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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/06/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1 and 21 have been amended; support is found in Figures 1-3.
Claim 20 has been cancelled.
Claims 1-19 and 21 are currently pending and have been examined on the merits in this office action.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8, 13-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 108511670 A1-as cited in the IDS) in view of Kim (US 2005/0266302 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 21, Lu discloses an electronic device comprising a battery wherein the battery comprising:
A housing including a mechanical part (Figure 6, battery housing with a cover body 21), the housing comprising a cavity (Figure 6; [17] the battery comprising a battery housing with a battery cell located within the housing and the cover plate covering the battery housing), and the mechanical part forming at least a portion of the cavity (Figure 3; cover plate forms a top portion of the cavity and is connected to the sides of the battery housing);
A battery cell, located in the cavity (Figure 6; [17] the battery comprising a battery housing with a battery cell located within the housing and the cover plate covering the battery housing), wherein the battery cell comprises a tab ([26] inner lead out sheet 34 is read as the tab);
A thermal strain elastic component, located between the housing and the tab and insulatively connected to the housing and/or the tab (Figure 4; temperature memory elastic element 14; [38] temperature memory elastic element is provided with an insulating coating to prevent the conductive sheet 12 from contacting the lower surface of the cap 11 to conduct electricity); and
An electric conductor, located between the housing and the tab (Figure 4; [46] terminal 32 provided between the cover and the tab/ inner lead out sheet); wherein
When a temperature of the battery cell is less than a threshold, the electric conductor is electrically connected to the terminal, and when the temperature of the battery cell is greater than or equal to the threshold, the thermal strain elastic component is deformed, so that the electric conductor is separated from the terminal ([42-44] the temperature memory elastic element as a deformation temperature that causes an internal disconnection of the battery when the threshold temperature is exceeded).
Lu discloses wherein the cover plate covers the opening of the battery housing and contains the electrode terminals, however, is silent with respect to the housing serving as an electrode terminal and wherein the elastic component is located between the mechanical part of the housing and the tab.
Kim discloses a secondary battery and is analogous with the instant invention as being within the same field of endeavor of batteries. Kim discloses wherein a battery has a cap assembly and discloses wherein an insulated electrode terminal is provided in the cap assembly and wherein the cap assembly can be connected to the other electrode and function as a terminal (abstract, [0012], [0039]). Kim also discloses a thermos-breaker having an elastic body positioned between the bimetal and the terminal lead wire and the cap plate (Figure 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to rearrange the battery casing structure of Lu such that the cap assembly/housing is electrically connected to one of the electrodes to serve as the terminal and wherein the other terminal extends through and is insulated from the cap assembly as taught by Kim. Additionally, it would have been obvious to rearrange the elastic member of Lu to be between the cap plate and the electrode tab as taught by Kim. The resulting modification can have the thermal strain elastic component located between the mechanical part of the housing and the tab and when an increase in temperature occurs the thermal strain elastic component can be deformed to disconnect the tab from the housing. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Modified Lu is further silent with respect to wherein the cover plate forms at least a portion of two or more sides of the cavity. Examiner notes that the cover plate of Lu is connected to the other housing component to form the sealed housing, however, is silent with respect to an extension downward to connect the cover assembly to the rest of the housing that would read on the cover forming at least a portion of two or more sides of the cavity. A skilled artisan would have recognized that the structure of the sealed battery can be with or without these extensions as the cover assembly with or without the extensions is connected to the rest of the housing to seal the battery. Thus it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to modify the shape of the cover plate such that the cover plate has extension that extend downward from ends of the cover plate to be connected with the rest of the battery housing to form a sealed battery housing that has the cover plate forming multiple sides of the cavity. The change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claims 2-3, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Lu discloses wherein the mechanical part comprises a first mechanical part, the housing comprises the first mechanical part and a second mechanical part, the first mechanical part and the second mechanical part are insulatively connected and are enclosed to form the cavity, the tab comprises a negative tab/ positive tab, and the thermal strain elastic component and the electric conductor are located between the first mechanical part and the negative tab/positive tab (Figure 2; the cap 11 is read as a first mechanical part being part that seals the battery housing; Figure 6 shows the rest of the battery housing reading as the second mechanical part; the temperature memory elastic element and terminal 32 are formed between the cap and the inner lead out sheet that is read as the tab; [46] the electrode terminal can be a negative and/or positive terminal).
Regarding claim 4, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Lu discloses wherein the mechanical part comprises a first mechanical part, the housing comprises the first mechanical part and a second mechanical part, the first mechanical part and the second mechanical part are insulatively connected and are enclosed to form the cavity, the tab comprises a negative tab and positive tab, and the first/second thermal strain elastic component and the first/second electric conductors are located between the first/second mechanical part and the negative tab/positive tab (Figure 2; the cap 11 is read as a first mechanical part being part that seals the battery housing; Figure 6 shows the rest of the battery housing; the temperature memory elastic element and terminal 32/33 are formed between the cap and the inner lead out sheet that is read as the tab; [46] the electrode terminal can be a negative and/or positive terminal; [49] the negative terminal and/or positive terminal can be disconnected from the battery cap thus both of the positive and negative terminals can have the thermal strain elastic component used for forming a disconnection between the electrical materials within the battery).
Regarding claim 5, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 1. Lu further discloses wherein the electric conductor comprises a body part and a protruding part, the body part is connected to the protruding part, the body part is connected to the tab and the thermal strain elastic component, and the protruding part faces the housing and is detachably connected to the housing (Figures 2-4; the terminals 32 has a protrusion section that is connected to cover plate 21 and a second portion that is read as the body portion that extends between the temperature memory elastic element; [32] a connection should include a detachable connection). Lu is silent with respect to the shape of the protruding part having a convex shape, however, the shape of the terminal member is not inventive and can be changed by a skilled artisan. Therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to change the shape of the conductive terminal member 32 such that the conductive terminal member has a convex part and a body part wherein the convex part faces the housing and is detachable to the housing as a simple change in shape of the conductive member. The change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 6, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu further discloses wherein the thermal strain elastic component is located on a surface that is of the body part and that faces the housing, and the thermal strain elastic component is spaced apart from the convex part (Figure 2; temperature memory elastic element is around the body part that spaces the housing and is vertically spaced from the convex part).
Regarding claim 7, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu discloses wherein multiple temperature memory elastic elements can be used for the terminals. Lu is silent with respect to the plurality of thermal strain elastic components enclosing a peripheral edge of the convex part, however, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to rearrange the battery elements such that the convex protrusion of the terminal are enclosed by the temperature memory elastic element as a simple rearrangement of parts. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 8, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu discloses wherein the thermal strain elastic component is a hollow ring (Figure 2). Lu is silent with respect to the thermal strain elastic components enclosing a peripheral edge of the convex part and wherein the convex part is in the middle of the thermal strain elastic component, however, it would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to rearrange the battery elements such that the convex protrusion of the terminal are within the hollow ring and enclosed by the temperature memory elastic element as a simple rearrangement of parts. The mere rearrangement of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 13, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu discloses wherein a shape of the thermal strain elastic forms a circular ring. Lu is silent with respect to the shapes as claimed, however, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to change that shape of the temperature memory elastic element to a cuboid, cube, ellipsoid, or a semi-ellipsoid as a simple change in shape. The change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claims 14-15, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu further discloses wherein the temperature memory elastic element is made of a spring shaped memory alloy element such as Mn-Ga-Gd alloy or Ni-Mn-Sn alloy and contains an insulating coating provided on a surface of the elastic element ([38]-[42]). Thus Lu discloses wherein the thermal strain elastic component is made of a conductive material and/or with an insulating layer provided on top and thus would read on the claim limitations of claims 14-15.
Regarding claim 16, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu further discloses wherein the threshold is 70-75 C ([42] threshold temperature is 60-80 C). 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, 191USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claims 17-18, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 5. Lu further discloses a single lead out sheet, however, the battery cell can contain multiple lead out sheets as each electrode layer can have their own tabs, therefore, it would have been obvious in view of a skilled artisan to duplicate the lead out sheet such that multiple lead out sheets can be used or a single lead out sheet. Through the combination a single lead out sheet can be used or multiple lead out sheets can be used thus rendering obvious all the claim limitations of claims 17-18. The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (see MPEP § 2144.04).
Regarding claim 19, modified Lu discloses all the claim limitations of claim 2. Lu further discloses wherein the first mechanical part is a metal shell and the second mechanical part is a battery post, or both mechanical parts are metal shells ([17] housing with a cover plate would read on two shells; and/or the terminals extending out would read as a battery post with the rest of the housing reading of the shells thus Lu appears to disclose both embodiments).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12 are 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9 depends upon claim 5 and contains the limitation of the thermal strain elastic component is connected to the surface of the body part and faces the housing and further comprises a supporter located on a side that is of the thermal strain electric component that is away from the convex part and is fastened to the housing and connected to the body part. Lu is silent with respect to this structure and a skilled artisan would not have been motivated to make such a modification as the modification would require a significant amount of restructuring thus is deemed to be non-obvious. A skilled artisan would not have been motivated to modify the structure taught by Lu to read on the claimed invention.
Claim 10 contains the limitation wherein on a cross section of the thermal strain elastic component along an overlaying direction of the housing, the thermal strain elastic component has a first length on a side facing the convex part, and the thermal strain elastic component has a second length on a side way from the convex part wherein the first length is greater than the second length. Lu is silent with respect to this structure and a skilled artisan would not have been motivated to make such a modification as the modification would require a significant amount of restructuring thus is deemed to be non-obvious. A skilled artisan would not have been motivated to modify the structure taught by Lu to read on the claimed invention. Claims 11-12 are objected to for depending upon claim 10.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amended claims overcome the rejection of record as Kim and Lu fail to teach wherein the elastic component is located between the mechanical part of the housing and the tab of the battery, however, this argument is not persuasive in view of the updated rejection as Kim discloses wherein the elastic component can be towards as inside region of the cap plate. Thus the arguments are rendered moot in view of the updated rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hu (WO 2018153155 A1)-discloses a battery cover assembly and battery having a spring member 9 that is located between an electrode lead and the cover body 12.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam J Francis whose telephone number is (571)272-1021. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7 am-4 pm 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, Matthew Martin can be reached at (571)270-7871. 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.
/ADAM J FRANCIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728