Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 and 10 have been considered but are not persuasive or moot. Specifically, applicant’s arguments in regard to the previously cited GS Yuasa prior art 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.
PNG
media_image1.png
636
607
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s arguments in regard to Hitachi are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the welding between the current collecting disk 7 and the copper foil exposed part 14 do not constitute welding to a “respective longitudinal edge of the negative current collector”. The Examiner disagrees. In fact, the exposed portion of the copper foil 14 does in fact correlate to the longitudinal edge of the negative current collector (negative electrode plate 4) as described in paragraph [0023] – the negative electrode plate 4 uncoated portion 3 is wound into an assembly and results in an exposed copper foil portion 14 which sticks out from the electrode assembly to be welded to the collecting disk 7 (see annotated figures reproduced here).
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 7 and 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
These claims require limitations such as “line shaped weld seam having a partial spiral geometry” with a particular length. While the electrode assembly is described as a spiral in specification as originally filed (paragraphs [0120, 0159]), nowhere in the original description does a weld seam with a spiral geometry appear either implicitly or explicitly. Paragraphs [0110-0117] of the instant specification as filed describe weld seams over the contact area between the contact metal sheet member and the longitudinal edges, however, nowhere is the weld seam specified to be spiral in geometry.
Therefore, such is taken to introduce new matter to the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-8, 10-14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitachi Vehicle Energy LTD (JP 2008-269904 cited in IDS, a machine translation of which is attached, hereinafter “Hitachi”) in view of Mitsubishi Materials Corp (JP 2019-096388 cited in IDS, using applicant’s provided translation, hereinafter “Mitsubishi”).
In regard to claim 1, Hitachi teaches a lithium-ion cell, comprising: a ribbon-shaped electrode-separator assembly (wound group 6) comprising an anode (negative electrode plate 4), a separator 5, and a cathode (positive electrode plate 6) in a sequence anode/separator/cathode, the electrode-separator assembly being formed as a winding with two terminal end faces (uncoated portions 1, 3 – aluminum foil exposed portion 15, copper portion exposed portion 14), wherein:
the anode comprises, as an anode current collector 4, a ribbon-shaped metal (copper) foil having a thickness such as 10 micron (paragraph [0025]), a first longitudinal edge 14, a second longitudinal edge, and two ends, the anode current collector has a strip-shaped main region loaded with a layer of negative electrode material and a free edge strip 3 (uncoated portions in figures below) extending along the first longitudinal edge that is not loaded with the negative electrode material (paragraph [0025]),
the cathode comprises, as a cathode current collector 2, a ribbon-shaped (aluminum) metal foil with a thickness such as 20 micron (paragraph [0024]) having a first longitudinal edge, a second longitudinal edge, and two ends, the cathode current collector has a strip-shaped main region loaded with a layer of positive electrode material and a free edge strip (uncoated portion 15) extending along the first longitudinal edge that is not loaded with the positive electrode material (figures 1-3),
the anode 4 and the cathode 2 are formed and/or arranged relative to each other within the electrode-separator assembly such that the first longitudinal edge 14 of the anode current collector 4 protrudes from one of the terminal end faces of the winding-and the first longitudinal edge 15 of the cathode current collector 5 protrudes from the other of the terminal end faces of the winding (see figures 1 reproduced below); and
PNG
media_image2.png
636
607
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a plate shaped contact sheet metal member (current collecting disk 7) having a thickness such as 500 micron (see paragraph [0018]), a face of the plate shaped contact sheet metal member extends in a plane perpendicular to a winding axis of the winding and being in direct contact with and welded to a respective longitudinal edge 3, 14, the respective longitudinal edge being the first longitudinal edge of the anode 4 current collector, wherein the free-edge strip of the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge is free of apertures (paragraphs [0015-0028]).
PNG
media_image3.png
540
615
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 differs from Hitachi in calling for the strip-shaped main region of the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge has a plurality of apertures. However, Mitsubishi teaches a similar power storage device including anode/separator/cathode electrode assembly and the desirability to provide a plurality of through holes 34 in the main body of the ribbon shaped current collectors (see figures 10-12) and not the free edge strip (see annotated figure below) which is joined to the current collecting structure through a welding process such as laser welding (paragraph [0025]) because the perforated metal sheet main body improves lithium pre-doping and prevents the active material layer from falling off (paragraph [0003]).
PNG
media_image4.png
237
319
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include apertures in the main body of the current collector in the lithium-ion cell of Hitachi as such allows for better lithium doping and electrode material adhesion as taught by Mitsubishi.
In regard to claim 2, Mitsubishi teaches the plurality of apertures are slotted (figures 10 above).
In regard to claim 3, Mitsubishi teaches the apertures are on the micron scale (paragraph [0011-0012]) which overlaps the claimed range in a manner which provides a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05).
In regard to claim 4, Mitsubishi teaches at least a partial section of the main area of the current collector with respective longitudinal edge has a lower weight per unit area than the free edge strip of the current collector (see figure 10 – apertures 34 reduce weight per area in coated portions of collectors).
In regard to claim 5, Mitsubishi teaches at least one feature is present from the group of features consisting of: the weight per unit area, in the main area, of the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge is reduced by 5% to 80% compared to the weight per unit area, in the free edge strip, of the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge, the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge has a hole area in a range of 5% to 80% in the main area (see figures 3-6, paragraphs [0025-0039] – through holes 30 reduce weight per area in coated portions of collectors 21 and 26; welded edge portion may have no or less number of holes, the prior art appreciates the properties of the collectors is effected by the number of holes and therefore hole density is a result effective variable that should be optimized MPEP 2144.05 Part II – Routine Optimization of Result Effective Variable) or the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge has a tensile strength which overlaps the claimed range of 20 N/mm2 to 250 N/mm2 in the main area as a range of materials including copper and aluminum alloys in paragraphs [0020-0023] which have the claimed tensile properties ranges – see MPEP 2112.01).
In regard to claim 6, Mitsubishi teaches the strip-shaped main region of the anode current collector and the strip-shaped main region of the cathode current collector both have a plurality of apertures 34 (figures). While Hitachi does not disclose the cell further comprises a second contact sheet metal member being in direct contact with another respective longitudinal edge, the another respective longitudinal edge being the other of the first longitudinal edge of the anode current collector or the first longitudinal edge of the cathode current collector to which the contact sheet metal member is not in direct contact with, and the second contact sheet metal member is connected to the another longitudinal edge by welding, the duplication of parts, such as an additional plate shaped metal contact member for the cathode current collector would have been an obvious modification to the prior art as duplicating the structure of the prior art for the same purposes has been held as obvious absent evidence to the contrary (see MPEP 2144.05 Part IV).
In regard to claim 7, Hitachi teaches the contact sheet metal member 7 connected to the first longitudinal edge of the anode current collector 4 by welding is in contact with the first longitudinal edge of the anode current collector such that a line-shaped contact zone is formed (figures 9-12) which forms along the tip of the exposed copper foil (paragraph [0026]) which is wound into a spiral. While a spiral shaped weld is not specified, changes to size and shape of the prior art electrode welding are an obvious modification absent evidence to the contrary (see MPEP 2144.04 Part IV).
In regard to claim 8, Hitachi teaches the separator is a ribbon-shaped plastic substrate 5 comprising a 30-micron thickness (paragraph [0023]).
In regard to claim 10, Hitachi teaches the battery module of claim 1 above, and further a respective face of the contact sheet metal member (current collector disk 7) is seated flat against (figure 1 above) in direct contact with a respective longitudinal edge 14, the respective longitudinal edge being the first longitudinal edge of the anode current collector, wherein the respective face of the contact sheet metal member 7 extends parallel to the respective terminal end face of the winding 6, the respective terminal end face of the winding being the terminal end face from which the respective longitudinal edge protrudes 14, and wherein the respective face of the contact sheet metal member is connected to the respective longitudinal edge by welding (figure 1 above, paragraph [0018, 0026]), and GS teaches the desirability for the strip-shaped main region of the current collector with the respective longitudinal edge to have a plurality of apertures as applied to claim 1 above.
In regard to claim 11, Hitachi teaches the respective longitudinal edge 14 comprises one or more sections (wound sheet shown with perpendicular sections as seen in figure 1), each of which is continuously connected along its entire length to the face of the contact sheet metal member 7 by a weld seam (figure 1 above, paragraph [0018, 0026]).
In regard to claim 12, Hitachi teaches the plate-shaped contact sheet metal member 7 has a shape of a circular disk or an approximately circular disk (figure 5 and 6).
In regard to claim 13, Hitachi teaches the plate-shaped contact sheet metal member is welded along the respective longitudinal edge via a single line-shaped weld seam 17 (figure 6).
In regard to claim 14 and 17-20, Hitachi teaches the contact sheet metal member 7 connected to the first longitudinal edge of the anode current collector 4 by welding is in contact with the first longitudinal edge of the anode current collector such that a line-shaped contact zone is formed (figures 9-12) which forms along the (presumably the entire) tip of the exposed copper foil (paragraph [0026]) which is wound into a spiral. While a spiral shaped weld or length of the weld is not specified, changes to size and shape of the prior art electrode welding are an obvious modification absent evidence to the contrary (see MPEP 2144.04 Part IV).
Claims 15, 16 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hitachi and Mitsubishi as applied to claim 14 or 18 above, and further in view of Ahn (US Pub 2013/0017424 newly cited).
In regard to claims 15, 16 and 21, Hitachi and Mitsubishi teach the lithium-ion cell according to claim 14 or 18 applied above, but does not disclose the respective free edge strip is coated with a support material, the support material retains a solid state at a temperature at which a metal from which the current collector having the respective free edge strip melts. However, Ahn teaches a similar wound battery 10 assembly including an anode 120 and cathode 110 wound with a separator therebetween, where the uncoated free edge portions (non-active parts 111) are formed with a ceramic support material layer 50, 51 (such as alumina) which helps prevent short circuits during joining processes such as laser welding (paragraphs [0039-0056]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a high temperature support material such as alumina on the free edge strip of Hitachi as such prevents short circuits during laser welding as taught by Ahn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure – Ando et al. (US Pub 2007/0002523) teaches similar current collector structures with various shaped apertures (figure 7). US Pub 2022/0020537 teaches a 100-micron thick current collector (paragraph [0052]).
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas P D'Aniello whose telephone number is (571)270-3635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9am to 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, Tong Guo can be reached at 571-272-3066. 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.
/NICHOLAS P D'ANIELLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights