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
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 25, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Request for Continued Examination filed on March 25, 2026 in response to the Advisory Action mailed on March 3, 2026 have been received and amendments filed on January 26, 2026 have been entered. Claim 1 was amended and claim 2 was cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-13 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Claim 1 rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (KR 20170136880 A, see machine translation for citation) in view of Fukuda et al. (US 10122050 B2).
Regarding claim 1, the applicant argues first that Hwang in view of Fukuda fails to disclose "a magnetic sensor coupled to at least one battery cell of the plurality of battery cells to detect a change of a magnetic field generated by a change in a separation height between the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit when the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit are separated from each other" (see Remarks page 6-8).
Second it is argued that the combined teaching of Hwang and Fukuda fails to disclose "the magnetic sensor being adjacent to both the first peripheral portion and the second peripheral portion at an outside of the pouch" (see Remarks page 8).
Third it is argued that the combined teaching of Hwang and Fukuda fails to disclose "the first pouch case and the second pouch case are combined with each other so that the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit face each other" (see remarks page 8-9).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 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.
Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Buckholz et al. (US 20190067671 A1) in view of Naftali et al. (US 20180322992 A1) and Hoyle et al. (GB 2187871 A).
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckholz et al. (US 20190067671 A1) in view of Naftali et al. (US 20180322992 A1) and Hoyle et al. (GB 2187871 A).
Regarding claim 1, Buckholz teaches a lithium-ion pouch cell (2) including an electrode assembly (20) that is sealed within a cell housing (4) along with an electrolyte to form a power generation and storage unit [0016 and Fig. 2]. In some embodiments groups of cells (2) can be bundled together to form battery modules (battery system) [0016]. The cell housing (4) is an assembly of a first and a second housing portion (6 and 9) (first and second pouch case) [0017 and Fig. 2]. Both the first and second housing portions (6 and 9) (first and second pouch case) comprise a first and second flange (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) respectively [0017 and Fig. 2].
Buckholz does not teach the features “a first magnetic unit formed at the first peripheral portion; a second magnetic unit formed at the second peripheral portion, the second magnetic unit having an opposite polarity from that of the first magnetic unit, the second pouch case being sealed with the first pouch case; and a magnetic sensor coupled to at least one battery cell of the plurality of battery cells to detect a change of a magnetic field generated by a change in a separation height between the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit caused-when the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit are separated from each other, the magnetic sensor being adjacent to both the first peripheral portion and the second peripheral portion at an outside of the pouch, wherein the first pouch case and the second pouch case are combined with each other so that the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit face each other”.
Naftali teaches a sealing closure (100) comprising a first and second flexible strip (10 and 20) with a plurality of cavities (16 and 26) adapted to incorporate a plurality of magnetic elements (18 and 28) respectively, which are selected from the group consisting of Neodymium, Neodymium Iron Boron (NdFeB), Samarium-Cobalt, electromagnet, any other type of rare-earth magnet and any combination thereof [0166, 0187 and Fig. 1]. The above mentioned first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) further comprise a very thin first and second membranes (19 and 29) which serves to encapsulate and embed magnetic elements (18 and 28) of the respective flexible strips [0170, 0175, 0176 and Fig. 1]. The first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) are brought together from the thin membranes (19 and 29) side, such that magnetic elements (18 and 28) magnetically attract each other and provide a sealing [0172]. The above described first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) may be characterized by any geometrical structure known in the art [0161] and they are connectable to the walls of the saleable device [0194]. The taught sealing closure (100) may be employed fields like packaging, storage and/or pouch devices [0160 and 0193]. It is taught that with the above described construction of the first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) a stable sealing, in which the strips are not disconnected from each other when mechanical deformations of sealing closure (100) occur, is obtained.
From the previous teachings, the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portions) of Buckholz can be modified to include the first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali. Because Naftali teaches that its strips may have any geometrical structure known in the art and that they are connectable to the walls of a saleable device, if this modification is made in a way that the respective flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali are placed along the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) perimeter of Buckholz and facing its cell housing (4) inner part, the limitation “a first magnetic unit formed at the first peripheral portion; a second magnetic unit formed at the second peripheral portion, the second magnetic unit having an opposite polarity from that of the first magnetic unit, wherein the first pouch case and the second pouch case are combined with each other so that the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit face each other” will be met.
Buckholz is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a plurality a battery system comprising of battery cells, each of the plurality of battery cells comprising: a pouch comprising: a first and second pouch cases comprising a first and second peripheral portion and an electrode assembly accommodated in the pouch.
Naftali is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a sealing closure comprising two complimentary flexible strips having magnetic elements, which can be employed on packaging, storage and/or pouch devices.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) of Buckholz to include the features “a first magnetic unit formed at the first peripheral portion; a second magnetic unit formed at the second peripheral portion, the second magnetic unit having an opposite polarity from that of the first magnetic unit, the second pouch case being sealed with the first pouch case, wherein the first pouch case and the second pouch case are combined with each other so that the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit face each other”, because Naftali teaches a sealing closure capable of meeting the above features and that with its construction a stable sealing, in which the strips are not disconnected from each other when mechanical deformations of sealing closure occur, is obtained.
Hoyle teaches a positional sensor able to positively identifying the relative position of two juxtaposed items [p. 1; col. 1; line 5-7]. The positional sensor (10) comprises a magnetic field sensor (12), which may be a Hall effect sensor, capable to produce an output voltage proportional to a magnetic flux density caused by a magnet (11) [p. 1; col. 2; line 97-103 and Fig. 1]. The output voltage of the magnetic field sensor (12) will be fed to a lower threshold detector (16) through a network comprising a capacitor (14) and a resistor (15), wherein if the output is lower to an initial value an alarm can be triggered [p. 1; col. 2; line 103-110]. It is taught that the output voltage of the magnetic field sensor (12) will decrease if the magnet (11) is displaced away from the sensor [p. 1; col. 2; line 110-112]. Hoyle teaches that its invention provides a positional sensor of high integrity, which could be suitable for use in an intruder detection system or for use in any other similar situation in which a safety switch or the like should not be readily susceptible to invalidation [p. 1; col. 1; line 20-28].
Hoyle is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a magnetic sensor system which is able to detect a magnetic flux density change and trigger an alarm depending on its detected value.
Because Hoyle teachings are related to a positional sensor able to positively identifying the relative position of two juxtaposed items, its positional sensor (10) can be placed and employed on the Buckholz-Naftali battery system on any position facing the modified first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) perimeter. Because the magnetic field sensor (12) of Hoyle, which may be a Hall effect sensor, can detect changes on a magnetic flux density caused by the displacement of a magnet, it can be used for detecting a “change in a magnetic field generated by the separation of the first and second magnetic units”.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the battery system of Buckholz and Naftali to include the feature “a magnetic sensor coupled to at least one battery cell of the plurality of battery cells to detect a change of a magnetic field generated by a change in a separation height between the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit caused-when the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit are separated from each other,
the magnetic sensor being adjacent to both the first peripheral portion and the second peripheral portion at an outside of the pouch”, because Hoyle teaches a positional sensor employable for the referred application, which provides a positional sensor of high integrity, which could be suitable for use in an intruder detection system or for use in any other similar situation in which a safety switch or the like should not be readily susceptible to invalidation.
Regarding claim 3, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Buckholz further teaches that its first housing portion (6) (first pouch case) has a central first recess (7) (a first accommodating portion) surrounded by a first flange (8) (first peripheral portion) and its second housing portion (9) (second pouch case) has a central second recess (10) (second accommodating portion) surrounded by a second flange (11) (second peripheral portion) [0017 and Fig. 2]. From Figure 2, the limitations wherein the “first accommodating portion and second accommodating portion protrude to an outside of the pouch to accommodate the electrode assembly” is met.
Regarding claim 4, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 3. From claim 1 discussion, because the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portions) of Buckholz were modified to comprise the flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali along its respective perimeters, the claimed limitations are met.
Regarding claim 5, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 4. Buckholz further teaches that its first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portions) are joined together and the sealed joint (12) surrounds the pouch enclosure (14) [0017, Fig. 1 and 2]. From this previous teaching and claim 1 discussion, the claimed limitations are met.
Regarding claim 7, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the claimed limitation is met.
Regarding claim 9, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, because the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portions) of Buckholz were modified to comprise the flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali along its respective perimeters, the limitation “wherein the first magnetic unit and the second magnetic unit have a closed ring shape” is met.
Regarding claim 10, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, if the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) of Buckholz are modified to include the first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali in a way that the respective flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali are placed along the first and second flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) perimeters of Buckholz and facing to the outside of the cell housing (4), the limitation “wherein the first magnetic unit is formed on an outer surface of the first pouch case, and the second magnetic unit is formed on an outer surface of the second pouch case” will be met.
Regarding claim 11, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the limitation “wherein the first magnetic unit is formed on an inner surface of the first pouch case, and the second magnetic unit is formed on an inner surface of the second pouch case” is met.
Regarding claim 12, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, the claimed limitation is met.
Regarding claim 13, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Buckholz further teaches that its electrode assembly (20) comprises a first and second lead tabs (40 and 80) electrically connected to the electrode plates within the cell (2) and protruding through the cell housing (4) to the outside of the pouch [0020 and Fig. 2]. It is further taught that seal tape (90) surrounds a circumference of each lead tab (40 and 80) at a location corresponding to the opening (16). and provides a seal between the lead tabs (40 and 80) and the facing flanges (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portions) [0026 and Fig. 2]. When localized heat is applied, the seal tape (90) is required to melt, flow into open gaps between materials, and bond to both the pouch material and the respective lead tabs (40 and 80) [0026]. From the previous descriptions the limitation “wherein the electrode lead is fused together with the first peripheral portion of the first pouch case and the second peripheral portion of the second pouch case” is met.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckholz et al. (US 20190067671 A1) in view of Naftali et al. (US 20180322992 A1) and Hoyle et al. (GB 2187871 A) as applied to claim 4 above, further in view of Jung et al. (US 20190027714 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 4. From claim 1 discussion, it was taught that the first and second flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali may be characterized by any geometrical structure known in the art [0161]. Because of the teachings of Naftali a configuration wherein the flexible strips (10 and 20) of Naftali are placed “extending along three sides” of the first and second flange (8 and 11) (first and second peripheral portion) of Buckholz is achievable.
Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle does not each the feature “wherein the first pouch case and the second pouch case are sealed to each other through three sides of the pouch”.
Jung teaches a pouch type secondary battery (100) including an electrode assembly (200) housed by a pouch exterior (300) [0053 and Fig. 4]. The pouch exterior (300) is an integral housing comprising two corresponding accommodating portions (310a and 310b) having a protruding part (315) between them [0055 and Fig. 4]. After accommodating the electrode assembly (200) on the pouch exterior (300), the upper and lower sealing parts (320 and 330) are sealed and after injecting the appropriate electrolyte, the side sealing parts (350) are sealed and cut to a predetermined size (three side sealing) [0059 and Fig. 4]. It is taught that with the configuration of the pouch exterior (300) described above, unnecessary space may be prevented from the non-sealed surface and thus a cell capacity may be increased, an energy density of a module/pack including the pouch-type secondary battery may be increased and a module/pack cooling structure and an assembly process may be simplified [0091].
Jung is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a pouch comprising: a first pouch case comprising a first peripheral portion, a second pouch case comprising a second peripheral portion.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cell housing (4) of Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle to meet the feature “wherein the first pouch case and the second pouch case are sealed to each other through three sides of the pouch”, because with Jung pouch case configuration unnecessary space may be prevented from the non-sealed surface and thus a cell capacity may be increased, an energy density of a module/pack including the pouch-type secondary battery may be increased and a module/pack cooling structure and an assembly process may be simplified.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckholz et al. (US 20190067671 A1) in view of Naftali et al. (US 20180322992 A1) and Hoyle et al. (GB 2187871 A) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Kim et al. (KR 20100005810 A, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 8, Buckholz, Naftali and Hoyle teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 1, except “wherein a thickness of the first magnetic unit or the second magnetic unit is from 5 µm to 20 µm”.
Kim teaches a pouch for a secondary battery, where the pouch outer material (100) structure is composed of a conventional heat-sealing layer (10), a metal layer (20), an outer layer (30) and further comprises a magnetic layer (40) between the thermal bonding layer (10) and the metal layer (20) or the metal layer (20) and the outer layer (30) [005, 006 and Fig. 2]. It is stated that the overall thickness of the pouch outer material (100) is typically 40-120 µm, the outer layer (30) and the heat-sealing layer (10) have a thickness of 10-40 µm, and the metal layer (20) has a thickness of 20 µm [007]. Based on the provided thickness ranges, the magnetic layer (40) could have a thickness between 20-80 µm, which overlaps the claimed range. It is taught that the implementation of the magnetic layer improves the safety of a secondary battery by improving the adhesive strength of the pouch and preventing moisture infiltration or electrolyte leakage [001].
Kim is analogous art to the current invention because it is concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely a pouch for a secondary battery, wherein its pouch structure comprises a magnetic layer. From the previous descriptions the magnetic layer can be considered analogous to the first and second magnetic unit and it is used to improve the adhesive strength of the pouch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have selected the overlapping portion of the magnetic layer range disclosed by Kim because overlapping ranges have been held to be a prima facie case of obvious. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP § 2144.05.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERTO RAMOS RIVERA whose telephone number is (571) 272-2740. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 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, 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.
/G.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights