Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/011,735

Secondary Battery Including Gas Discharge Portion Configured to Discharge Gas and Secondary Battery Manufacturing Method

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 20, 2022
Examiner
ZENG, LINGWEN R
Art Unit
1723
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
LG Energy Solution, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
398 granted / 522 resolved
+11.2% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
544
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
61.6%
+21.6% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
7.5%
-32.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 522 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 12/20/2022, 11/01/2023, 01/24/2024 and 09/30/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2012/0231307 to Ha. With respect to claim 1, Ha teaches a pouch-shaped case comprising: a receiving portion 225 configured to receive an electrode assembly 100; a sealed portion 221-224 formed as a result of hermetically sealing a periphery of the receiving portion 225; and a gas discharge portion 120 or 160 disposed in the sealed portion 221, the gas discharge portion 120 or 160 having one end disposed in contact with the receiving portion 225 and the other end disposed in contact with an outside, the gas discharge portion 120 or 160 configured to selectively discharge only gas (Ha: Section [0052]; Figs. 1-4). With respect to claim 6, Ha teaches the pouch-shaped case, wherein the gas discharge portion wraps an electrode lead protruding outwards from the electrode assembly (Ha: Section [0052]; Figs. 1-4). With respect to claim 7, Ha teaches the pouch-shaped case, wherein the pouch-shaped case 200 comprises a laminate sheet, and contact portions of the gas discharge portion 120 or 160 and the laminate sheet are coated with polypropylene (Ha: Section [0049]; Figs. 1-4). With respect to claim 8, Ha teaches a secondary battery comprising: the pouch-shaped case 200; and an electrode assembly 100 (Ha: Section [0052]; Figs. 1-4). 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. 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 2-4 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2012/0231307 to Ha. With respect to claims 2-4, Ha teaches the pouch-shaped case, wherein the gas discharge material comprises polyethylene (PE) (Ha: Section [0052]; Figs. 1-4). Ha teaches the same gas discharge material, therefor, lacking of any clear structural or composition distinction between the claimed gas discharge material of the battery and those disclosed by Ha, it would have expected for the battery of Ha to have the gas discharge portion 120 or 160 is made of a gas discharge material having a higher gas permeability than a moisture permeability and an annual moisture permeability of 50 ppm or less as claimed lacking unexpected result showing otherwise. With respect to claims 9 and 10, Ha teaches a secondary battery manufacturing method comprising: (S1) applying a gas discharge material 120 or 160 having a higher gas permeability than a moisture permeability to at least a part of a surface of an electrode lead 110 or 150 of an electrode assembly 100; and (S2) receiving the electrode assembly 100 in a receiving portion 225 formed in a pouch-shaped case 200 having a gas discharge portion 120 or 160 and then hermetically sealing the case 200 (Ha: Sections [0049] and [0052]; Figs. 1-4). Ha teaches the same gas discharge material, therefor, lacking of any clear structural or composition distinction between the claimed gas discharge material of the battery and those disclosed by Ha, it would have expected for the battery of Ha to have a gas discharge material having a higher gas permeability than a moisture permeability as claimed lacking unexpected result showing otherwise. With respect to claim 11, Ha teaches the secondary battery manufacturing method, wherein, in step S2, the gas discharge material 120 or 160 and the pouch-shaped case 200 are coupled to each other by using thermally adhesive synthetic resin (thermal fusion performed at least once to ten times) (Ha: Section [0049]; Figs. 1-4). With respect to claim 12, Ha teaches the secondary battery manufacturing method, wherein the gas discharge portion 120 or 160 undergoes a surface reforming process by using thermally adhesive synthetic resin (Ha: Section [0049]; Figs. 1-4). Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2012/0231307 to Ha in view of US Patent Application Publication 2006/0216594 to You et al. With respect to claim 5, Ha further teaches the pouch-shaped case, wherein the safety film 120 and 160 may have a thickness of approximately 20% to approximately 50% of that of the first or the second electrode tab (Ha: Section [0049]; Figs. 1-4). Ha does not specifically teach the pouch-shaped case, wherein the gas discharge portion has a thickness of 100 μm to 600 μm. You et al. teach a battery comprising electrode leads, wherein a thickness of the electrode leads is approximately 200 μm to 500 μm (You et al.: Section [0017]). With the teaching from You et al., the thickness of the safety film 120 and 160 would be 40 μm to 150 μm. It would have been obvious as of the effective filing dated of the claimed invention to have modified Ha with the teaching above from You et al. with the motivation of having a means such the specific thickness of the electrode leads are very common in the art. With respect to claim 13, Ha further teaches the secondary battery manufacturing method, wherein the safety film 120 and 160 may have a thickness of approximately 20% to approximately 50% of that of the first or the second electrode tab (Ha: Section [0049]; Figs. 1-4). Ha does not specifically teach the pouch-shaped case, wherein the gas discharge portion has a thickness of 100 μm to 600 μm. You et al. teach a battery comprising electrode leads, wherein a thickness of the electrode leads is approximately 200 μm to 500 μm (You et al.: Section [0017]). With the teaching from You et al., the thickness of the safety film 120 and 160 would be 40 μm to 150 μm. It would have been obvious as of the effective filing dated of the claimed invention to have modified Ha with the teaching above from You et al. with the motivation of having a means such the specific thickness of the electrode leads are very common in the art. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINGWEN R ZENG whose telephone number is (571)272-6649. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm. 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, Milton I Cano and Tiffany Legette can be reached on (313) 446-4937 and (571) 270-7078, respectively. 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. /LINGWEN R ZENG/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 1/18/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 20, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 15, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 15, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603351
BATTERY MODULE WITH IMPROVED COOLING PERFORMANCE AND BATTERY PACK INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603397
Seam Welding Structure of Battery Can, Current Collecting Plate, and Cap and Battery Cell Using the Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597683
CURRENT COLLECTOR, BATTERY CELL, BATTERY PACK, AND VEHICLE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592449
ASSEMBLED BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12573676
BATTERY UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+21.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 522 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month