DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the March 2nd, 2026 arguments and remarks (“Remarks”). The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office 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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 3-10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as described below:
Claims 1, 3-4 and 10 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (C.N. Pat. No. 103620852 A) in view of Cho et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20190189976 A1). The rejections are maintained.
Claims 5-9 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (C.N. Pat. No. 103620852 A) in view of Cho et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20190189976 A1) and further in view of Jung et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 2015180082 A1). The rejections are maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 2nd, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive:
Regarding Claim 1, applicant argues that secondary reference Cho et al. fails to teach every claim element, specifically "independent electrodes ... disposed in a plurality of second spaces formed by the second folding of the separator sheet" and that "each of the plurality of first spaces and the plurality of second spaces has an open side and a closed side, and wherein the respective open and closed sides of the plurality of first spaces are on opposite sides of the electrode assembly relative to the respective open and closed sides of the plurality of second spaces" (see pg. 3 of the “Remarks”). Applicant solely attacks secondary reference Cho et al. for not teaching said elements rather than addressing the combination of references as relied upon (Kwon et al. in view of Cho et al.); in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Additionally, "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007). "[I]n many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle." Id. at 420, 82 USPQ2d 1397. Office personnel may also take into account "the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ" Id. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. (see MPEP 2141.03.I).
Kwon et al. discloses an electrode assembly comprising portions analogous to first spaces, second spaces formed by a second folding of a separator sheet, open sides, and closed sides, in which the respective open and closes sides of the first spaces are on opposite sides with respect to the open and closed sides of the second spaces (see annotated Fig. 5 of Kwon et al. below). Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. to include independent electrodes and unit cells (comprising a first electrode, second electrode, and separator) alternately arranged on opposing surfaces of a separator sheet. Cho et al. is not relied upon to teach said first spaces, second spaces, open sides, or closed sides. The independent electrodes of Cho et al. are positioned on alternating surfaces of a separator film similar to the claimed invention; the separator sheet of Cho et al. clearly forms distinct spaces in which a space comprising a plurality of electrodes forming an analogous unit cell (annotated as Space A), while another space includes independent electrodes (annotated as Space B) as shown in annotated Figure 1 of Cho et al. included in the rejection below.
Based on the similarities between the electrode structures of Kwon et al. and Cho et al., when performing the proposed modification, it is within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art to arrange the unit cells and independent electrodes alternately in the first and second spaces of Kwon et al., respectively. Specifically, a skilled artisan would correspond the first space of Kwon et al. to the annotated Space A of Cho et al. as both spaces comprise at least one first electrode, second electrode, and separator interposed there between; further, disposing the independent electrodes shown in annotated Space B of Cho et al. in the second spaces of Kwon et al. would be necessary to achieve the goal of the modification in which is an alternating arrangement on opposing surfaces of a separator.
In reference to applicant’s arguments regarding a lack of motivation (see pg. 4 of the “Remarks”), Kwon et al. teaches that the electrode assembly is flexibly arranged to enhance space utilization in which the overall thickness or volume of the device is reduced to achieve an ultra-thin design (para. 191); therefore, modifying Kwon et al. by Cho et al. to include independent electrodes disposed alternately rather than multiple stacked electrodes (unit cells) would further achieve Kwon’s goal by reducing the size of the assembly.
Further, applicant argues that the conclusion of obviousness is based on impermissible hindsight reconstruction (see pg. 4 of the “Remarks”). In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In this case, each and every element of the claimed invention is taught and/or suggested by the combination of Kwon et al. and Cho et al. in consideration of the creative steps that a skilled artisan would employ. As described above and recited below for clarity, Kwon et al. discloses an electrode assembly comprising first spaces, second spaces, open sides, and closed sides (see annotated Fig. 5 of Kwon et al. below). The electrode assembly configuration of Cho et al. comprises independent electrodes alternately attached to opposing surfaces of a separator forming a distinct Space A and Space B (Fig. 1,3; para 39).
Therefore, the electrode assembly of Kwon et al. is modified to include independent electrodes having a first polarity arranged in which the unit cells and independent electrodes are alternately attached on opposing surfaces (one surface and another surface) of the separator sheet as taught by Cho et al. A skilled artisan would correspond the first space of Kwon et al. to the annotated Space A of Cho et al. as both spaces comprise at least one first electrode, second electrode, and separator interposed there between. Further, disposing the independent electrodes shown in annotated Space B of Cho et al. in the second spaces of Kwon et al. would be necessary to achieve the goal of the modification in which is an alternating arrangement on opposing surfaces of a separator.
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are deemed unpersuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Cited Prior Art
Previously Cited Kwon et al. (C.N. Pat. No. 103620852 A) (“Kwon et al.”).
Previously Cited Jung et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20150180082 A1) (“Jung et al.”).
Previously Cited Cho et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20190189976 A1) (“Cho et al.”).
Claim Interpretation
Figure 1 of applicant’s originally filed drawings is annotated and provided below to show the Examiners interpretation of the closed side and open side of the first and second spaces, in view of the amendment and as defined in para. 39 of the originally filed specification.
PNG
media_image1.png
418
779
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Figures included in previous Office Actions have been omitted.
[AltContent: textbox (Kwon et al. (Fig. 5))]
PNG
media_image2.png
662
994
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 1, 3-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (C.N. Pat. No. 103620852 A) in view of Cho et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20190189976 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kwon et al. teaches an electrode assembly comprising a separator sheet (single sheet separation membrane (70)) in which includes a first folding to one side (in the left direction) and a second folding folded to the other side (in a right direction); the first folding and second folding are repeated at certain intervals forming separators (para. 169, Fig. 5). The electrode assembly includes unit cells (501-507) (para. 170, Fig. 5) formed by stacking a plurality of electrodes (positive electrode (40), negative electrodes (50)) and separators (60) disposed there between (para. 163, Fig. 5). As indicated in annotated Figure 5, the folding of the separator sheet create spaces analogous to first and second spaces, in which the plurality of the stacked electrodes and separators are disposed there between (Fig. 5).
Further, Kwon et al. teaches the unit cells including an outer electrode stacked on the two outermost surfaces and an inner electrode disposed between the outer electrodes with the two outer electrodes having the same polarity (second polarity) (para. 81, Fig. 5). The described unit cell structure can be considered a bi-cell as known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Kwon et al. teaches each of the plurality of first spaces and the plurality of second spaces has an open side and a closed side, and wherein the respective open and closed sides of the plurality of first spaces are on opposite sides of the electrode assembly relative to the respective open and closed sides of the plurality of second spaces (see annotated Figure 5); the elongated separator sheet (70) indicated by the darker solid line of Fig. 5 forms equivalent first spaces and second spaces (para. 168-170, Fig. 5). As shown, the elongated separator sheet is formed in a zig-zag manner wherein one side of the unit cell is open and the opposite side is closed by the separator sheet.
PNG
media_image3.png
524
697
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (Cho et al. (Fig. 1))][AltContent: textbox (Cho et al. (Fig. 3))]
PNG
media_image4.png
202
353
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kwon et al. does not teach independent electrodes disposed in the second spaces and wherein the unit cells and the independent electrodes are alternately attached on one surface and another surface of the separator sheet.
Cho et al. teaches second (independent) electrodes (21) disposed between unit cells (comprising a first electrode, second electrode, and separator) as shown in annotated Figure 1 (Fig. 1,3; para. 42-43). The independent electrodes are positive electrodes (para. 43) having a first polarity as known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Cho et al. teaches a structure in which the unit cells (disposed in annotated Space A) and independent electrodes (disposed in annotated Space B) are attached to opposing surfaces of a sheet-like separator (Fig. 1,3; para. 39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode assembly of Kwon et al. to include independent electrodes having a first polarity arranged in which the unit cells and independent electrodes are alternately attached on opposing surfaces (one surface and another surface) of the separator sheet as taught by Cho et al. When performing the described modification, it is within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art to correspond the first space of Kwon et al. to the annotated Space A of Cho et al. as both spaces comprise at least one first electrode, second electrode, and separator interposed there between. Further, disposing the independent electrodes shown in annotated Space B of Cho et al. in the second spaces of Kwon et al. would be necessary to achieve the goal of the modification in which is an alternating arrangement on opposing surfaces of a separator.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification to provide an electrode assembly capable of implementing high capacity by its simple structure (Cho et al., para. 10, 97). Additionally, Kwon et al. teaches that the electrode assembly is flexibly arranged to enhance space utilization and reduce the overall thickness or volume of the device to achieve an ultra-thin design (para. 191) in which modifying by Cho to include independent electrodes rather than unit cells disposed alternately would further achieve Kwon’s goal by reducing the size of the electrode assembly.
Regarding Claim 3, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Kwon et al. teaches each unit cell comprising one inner electrode (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 4, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 3 above.
Kwon et al. does not teach the inner electrode having the same first polarity as the independent electrode.
Cho et al. teaches (unit cells) comprising an inner positive electrode (22) and an independent positive electrode (21) having the same first polarity as known to one of ordinary skill in the art (Fig. 1,3; para. 39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode assembly of Kwon et al. to include the inner electrode having the same first polarity as the independent electrode as taught by Cho et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to perform the described modification as to provide an electrode assembly capable of implementing high capacity (para. 10) and smooth lithium movement (para. 72) as described by Cho et al.
Regarding Claim 10, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Kwon et al. teaches a secondary battery comprising an electrode assembly (para. 3). The electrode assembly is contained in a battery case in which is configured to accommodate the electrode assembly (para. 4).
Claims 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (C.N. Pat. No. 103620852 A) in view of Cho et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 20190189976 A1) and further in view of Jung et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 2015180082 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 1 above.
Kwon et al. does not teach a plurality of inner electrodes formed in the electrode assembly.
Jung et al. teaches a unit cell (200) including a plurality of inner electrodes as shown in the annotated Figure 4 (para. 47, Fig. 4 (b)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode assembly of Kwon et al. to include a plurality of inner electrodes as taught by Jung et al. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the teachings of Jung et al. useful in developing an electrode assembly having improved productivity and position alignment between electrodes (Jung et al., para. 6).
Regarding Claim 6, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. and Jung et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 5 above. Further, Kwon et al. teaches one inner electrode formed in each unit cell in which one is an odd number (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 7, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. and Jung et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 5 above.
Kwon et al. does not teach the electrode assembly including a first inner electrode stacked such that a respective separator is disposed between the outer electrode and the first inner electrode, and a second inner electrode of the inner electrodes is stacked such that a respective separator is disposed between the first inner electrode and the second inner electrode.
Jung et al. teaches the inner electrodes stacked in the order of separator/cathode/separator/anode/separator/cathode/separator (Fig. 4 (b)) in which a separator is disposed between the outer negative electrode and the first inner electrode (para. 47, Fig. 4 (b)). Further, a separator is disposed between the first inner electrode and the second electrode (para. 47, Fig. 4(b)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode assembly of Kwon et al. to include the inner electrode structure of Jung et al. Specifically, the electrode assembly can be modified in which separators are disposed between the outer electrode and the first inner electrode, and between the first inner electrode and the second inner electrode of the stacked structure. One of ordinary skill in the art would find the teachings of Jung et al. useful in developing an electrode assembly having improved productivity and position alignment between electrodes (Jung et al., para. 6).
Regarding Claim 8, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. and Jung et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. Specifically, the electrode assembly of Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. to include independent positive electrodes. The electrode assembly of Kwon et al. is further modified by Jung et al. to include the first positive inner electrode. Therefore, as the first inner electrode and the independent electrode are positive electrodes, it is known to one of ordinary skill in the art that the first inner electrode will have the same polarity (first polarity) as the independent electrode. Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Regarding Claim 9, Kwon et al. is modified by Cho et al. and Jung et al. teaching all claim limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. As applied to Claim 7 above, Jung et al. teaches the outer electrode and the second inner electrode being an anode or negative electrode. Therefore, as the outer electrode and the second inner electrode are negative electrodes, it is known to one of ordinary skill in the art that the outer electrode will have the same polarity (second polarity) as the second inner electrode. Therefore, all claim limitations are met.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHRISTINA RENEE DAULTON whose telephone number is (703)756-5413. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, ULA RUDDOCK can be reached at (571) 272-1481. 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.
/C.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729