the flexible exterior case comprises a second battery case.
However, Chang teaches a pouch-type secondary battery (Abstract). As illustrated in Figure 4, Chang teaches that the battery comprises an upper case (21, extending in an upward thickness direction relative to the illustrated orientation of the battery) and a lower case (22, extending in a downward thickness direction relative to the illustrated orientation of the battery) (Pages 5-6 of translation). Chang teaches that by providing both an upper case and a lower case which each extend in said upward/downward directions, then the capacity of the battery can increase because it can be produced without being limited in thickness in only one (e.g. upward) direction (Page 6 of translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to Tajima, form the flexible exterior case such that it comprises a second battery case (formed the same as the first battery case but extending in a downward direction opposite to the upward direction of the first battery case), as taught by Chang, given that the provision of such first and second battery cases would allow for capacity increases because the battery can be produced without being limited in thickness in only one direction.
Regarding Claim 9, Tajima, as modified by Chang, teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
As previously described (See Claim 8), the stepped structure is formed at a portion of the first battery case, and wherein the stepped structure is attached, at least in part, to an uppermost electrode of the electrode assembly. Furthermore, given that the second battery case is formed the same as the first battery case except for its downward extension direction (See Claim 8), a stepped structure would also be formed at a portion of the second battery case, wherein the stepped structure would be attached, at least in part, to a lowermost electrode of the electrode assembly.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tajima (US 2017/0033327), and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2017/0170437).
Regarding Claim 10, Tajima teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2A-2B, Tajima teaches that the outer peripheries of the flexible exterior case are sealed, and that flexible exterior case and the electrode assembly are folded ([0109]).
Tajima does not explicitly teach that a notch is formed in a sealed portion located at a portion of the flexible exterior case that is folded.
However, Lee teaches a pouch-type battery cell (Abstract). As illustrated in Figures 2-3, Lee teaches that the battery cell is sealed along its outer periphery, wherein recesses (210) are formed in outer sealed portions of the pouch-type battery case (250) ([0059]-[0062]). Lee teaches that the battery cell is bent about the recesses ([0062]). Lee teaches that the provision of the recesses help prevent wrinkles from being formed in the sealed parts of the battery case when the battery is bent ([0016]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art would, with respect to Tajima, form recesses (“notch”), as taught by Lee, in outer sealed portions of the flexible exterior case along its folding line, given that such recesses would help prevent wrinkles from being formed in the flexible exterior case when the battery is folded.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7595. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-3PM EST M-F.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 5712707871. 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.
/MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728