DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 23 December 2025 was filed prior to the mailing date of this office correspondence. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed on 23 December 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-4 and 6-20 are now pending in the application.
Amendments to the claim 10 to overcome the informalities are acceptable. Therefore, claim objections have been withdrawn.
Amendments to the claim 6 to overcome the rejections under U.S.C 112(b) have been fully considered and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claim 6 has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 23 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument on Pages 7-8 that “neither Momo, Adams, nor any proper combination of the two references describes or suggests "placing a resin layer over the first exterior body to surround the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode in a frame-like manner," as recited in claim 1...the Office Action appears to rely upon the finished device depicted in FIG. 8E of Momo in order to assert that the sequence of method steps recited in claim 1, including the steps noted above, are described by Momo... Adams, which is cited for showing a battery, does not remedy the failure of the Office Action to establish that Momo describes or suggests the noted features of claim 1.”, respectfully, the Examiner submits the following:
Firstly, in response to applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., placing a resin layer over the first exterior body to surround the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode in a frame-like manner) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Further, Adams teaches in Fig. 1a and para. [0056], depositing an adhesive frame 7 surrounding the conductive layer, anode layer and cathode layer.
Secondly, Momo teaches in para. [0030], “a fabricating method for a secondary battery includes the steps of forming a first electrode including a positive electrode active material layer; forming a second electrode including a negative electrode active material layer; performing electrochemical reduction or oxidization on the first electrode or the second electrode put in an electrolyte solution in a container by supplying a current in the electrolyte solution with the electrode used as one electrode; taking out the first electrode or second electrode that has been subjected to the electrochemical reaction from the electrolyte solution in the container; drying and processing the first electrode or the second electrode into a desired shape; packing a stack formed of the first electrode and the second electrode in a region surrounded by an exterior body having an opening; introducing the electrolyte solution in the region surrounded by the exterior body; and closing the opening of the exterior body.” Further, Momo teaches in para. [0075] the metal films are sandwiched between an adhesive layer, containing polypropylene. The instant application discloses, (see para. [0344], of PG PUB) resin layer as a polypropylene resin material. Therefore, the modified method of fabricating a secondary battery of Momo in view of Adams is conceptually identical with the method of fabricating a secondary battery recited in this application.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momo (US 20160111710) in view of Adams (US 20130029205).
Regarding claim 1, Momo teaches, a method for fabricating a secondary battery (fabricating method for a secondary battery, para. [0030]), comprising:
placing a first electrode (negative electrode current collector 14, Fig. 8E) over a first exterior body (exterior body 11, see annotated Fig. 8E below);
[AltContent: textbox (second exterior body)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first exterior body)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image1.png
170
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 8E, Momo.
placing a separator (separator 13) over the first electrode;
placing a second electrode (positive electrode current collector 12, Fig. 8E) over the separator;
dripping an electrolyte (an electrolyte of an electrolyte solution 20 Fig. 8E, the sheet-like electrode that is rolled is put in the electrolyte solution in the container 1001 in the fabricating apparatus, para. [0101],…fabricating apparatus for a secondary battery…includes a container…The cooler has a function of cooling and condensing vaporized solvent components of the electrolyte solution, and dripping the components to the electrolyte solution, para. [0032]. Para. [0101] teaches electrode is put in the electrolyte solution in the container, and in para. [0032], dripping the components to the electrolyte solution, which reads on dripping an electrolyte) on at least one of the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode;
placing a resin layer (adhesive layer, para. [0075]) over the first exterior body (a sheet made of a flexible base material is prepared as the exterior body 11. As the sheet, a stacked body, a metal film provided with an adhesive layer…sandwiched between adhesive layers is used, para. [0075]);
impregnating at least one of the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode with the electrolyte (a current collector…the sheet-like electrode that is rolled is put in the electrolyte solution in the container 1001 in the fabricating apparatus, para. [0101]) and then placing a second exterior body (exterior body 11, see Fig. 8E) over the first exterior body to cover the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode (see Fig. 8E);
curing at least part of the resin layer under reduced pressure (adhesive layer, also referred to as a heat-seal layer, para. [0075], the hermetically-closed apparatus is maintained at a pressure of approximately 0.5 atmospheres, para. [0027]); and
sealing the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode with the first exterior body (lead electrode 16 includes the sealing layer 15, Fig. 8D, para. [0074]) and the second exterior body under atmospheric pressure (see, the thermocompression-bonded region 17 is illustrated in Figs. 8D and 8E, para. [0113], fabricating apparatus 1020 is configured…in a nitrogen atmosphere or an argon atmosphere, para. [0127], in which it is obvious that the sealing is done under atmospheric pressure),
wherein one of the first electrode and the second electrode is a positive electrode, and the other is a negative electrode (see the cathode and the anode, Figs. 8B to 8E).
[AltContent: textbox (adhesive frame)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image2.png
344
466
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1a, Adams.
Momo does not teach the resin layer surround the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode in a frame-like manner; or curing the resin layer by irradiation of the resin layer with ultraviolet light. However, Adams teaches a secondary battery in Fig. 1a, including placing a first electrode (anode, see annotated Fig. 1a) over a first exterior body; placing a separator (separator 13) over the first electrode; placing a second electrode (cathode) over the separator; an electrolyte on at least one of the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode, in which, the adhesive layer surround the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode in a frame-like manner (deposited upon the conductive layer 3b is a central square of cathode active material 5, which becomes the active cell area A and is surrounded by a closed adhesive frame 7…Deposited upon the conductive layer 9b is a central square of anode active material 11, surrounded by an adhesive frame 7, Figs. 1a and 1b, para. [0056]), and curing the resin layer by irradiation of the resin layer with ultraviolet light (substrates may be laminated film layers, while the picture frame may be formed from a UV curable adhesive, para. [0008]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Adams, 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 method for fabricating a secondary battery of Momo and to replace the resin layer with an ultraviolet curable resin layer frame 7 as taught by Adams in Figs. 1a and 1b so that it enables fabricating the entire secondary battery using a printing process as Adams disclosed in para. [0008]. Moreover, there is no indication in the instant invention that any surprising results were derived, or that any special steps were devised in order to cure the resin layer with ultraviolet light. Such a combination would have been done by one of ordinary skill in the art without any need for experimentation and with reasonable expectations of success.
Regarding claim 7, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the sealing is performed by thermocompression bonding (a stack formed of a positive electrode, a separator, and a negative electrode is packed in a region surrounded by an exterior body having an opening, the electrolyte solution is introduced into the region surrounded by the exterior body, and the opening of the exterior body is closed by thermocompression bonding…thermocompression-bonded region 17 is illustrated in FIGS. 8D and 8E, para. [0113]).
Regarding claim 10, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, further comprising a step of connecting a first lead electrode (lead electrode 16, see annotated Fig. 8D below) to the first electrode and a step of connecting a second lead electrode (see Fig. 8D) to the second electrode under the reduced pressure (hermetically-closed apparatus is maintained at a pressure of approximately 0.5 atmospheres, para. [0027]). Adams further teaches, UV curable adhesive.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (second lead)][AltContent: textbox (first lead)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
262
234
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 8D, Momo.
Therefore, in view of the teachings of Adams, 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 method for fabricating a secondary battery of Momo and to replace the resin layer with an ultraviolet curable resin layer as taught by Adams in Fig. 1a and to connect first lead to the first electrode and the second lead to the second electrode before the ultraviolet light irradiation under reduced pressure so that it enables fabricating the entire secondary battery using a printing process.
Regarding claim 11, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the electrolyte comprises fluorine (a gelled high-molecular material is used as the solvent for the electrolyte solution…Typical examples of the gelled high-molecular material include…a fluorine-based polymer, para. [0158]).
Regarding claim 12, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the electrolyte comprises an ionic liquid (a gelled high-molecular material is used as the solvent for the electrolyte solution…Typical examples of the gelled high-molecular material include… Alternatively…one or more of ionic liquids, para. [0158]).
Regarding claim 13, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein one or both of the first electrode and the second electrode comprise graphene (positive electrode active material layer 306 may further include…a conductive additive…As a conductive additive…for example, acetylene black (AB) can be used. Alternatively, a carbon material such as a carbon nanotube, graphene, para. [0150]).
Regarding claim 14, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the first electrode comprises a first active material layer on one or both surfaces of a first current collector (first electrode including a positive electrode active material layer, para. [0030]).
Regarding claim 15, Momo in view of Adams teaches the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Momo further teaches, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the second electrode comprises a second active material layer on one or both surfaces of a second current collector (second electrode has a positive electrode active material layer or a negative electrode active material layer on its surface, para. [0020]).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momo in view of Adams as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takahashi (US 20160156012).
[AltContent: textbox (concave portion)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image4.png
186
661
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1C, Takahashi.
Regarding claim 2, modified Momo does not teach the first exterior body comprises a concave portion. However, Takahashi teaches, a secondary battery in Fig. 1C, including first electrode 111, separator 103, a second electrode 115, in which, the method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim 1, wherein the first exterior body comprises a concave portion (see annotated Fig. 1C above), and wherein the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode are placed in the concave portion (exterior body 107 wrapping the positive electrode 111, the negative electrode 115, and the separator 103, para. [0047]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Takahashi, 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 method for fabricating a secondary battery of Momo and to replace the first exterior body 11 as taught by Momo in Fig. 1a with a first exterior body 107 as Takahashi taught in Fig. 1C, so that it enables placing the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode inside the concave portion while sealing the secondary battery by thermal fusion.
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Momo in view of Adams as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Masayuki (JP 2004247159).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, modified Momo does not teach the second exterior body is configured to transmit ultraviolet light or block ultraviolet light. However, Masayuki teaches a method for fabricating a secondary battery including a first electrode 7a, a separator, a second electrode 7b, and a resin layer curable with an ultraviolet light, in which,
Claim 8. The method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the second exterior body is configured to transmit ultraviolet light (attaching a casing sheet consisting of four layers, namely an adhesive layer/base material layer/ultraviolet-curable resin layer/protective layer, in which the ultraviolet-curable resin layer is uncured, and the protective layer is ultraviolet transparent, para. [0030]) at least in a region overlapping the resin layer.
Claim 9. The method for fabricating a secondary battery, according to claim1, wherein the second exterior body is configured to block ultraviolet light (if a protective layer that does not transmit ultraviolet light is used, the curing reaction of the ultraviolet curable resin layer will be insufficient, resulting in insufficient surface hardness, para. [0033]) at least in a region overlapping at least one of the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode.
Therefore, in view of the teachings of Masayuki, 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 method for fabricating a secondary battery of Momo and to replace the second exterior body 11 as taught by Momo in Fig. 1a with a protective layer as Masayuki taught in Fig. 4C, so that it enables controlling the surface hardness of the exterior body.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter:
Claim 6 would be allowable for disclosing a method for fabricating a secondary battery, wherein an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light during the sealing is larger than an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light under the reduced pressure.
Though, prior art of record Adams teaches a ultraviolet curable adhesive film, Adams fails to teach dripping an electrolyte on at least one of the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode; or curing at least part of the resin layer by irradiation of the resin layer with ultraviolet light under reduced pressure; or an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light during the sealing is larger than an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light under the reduced pressure.
Prior art of record Momo fails to teach curing the resin layer by irradiation of the resin layer with ultraviolet light; or an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light during the sealing is larger than an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light under the reduced pressure.
Though, prior art of record Masayuki teaches curing the resin layer by irradiation of the resin layer with ultraviolet light; Masayuki fails to teach dripping an electrolyte on at least one of the first electrode, the separator, and the second electrode; or an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light during the sealing is larger than an area of the resin layer irradiated with the ultraviolet light under the reduced pressure.
Therefore, claim 6 would be allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
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 JOSE K. ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1087. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 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, THOMAS J. HONG can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/JOSE K ABRAHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3729 /THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729