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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2 and 5-20 are currently pending
Claims 1, 5-8, 11, and 17 are amended
Claims 3-4 have been cancelled
Status of Amendments
The amendment filed 23 October 2025 has been fully considered, but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
This action has been made final.
Status of Objections and Rejections of the Office Action from 23 July 2025
The objection to claim 1 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The 112 rejection of claims 1-20 is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The 102 rejections over Lin are maintained in view of Applicant’s amendment. The rejections have been modified to address the new limitations.
The 103 rejections over Lin, Lin in view of Lee, and Lin in view of Guo are maintained.
Drawings
The replacement drawings were received on 23 October 2025. These drawings are accepted. The objection has been withdrawn.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin (CN 209045679 U), hereinafter Lin, as evidence provided by Guo et al. (CN 205828573 U), hereinafter Guo.
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches a battery cell [0039], comprising:
a first electrode plate, wherein the first electrode plate comprises a first current collector 11 and a first active layer 12, the first electrode plate comprises a first end portion, not numbered, but labeled in Fig. 3A below, for convenience, the first end portion is arranged on an outer side of the battery cell, and the first active layer 12 is arranged on a surface of the first current collector 11 in the first end portion; and
a second electrode plate 21+22, wherein the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate are spaced apart and wound, and an electrode plate at the outermost circle of the battery cell is the first electrode plate; wherein
a first end face and a first cambered zone connected to the first end face are defined, labeled in Fig. 3A below, wherein the first end portion is located in the first cambered zone;
wherein the second electrode plate comprises a second current collector 21 and a second active layer 22, wherein the second electrode plate comprises a second end portion, labeled in Fig. 3A below, the second end portion is located in the first cambered zone, the second active layer 22 is arranged on a surface of the second current collector 21 in the second end portion; in a direction perpendicular to the first end face, a distance from the first end portion to the first end face is greater than a distance from the second end portion to the first end face, as can be seen in Fig. 3A below where the second end portion extends further than the first end portion.
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (First End Portion)]
[AltContent: textbox (Second End Portion)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (First End Face)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
555
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (First Cambered Zone)]
Lin further teaches the battery cell comprising an insulating layer 24 comprising polyacrylate or polyvinylidene fluoride [0059]. Lin does not specify the insulating layer being a glue. However, polyacrylate and polyvinylidene fluoride are both known to be used as a glue (Guo pg. 7, ¶ 3). Therefore, the insulating layer is considered to be equivalent to the insulation glue. Lin further teaches the insulation glue comprising a first insulation sub-glue and a second insulation sub-glue. In this case, Lin teaches that the insulating layer 24 may be disposed in the empty foil regions 41-44 [0052]. The insulating layer disposed in empty foil regions 41-42 corresponds to the second sub-glue and the insulating layer disposed in empty foil region 43 corresponds to the first sub-glue, as seen and labeled in Fig. 4B below, for convenience. Lin further teaches the first insulation sub-glue being provided on a surface of the first current collector 11 in the first cambered zone, in this case the interior surface of the current collector 11, the second insulation sub-glue covering the first end portion and the second end portion, in this case passing over them, which is considered to be equivalent to covering, and
wherein, within the first cambered zone, the second insulation sub-glue is in contact with the first insulation sub-glue, as shown in a first modified version of Fig. 3A below, for convenience, that is meant to show what the wound cell would look like with the extra insulating layer being present in empty foil region 43.
[AltContent: textbox (Second insulation sub-glue)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Second insulation sub-glue)][AltContent: textbox (First insulation sub-glue)][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image2.png
289
652
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
[AltContent: textbox (First Modified Lin Fig. 3A)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (First insulation sub-glue)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
555
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (First Cambered Zone)][AltContent: ]In the interest of compact prosecution, but not for further reference in this office action, Examiner notes two other possible interpretations of original Fig. 3A without the presence of the extra insulating layer in empty foil region 43. First, one could argue that the outer sub-glue in original Fig. 3A is making contact with the inner sub-glue indirectly through the current collector 11. Second, with the interpretation that the first insulation sub-glue and second insulation sub-glue may define two sections of the same layer, one could define the first insulation sub-glue as being the initial inner portion of layer 24, for example the portion before the divider shown below, that turns into the second insulation sub-glue within the first cambered zone in order to read on them inherently making contact in the first cambered zone, as they are part of the same layer, and such that the second insulation sub-glue covers the first insulation sub-glue away from the first end portion [AltContent: textbox (First insulation sub-glue)]after wrapping around the cell, as later required by claim 6.
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Second insulation sub-glue)][AltContent: textbox (Alternate Fig. 3A Interpretation)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Divider between first and second)]
PNG
media_image1.png
555
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 1, wherein the first active layer 12 is arranged on a surface of the first current collector 11 at the outermost circle of the battery cell, the surface faces toward an inner side of the battery cell, and the first active layer 12 is not arranged on a surface of the first current collector 11 on the outermost side of the battery cell, as seen in Fig. 3A.
Regarding claim 6, Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 4, wherein the second insulation sub-glue covers a part of the first insulation sub-glue, the part of the first insulation sub-glue is away from the first end portion, as can be seen in first modified Fig. 3A above.
Regarding claim 7, Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 4, wherein the first insulation sub-glue and the second insulation sub-glue are arranged at two sides of the first end portion and the second end portion, as can be seen in first modified Fig. 3A above.
Regarding claim 11, Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 4, wherein the first electrode plate further comprises a third end portion, and the second electrode plate further comprises a fourth end portion, as labeled below, the battery cell further comprises a tab [0049], and the tab is disposed in the third end portion and the fourth end portion, as shown in Fig. 3A below.
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Uncoated foil zones)][AltContent: textbox (Fourth end portion)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Tabs)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Third end portion)][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
555
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 3, wherein the battery cell further comprises a tab, the first electrode plate comprises a first uncoated foil zone, and the second electrode plate comprises a second uncoated foil zone, all as labeled in Fig. 3A above; wherein in the first uncoated foil zone, the first current collector 11 is not covered by the first active layer 12, as can be seen in Fig. 3A above by the presence of only current collector 11 at the third end portion, the second current collector 21 in the second uncoated foil zone is not covered by the second active layer 22, as can be seen in Fig. 3A above by the presence of only current collector 21 at the fourth end portion, and the tab comprises a first tab and a second tab, the first tab is disposed in the first uncoated foil zone, the second tab is disposed in the second foil zone.
Regarding claim 19, Lin teaches a battery comprising the battery cell according to claim 1, in this case an electrochemical device, such as a lithium-ion battery [0039].
Regarding claim 20, Lin teaches an electronic apparatus comprising the battery according to claim 19, in this case various forms of computers, TVs, vehicles, etc. [0086].
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.
Claim 5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, as evidence provided by Guo, as applied above.
Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 3. Lin is silent as to the distance from the first end portion to the first end face ranging from 2 mm to 8 mm, the distance from the second end portion to the first end face ranging from 0 mm to 3 mm, in a direction perpendicular to the first end face, and a distance between the first end portion and the second end portion being greater than 2 mm. However, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lin in a way that satisfies these particular ranges. It has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In re Rose , 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976); In Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, as evidence provided by Guo, as applied above, in view of Lee et al. (US 8557423 B2), hereinafter Lee.
Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 3, wherein the battery cell further comprises a separator 23, wherein the separator 23 is arranged between the first electrode plate 11+12 and the second electrode plate 21+22, the separator 23 comprises a fifth end portion and a sixth end portion, as labeled in Fig. 3A below, the fifth end portion is arranged on an outer side of the battery cell, and the sixth end portion is arranged in the battery cell. Lin is silent as to a distance from the fifth end portion to the first end face being less than a distance from the second end portion to the first end face, a distance between the fifth end portion and the second end portion being greater than 4 mm, and at least two fifth end portions wrapping around the second end portion. However, Lee teaches a wound battery comprising a separator comprising a fifth end portion, wherein the distance from the fifth end portion to the first end face is less than the distance from the second end portion to the first end face, as seen in Fig. 6 of Lee, at least two fifth end portions wrap around the second end portion, (Lee col. 8, lines 1-3), and a distance between the fifth end portion and the second end portion is greater than 4 mm, in this case at least 5 mm or more (Lee col. 8, lines 6-8). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. 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).
Lin and Lee are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wound batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lin with the teaching of Lee and increase the distance that the fifth ends extend past the second end by at least 5 mm or more, making the distance from the fifth end portion to the first end face less than the distance from the second end portion to the first end face and ensuring at least two fifth end portions wrap around the second end portion. Doing so would have prevented short circuit between the electrodes, even if the separators undergo heat shrinkage (Lee col. 8, lines 4-6).
[AltContent: textbox (Fifth end portions)]
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Sixth end portion)][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
555
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, as evidence provided by Guo, as applied above, in view of Guo et al. (CN 205828573 U), hereinafter Guo.
Regarding claim 12, Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 11, wherein the first active layer 12 is not arranged on a surface of the first current collector 11 in the third end portion, as can be seen in Fig. 3A above by the presence of only current collector 11 at the third end portion, the second active layer 22 is not arranged on a surface of the second current collector 21 in the fourth end portion, as can be seen by the presence of only current collector 21 at the fourth end portion, and the insulation glue further comprises a third insulation sub-glue, in this case pieces similar to adhesive film 26, where the third insulation sub-glue is provided on the surface of the first current collector 11 in the third end portion, as can be seen in Fig. 3A by the adhesive portions surrounding the tab in the third end position. Lin is silent as to the composition of film 26. However, Guo teaches a double-sided insulating tape comprising a glue layer comprising polyacrylate or polyvinylidene fluoride on a substrate (pg. 7, ¶ 3). This is considered to be equivalent to comprising a third insulation sub-glue.
Lin and Guo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wound batteries. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the double-sided insulating tape of Guo as the adhesive film of Lin. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use, in this case as an adhesive film, supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Further, Lin teaches an adhesive film 26 on the fourth end portion of the second electrode. It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a similar adhesive film 26 on the third end portion of the first electrode separate from the adhesive films surrounding the tab disposed on the third end portion. It has been held that duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04, In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). This embodiment will be referred to as modified Lin and is shown in a second modified Fig. 3A below, for convenience.
[AltContent: textbox (Second Modified Lin Fig. 3A)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Fifth insulation sub-glues)][AltContent: textbox (Third insulation sub-glue (added by duplication of parts))][AltContent: textbox (First tab)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Fourth insulation sub-glues)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Second tab)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Third end portion)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Fourth end portion)][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image3.png
15
113
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
555
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, modified Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 12, wherein the outermost end of the third end portion is not covered by the third insulation sub-glue, as can be seen in Modified Lin Fig. 3A.
Regarding claim 14, modified Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 12, wherein the tab comprises a first tab and a second tab, as labeled in Modified Lin Fig. 3A above, the first tab is disposed in the third end portion, and the second tab is disposed in the fourth end portion, as can be seen in Modified Lin Fig. 3A.
Regarding claim 15, modified Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 14, where the insulation glue further includes a fourth insulation sub-glue, as labeled in Modified Lin Fig. 3A above, the fourth insulation sub-glue is provided at two sides of the first tab.
Regarding claim 16, modified Lin teaches the battery cell according to claim 15, where the insulation glue further includes a fifth insulation sub-glue, as labeled in Modified Lin Fig. 3A above, the fifth insulation sub-glue is provided at two sides of a terminating end of the third end portion.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 102 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues that Lin does not teach the first insulation sub-glue being in contact with the second insulation sub-glue. For the same reasons as noted above, Examiner respectfully disagrees as Lin teaches the insulating layer as being able to also be present in empty foil region 43 which would produce a first insulation sub-glue being in contact with a second insulation sub-glue.
Regarding the 103 rejection of claims 8-10, Applicant argues that Lee teaches away from the limitation of the distance from the fifth end portion to the first end face being smaller than the distance from the second end portion to the first end face. As noted by Applicant, Lee teaches the separators extending past the ending portion of the anode by a length of at least 5 mm or more in order to prevent short circuit between electrodes if the separators undergo heat shrinkage (Lee col. 8, lines 1-8). Examiner agrees that this teaching, when applied to the orientation of Lee, happens to produce a cell wherein the fifth end portion is further away from the first end face than the second end portion. However, Lee neither criticizes, discredits, or otherwise discourages an orientation such as that of Lin nor teaches any preference as to the positioning of the end portion of the separators and the end portion of the anode in relation to anything aside from each other. Therefore, Examiner respectfully disagrees that this could be considered to constitute Lee teaching away from the combination of the same teaching with the orientation of Lin. See MPEP 2123.II and MPEP 2143.01.I. It would have been obvious to modify Lin with the teachings of Lee to produce a cell wherein at least two fifth end portions wrap around the second end portion, a distance between the fifth end portion and the second portion is greater than 4mm, and a distance from the fifth end portion to the first end face is less than a distance from the second end portion to the first end face. Doing so would have prevented short circuit between the electrodes, even if the separators undergo heat shrinkage (Lee col. 8, lines 4-6).
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 DUSTIN KENWOOD VAN KIRK whose telephone number is (703)756-4717. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571)272-3433. 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.
/DUSTIN VAN KIRK/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722