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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2007-0074390 A, see also the previously provided English translation).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses in Fig. 2a-2b a secondary battery (P13) comprising:
an electrode assembly (100) to which an electrode lead (120) is coupled (P14);
a pouch (200) comprising an accommodation part accommodating the electrode assembly (100) therein, a front end of the electrode lead (120) extending through the pouch (200) to an outside of the pouch (200), and a sealing part (e.g. a part of the circumferential edge of 200 that is fused) extending along a circumference of the accommodation part, the sealing part sealing the accommodation part (P22); and
an insulating tape (150) extending through the pouch (200) (Fig. 2b), and
the insulating tape (150) extends between the electrode lead (120) and the sealing part (Fig. 2b).
Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the insulating tape is a gas discharge part, the gas discharge part being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the pouch to the outside of the pouch, the gas discharge part being configured to block an inflow of moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch, wherein the gas discharge part comprises: a gas transmitting film having air permeability, the gas transmitting film being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the accommodation part to the outside of the pouch; and a moisture absorbing material that is configured to absorb moisture from a gas from the outside of the pouch passing through the gas transmitting film, the moisture absorbing material being configured to block inflow of the moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch.
However, Lee discloses wherein the insulating tape (150) comprises an outer layer (154) formed of an organic material, such as polypropylene (P21), and an inner layer (152) formed of an organic material (152a), such as polypropylene, and an inorganic material (152b), such as silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4), alumina (Al2O3), zirconia (ZrO2), and magnesia (MgO) (P19).
The Examiner notes wherein the instant specification discloses a gas discharge part being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of an pouch to an outside of the pouch, the gas discharge part being configured to block an inflow of moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch, wherein the gas discharge part comprises: a gas transmitting film having air permeability, the gas transmitting film being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the accommodation part to the outside of the pouch; and a moisture absorbing material that is configured to absorb moisture from a gas from the outside of the pouch passing through the gas transmitting film, the moisture absorbing material being configured to block inflow of the moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch ([0051]-[0052]).
Specifically, the instant specification discloses wherein the gas transmitting film may be made of polypropylene ([0058]) and wherein the moisture absorbing material may be any one of silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4), alumina (Al2O3), zirconia (ZrO2), and magnesia (MgO) ([0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the outer layer of Lee to be made of polypropylene and to form the inner layer of Lee to be made of polypropylene and any one of silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4), alumina (Al2O3), zirconia (ZrO2), and magnesia (MgO), as disclosed by Lee, wherein the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the insulating tape desired by Lee.
In light of the above, modified Lee discloses wherein the insulating tape (150) is a gas discharge part (150) being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the pouch (200) to the outside of the pouch (200), the gas discharge part (150) being configured to block an inflow of moisture from the outside of the pouch (200) to the inside of the pouch (200), wherein the gas discharge part (150) comprises: a gas transmitting film having air permeability (154), the gas transmitting film (154) being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the accommodation part to the outside of the pouch (200); and a moisture absorbing material (152a) that is configured to absorb moisture from a gas from the outside of the pouch (200) passing through the gas transmitting film (154), the moisture absorbing material (152a) being configured to block inflow of the moisture from the outside of the pouch (200) to the inside of the pouch (200), as evidenced by [0051]-[0052], [0058], [0061] of the instant specification.
Furthermore, modified Lee discloses wherein the moisture absorbing material (152a) extends to locations inside and outside of the sealing part (Fig. 2, wherein the sealing part is a part (e.g. a portion) of the circumferential edge of 200 that is fused).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Lee discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the gas discharge part (150) extends within the sealing part (Fig. 2b).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Lee discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Modified Lee further discloses wherein the gas discharge part (150) acts as an adhesive and therefore the secondary battery does not need to comprise an adhesive film disposed between the gas discharge part and the sealing part (P21).
However, Lee discloses wherein an adhesive film may be formed on the gas discharge part (150), so as to be disposed between the gas discharge part (150) and the sealing part, in order to reinforce the adhesive strength between the sealing part of the pouch (200) and the electrode lead (120) (bridging of P21-22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form an adhesive film on the gas discharge part, such that the adhesive film is disposed between the gas discharge part and the sealing part, as disclosed by modified Lee, in order to reinforce the adhesive strength between the sealing part of the pouch and the electrode lead.
The Examiner notes that the limitation “configured to seal a gap between the gas discharge part and the sealing part” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because modified Lee discloses an adhesive film disposed between the gas discharge part (150) and the sealing part in order to adhere the sealing part of the pouch and the electrode lead (120), (bridging of P21-22), such reads on the limitation “configured to seal a gap between the gas discharge part and the sealing part”.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Lee discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the gas transmitting film (154) is made of a thermoplastic resin (P21, polypropylene), and the moisture absorbing material (152b) is made of an oxide that is configured to absorb moisture (P19, silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon nitride (Si3N4), alumina (Al2O3), zirconia (ZrO2), and/or magnesia (MgO), as rendered obvious above).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Lee discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the gas discharge part (150) has a first end located inside of the pouch (200) adjacent to an inner edge of the sealing part, and a second end located outside of the pouch (200) adjacent to an outer periphery of the sealing part (Fig. 2b).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 2007-0074390 A, see also the previously provided English translation), as applied to Claim 4 above, with evidence provided by NACE Corrosion Engineer’s Reference Book (see the previously provided NPL).
Regarding Claims 5 and 7, modified Lee discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Modified Lee remains silent regarding the material of the adhesive film and consequently does not disclose wherein the adhesive film is made of a material having air permeability and wherein the adhesive film has an air permeability less than an air permeability of the gas transmitting film.
Though, Lee discloses wherein a polyimide layer may act as an adhesive (P21).
The Examiner notes wherein polyimide has an air permeability less than polypropylene (Table: Oxygen and Water Permeability in Plastic Films of NACE Corrosion Engineer’s Reference Book).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the adhesive film of polyimide, as disclosed by modified Lee, such that the adhesive film is made of a material having permeability and has an air permeability less than an air permeability of the gas transmitting film, as such is a known material that acts like an adhesive and therefore the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the adhesive film desired by modified Lee.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Lee discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. Modified Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the adhesive film surrounds an entire outer circumference surface of the gas transmitting film, the adhesive film thereby preventing exposure of the gas discharge part to the outside of the pouch.
However, modified Lee discloses wherein the adhesive film is formed on the gas discharge part (150), so as to be disposed between the gas discharge part (150) and the sealing part, in order to reinforce the adhesive strength between the sealing part of the pouch (200) and the electrode lead (120) (bridging of P21-22).
Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the adhesive layer to be on the entire outer circumferential surface of the gas discharge part in order to maximize reinforcement of the adhesive strength between the sealing part of the pouch and the electrode lead.
Thus, modified Lee discloses wherein the adhesive film surrounds an entire outer circumferential surface of the gas transmitting film (154) (Fig. 2b), thereby preventing exposure of the gas discharge part (150) to the outside of the pouch (200).
Claims 1, 3-4, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyajima et al. (JP 2008-016337 A, see also the provided English translation), and further in view of Lee et al. (KR 2007-0074390 A, see also the previously provided English translation).
Regarding Claims 1 and 10, Miyajima discloses in Figs. 1-5 a battery comprising:
an electrode assembly to which an electrode lead (2) is coupled ([0021]);
a pouch (1) comprising an accommodation part (7, 8) accommodating the electrode assembly therein, a front end of the electrode lead (2) extending through the pouch (1) to an outside of the pouch (1), and a sealing part (9, 10) extending along a circumference of the accommodation part (7, 8), the sealing part (9, 10) sealing the accommodation part (7, 8) ([0021]);
a film (11, 12) extending through the pouch (1) ([0021]);
wherein the film (11, 12) extends between the electrode lead (2) and the sealing part (9, 10) ([0021]);
Miyajima does not explicitly disclose wherein the film is a gas discharge part, the gas discharge part being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the pouch to the outside of the pouch, the gas discharge part being configured to block an inflow of moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch, wherein the gas discharge part comprises: a gas transmitting film having air permeability, the gas transmitting film being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the accommodation part to the outside of the pouch; and a moisture absorbing material that is configured to absorb moisture from a gas from the outside of the pouch passing through the gas transmitting film, the moisture absorbing material being configured to block inflow of the moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch.
However, Miyajima discloses wherein the film (11, 12) comprises a thermoplastic resin ([0023], [0010], e.g. 13, 14, 15) and a material (16), such as silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide, aluminum oxide ([0012], [0023]) in order to form a film (11, 12) that prevents short-circuiting between the electrode lead (2) and a metal layer within the pouch (1) while maintaining airtightness of the pouch (1) ([0008]).
The Examiner notes wherein the instant specification discloses a gas discharge part being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of an pouch to an outside of the pouch, the gas discharge part being configured to block an inflow of moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch, wherein the gas discharge part comprises: a gas transmitting film having air permeability, the gas transmitting film being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the accommodation part to the outside of the pouch; and a moisture absorbing material that is configured to absorb moisture from a gas from the outside of the pouch passing through the gas transmitting film, the moisture absorbing material being configured to block inflow of the moisture from the outside of the pouch to the inside of the pouch ([0051]-[0052]).
Specifically, the instant specification discloses wherein the gas transmitting film may be made of a thermoplastic resin, such as polypropylene ([0058]) and wherein the moisture absorbing material may be any one of silicon dioxide (SiO2), magnesium oxide (MgO), aluminum oxide (Al2O3) ([0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide, or aluminum oxide as the material in the film, as disclosed by Miyajima, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully prevent short-circuiting between the electrode lead and a metal layer within the pouch while maintaining airtightness of the pouch, as desired by Miyajima.
In light of the above, modified Miyajima discloses wherein the film (11, 12) is a gas discharge part (11, 12) being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the pouch (1) to the outside of the pouch (1), the gas discharge part (11, 12) being configured to block an inflow of moisture from the outside of the pouch (1) to the inside of the pouch (1), wherein the gas discharge part (11, 12) comprises: a gas transmitting film (13, 14, 15) having air permeability, the gas transmitting film (13, 14, 15) being configured to discharge a gas from an inside of the accommodation part (7, 8) to the outside of the pouch (1); and a moisture absorbing material (16) that is configured to absorb moisture from a gas from the outside of the pouch (1) passing through the gas transmitting film (13, 14, 15), the moisture absorbing material (16) being configured to block inflow of the moisture from the outside of the pouch (1) to the inside of the pouch (1), as evidenced by [0051]-[0052], [0058], [0061] of the instant specification.
Furthermore, modified Miyajima discloses wherein the moisture absorbing material (16) extends to locations inside and outside of the sealing part (9, 10) ([0021], [0023]).
While modified Miyajima discloses a battery, modified Miyajima does not disclose wherein such is a secondary battery.
Lee teaches in Fig. 2a-2b a secondary battery (P13) comprising pouch (200) accommodating an electrode assembly (Fig. 2b and P14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the battery of modified Miyajima to be a secondary battery, as taught by Lee, wherein the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such would successfully function as the battery of modified Miyajima.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Miyajima discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the gas discharge part (11, 12 of Miyajima) extends within the sealing part (9, 10 of Miyajima) (Fig. 2, [0021] of Miyajima).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Miyajima discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses a desire for the pouch (1 of Miyajima) to be airtight ([0008] of Miyajima).
However, modified Miyajima does not disclose an adhesive film configured to seal a gap between a discharge part and a sealing part, the adhesive film being disposed between the gas discharge part and the sealing part.
Lee further teaches in Fig. 2a-2b wherein the secondary battery (P13) comprises an electrode lead (120); a pouch (200); and film (150) extending between the electrode lead (120) and a sealing part of the pouch (200) (Fig. 2b and P14).
Specifically, Lee teaches wherein an adhesive film may be formed on the (150), so as to be disposed between the film (150) and the sealing part, in order to reinforce the adhesive strength between the sealing part of the pouch (200) and the electrode lead (120) (bridging of P21-22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form an adhesive film on the gas discharge part of modified Miyajima, such that the adhesive film is disposed between the gas discharge part and the sealing part of modified Miyajima, as further taught by Lee, in order to reinforce the adhesive strength between the sealing part of the pouch and the electrode lead of modified Miyajima.
The Examiner notes that the limitation “configured to seal a gap between the gas discharge part and the sealing part” is intended use and therefore is not given patentable weight aside from the structure required to perform such function.
Thus, because modified Miyajima discloses an adhesive film disposed between the gas discharge part (11, 12 of Miyajima) and the sealing part (9, 10 of Miyajima) in order to adhere the sealing part of the pouch and the electrode lead (2 of Miyajima), (bridging of P21-22 of Lee), such reads on the limitation “configured to seal a gap between the gas discharge part and the sealing part”.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Miyajima discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the gas discharge part (11, 12 of Miyajima) has a first end located inside of the pouch (1 of Miyajima) adjacent to an inner edge of the sealing part (9, 10 of Miyajima), and a second end located outside of the pouch (1 of Miyajima) adjacent to an outer periphery of the sealing part (9, 10 of Miyajima) (Fig. 2 of Miyajima).
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyajima et al. (JP 2008-016337 A, see also the provided English translation), and further in view of Lee et al. (KR 2007-0074390 A, see also the previously provided English translation), as applied to Claim 4 above, with evidence provided by NACE Corrosion Engineer’s Reference Book (see the previously provided NPL).
Regarding Claims 5 and 7, modified Miyajima discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. However, modified Miyajima remains silent regarding the material of the adhesive film and consequently does not disclose wherein the adhesive film is made of a material having air permeability and wherein the adhesive film has an air permeability less than an air permeability of the gas transmitting film.
Though, Lee further teaches wherein a polyimide layer may act as an adhesive (P21).
The Examiner notes wherein polyimide has an air permeability less than polypropylene (Table: Oxygen and Water Permeability in Plastic Films of NACE Corrosion Engineer’s Reference Book).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the adhesive film of polyimide, as further taught by Lee, such that the adhesive film is made of a material having permeability and has an air permeability less than an air permeability of the gas transmitting film, as such is a known material that acts like an adhesive and therefore the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the adhesive film desired by modified Lee.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding amended Claim 1, the Applicant argues that the new amendment “wherein the moisture absorbing material extends to locations inside and outside of the sealing part”, as discussed in the previous interview.
The Examiner notes that the amendment has overcome the prior rejection of record. However, a new interpretation of the cited prior art is being made.
For example, the Examiner notes that the claim recites “a sealing part extending along a circumference of the accommodation part, the sealing part sealing the accommodating part” and therefore the sealing part can be any part (e.g. a portion) of the circumferential edge of the pouch (200) of Lee that is fused. Consequently, the sealing part is being interpreted as being a part of the circumferential edge of the pouch (200) such that the moisture absorbing material (150b) extends to locations inside and outside of the sealing part, see annotated 2b of Lee provided below as an example.
PNG
media_image1.png
494
1452
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Additionally, a rejection over new reference Miyajima has been relied upon.
The Examiner notes that both Lee and Miyajima disclose the moisture absorbing material as particles within an intermediate layer of the gas discharge part (Figs. 2b-3a of Lee and Fig. 2 of Miyajima) and therefore the Examiner suggests that the Applicant could amend Claim 1 to require the moisture absorbing material to be in the form of a film consisting of the moisture absorbing material, as supported by at least Figs. 3-4 and [0059]-[0061] of the instant specification.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 8 was indicated as containing allowable subject matter in the prior Office Action dated April 3, 2026. Thus, refer to the prior Office Action dated April 3, 2026 for the statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Matsumoto et al. (KR 2021-0077608 A, see also the provided English translation) teaches in Fig. 4 a secondary battery comprising, among additional limitations, a film (3) extending between an electrode lead (2b) and a sealing part (102), wherein the film (3) comprises a moisture absorbing material (6) ([0060]).
However, Matsumoto is not considered to be prior art.
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 KIMBERLY WYLUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 AM - 3 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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
