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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 31st, 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-13, 17-20 & 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US20060275666) (Provided in Applicant’s IDS filed on January 6th, 2023) in view of Chang’ (US20060263676).
Regarding Claim 1, Chang discloses a cylindrical type secondary battery (cylindrical can, [0035]) comprising:
A jelly-roll-type electrode assembly ([0036]) wound by an interposing a separator between sheet-shaped positive and negative electrodes ([0036]);
A battery case in which the electrode assembly is accommodated (cylindrical can, [0035]); and
A cap assembly coupled to an upper portion of the battery case (cap assembly-400, [0035]); and
A center pin inserted into a core of the electrode assembly and configured to support the electrode assembly in radial direction on an inner circumferential surface of the core by elasticity (center pin body is compressed by spring, [0015], center pin-120, [0035]),
Wherein the center pin comprises an elastic body having a length (center pin is elastic, [0057])
A lower support coupled to a first end of the elastic body, and an upper support coupled to a second end of the elastic body (lids-138 acts as upper and lower support, [0055], Fig. 5).
Chang does not directly disclose wherein the upper support being in contact with the cap assembly.
Chang’ discloses a cylindrical battery that includes a center pin ([0015]). Chang’ further discloses wherein the center pin is formed of an elastic body and an upper support structure (center pin-120, [0040], spring-133, [0043], and moveable member-132 acts as upper support, [0043]). Chang’ further discloses wherein the upper support contacts the cap assembly when in use (Fig. 3, [0050]). Chang’ teaches that this structure provides improved safety ([0023]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Chang with the teachings of Chang’ to have wherein the upper support being in contact with the cap assembly. This modification would yield the expected result of improved safety.
Chang further discloses wherein the upper support is a conductor, the lower support is a nonconductor, and the elastic body is a conductor (the upper support can be stainless steel, [0048], the lower support is a nonconductor formed of support can be made of polymer resins, [0016]), and the elastic body is a conductor that can be stainless steel, [0048]), and the tubular body is a conductor (center pin is formed of metal plate, [0041]).
Regarding Claim 2, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the lower support being in contact with a lower portion of the battery case (lids-138 act as lower support, Fig. 5, [0055]).
Regarding Claim 3, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the center pin further comprises an upper support which is coupled to other end of the elastic body and in contact with an upper portion of the battery case (lid-138 act as upper support, Fig. 5, [0055]).
Regarding Claim 4, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the center pin further comprises a tubular body which is provided between the lower support and the upper support and in which a hollow is formed to have the elastic body provided therein (compression spring- 137 is placed in hollow of tubular center pin, which is capped by the lids-138 acting as lower and upper supports, [0055], Fig. 5, body-131 forms a tubular center pin, [0054]).
Regarding Claim 5, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang does not directly disclose wherein the body has an axial length short than the length of the elastic body.
Chang discloses wherein the length of the center pin can be a predetermined length ([0036]), and further discloses wherein the axial length of the center pin is shorter than the length of the axial body (Fig. 5).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Chang to have wherein the body has an axial length short than the length of the elastic body.
Regarding Claim 6, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a cutoff part taken along an axial direction is formed in the body (thermal cut-off composition-133 defined cutoff part, Fig. 5, [0054]).
Regarding Claim 7, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the body is finished in a shape where an end, formed in the cutoff part, of the body is rolled toward the inside of the hollow (the examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, “body is rolled toward the inside of the hollow” can be interpreted to mean that the “shape where an end, formed in the cutoff part” is placed inside the inside of the hollow, therefore the gasifier-134 which acts as the shape where an end is formed, and since the gasifier is placed inside the hollow of the center pin, Fig. 5, Chang meets the limitations of Claim 7).
Regarding Claim 8, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Chang does not directly disclose wherein the elastic body is curved in an outward radial direction by axial compressive stress acting on the lower support and the upper support to press the elastic body.
Chang discloses wherein the elastic body comprises a compressive spring ([0057]). Chang further discloses wherein the elastic body is curved in an outward radial direction (Fig. 4a shows the center pin elastic body is curved radially outward). Chang discloses that the compression spring is in a pressed position until a specific thermal runaway cut off ([0016-0017]).
Therefore it is the examiner’s position that since the compression spring is pressed and the elastic body is curved in an outward radial direction, that Chang discloses wherein the elastic body is curved in an outward radial direction by axial compressive stress acting on the lower support and the upper support to press the elastic body.
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Chang to have wherein the elastic body is curved in an outward radial direction by axial compressive stress acting on the lower support and the upper support to press the elastic body.
Regarding Claim 10, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the upper support is a conductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]), the lower support is a nonconductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]), and the elastic body is a conductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]).
Regarding Claim 11, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a first positive electrode non-coating portion is located at a winding start position of the sheet-shaped positive electrode (cathode plate-210 has non-coated portions at both ends of the plate, [0036]), wherein one end of the first positive electrode non-coating portion is longer than one end of the separator and protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly (non-coated portions include a cathode tab-215 that protrude from the top of the electrode assembly, [0036]), and wherein the elastic body is bonded to the first positive electrode non-coating portion protruding toward the core of the electrode protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly (center pin is centered in electrode assembly, [0015], the examiner notes that since the ends of the cathode plates contain the non-coating portions, and the center pin is placed in the center of the electrode assembly that the non-coated portions are bonded to the center pin).
Regarding Claim 12, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the upper support is a conductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]), the lower support is a nonconductor (lids formed of support can be made of polymer resins, [0016]), and the elastic body is a conductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]), and the tubular body is a conductor (center pin is formed of metal plate, [0041]).
Regarding Claim 13, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a first positive electrode non-coating portion is located at a winding start position of the sheet-shaped positive electrode (cathode plate-210 has non-coated portions at both ends of the plate, [0036]), wherein one end of the first positive electrode non-coating portion is longer than one end of the separator (non-coated portions include a cathode tab-215 that protrude from the top of the electrode assembly, [0036], and therefore is longer than one end of the separator) and protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly (electrode assembly is winded, [0036], and therefore since both ends of the electrode plate have non-coated sections, [0036], there is a non-coated portion that protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly), and wherein the tubular body is bonded to the first positive electrode non-coating portion protruding toward the core of the electrode protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly (center pin is centered in electrode assembly, [0015], the examiner notes that since the ends of the cathode plates contain the non-coating portions, and the center pin is placed in the center of the electrode assembly that the non-coated portions are bonded to the center pin).
Regarding Claim 17, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang discloses wherein the upper support is a nonconductor (lids formed of support can be made of polymer resins, [0016]), the lower support is a conductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]), and the elastic body is a conductor (center pin is formed of metal plate, [0041]).
Regarding Claim 18, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a first negative electrode non-coating portion is located at a winding start position of the sheet-shaped negative electrode (anode plate-220 has non-coated portions at both ends of the plate, [0037]), wherein one end of the first negative electrode non-coating portion is longer than one end of the separator (non-coated portions include a anode tab-225 that protrude from the top of the electrode assembly, [0037], that protrudes past the separator) and protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly (electrode assembly is winded, [0036], and therefore since both ends of the electrode plate have non-coated sections, [0036], there is a non-coated portion that protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly), and wherein the elastic body is bonded to the first negative electrode non-coating portion protruding toward the core of the electrode protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly (center pin is centered in electrode assembly, [0015], the examiner notes that since the ends of the anode plates contain the non-coating portions, and the center pin is placed in the center of the electrode assembly that the non-coated portions are bonded to the center pin).
Regarding Claim 19, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang discloses wherein the upper support is a nonconductor (lids formed of support can be made of polymer resins, [0016]), the lower support is a conductor (can be stainless steel, [0048]), and the elastic body and tubular body is a conductor (center pin is formed of metal plate, [0041]).
Regarding Claim 20, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a first negative electrode non-coating portion is located at a winding start position of the sheet-shaped negative electrode (anode plate-220 has non-coated portions at both ends of the plate, [0037]), wherein one end of the first negative electrode non-coating portion is longer than one end of the separator (non-coated portions include a anode tab-225 that protrude from the top of the electrode assembly, [0037], that protrudes past the separator) and protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly (electrode assembly is winded, [0036], and therefore since both ends of the electrode plate have non-coated sections, [0036], there is a non-coated portion that protrudes toward the core of the electrode assembly), and wherein the tubular body is bonded to the first negative electrode non-coating portion protruding toward the core of the electrode protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly (center pin is centered in electrode assembly, [0015], the examiner notes that since the ends of the anode plates contain the non-coating portions, and the center pin is placed in the center of the electrode assembly that the non-coated portions are bonded to the center pin).
Regarding Claim 23, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein the elastic body has one of a cylindrical shape (center pin is cylindrical, Fig. 3).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US20060275666) in view of Chang’ (US20060263676 further in view of Hong (US20060093903) (Provided in Applicant’s IDS filed on January 6th, 2023).
Regarding Claim 9, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein each of the lower support and the upper support is a nonconductor (lids formed of support can be made of polymer resins, [0016]).
Chang discloses wherein the body and elastic body can be made of various materials ([0048]), but does not directly disclose wherein the body and elastic body is a nonconductor.
Hong discloses a center pin that can include an elastic body material or shape memory alloy ([0018]). Hong teaches that the elastic material allows for easier insertion of the center body and elastic material ([0016], [0041]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Chang with the teachings of Hong to have wherein the body and elastic body is a nonconductor. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved insertion of the center body and elastic material.
Claim(s) 14, 15 & 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US20060275666) in view of Chang’ (US20060263676) further in view of Hosoda (US20060121341) (Provided in Applicant’s IDS filed on January 6th, 2023).
Regarding Claim 14 & 15, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a second positive electrode non-coating portion and a positive electrode tab protruding from the second positive electrode non-coating portion are located at a central portion of the sheet-shaped positive electrode (electrode tab-215, Fig. 2, [0036]).
Chang does not directly disclose wherein the positive tab is bonded to the top surface of the upper support.
Hosoda discloses a cylindrical battery where the electrode assembly includes a negative electrode with an electrode lead that extends from the non-coated portion of the electrode (center pin-14, negative electrode lead-13 connected to negative current collector, [0073]). Hosoda further discloses wherein the negative electrode lead is connection to the center pin (negative electrode lead-1013 extend out of lower face side on one end of axial direction of the wound electrode body, and the center hole is formed where the center pin-14 is placed, Fig. 1 shows negative electrode lead is connected to bottom portion of center pin-14 via lower insulation plate-16, [0073]). Hosoda teaches that this structure provides a battery with improved life duration of charging/discharging cycle ([0091]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Chang with the teachings of Hosoda to have wherein the neagtive tab is bonded to the lower support. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life duration of charging/discharging cycle.
Regarding Claim 21, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang further discloses wherein a second negative electrode non-coating portion and a negative electrode tab protruding from the second negative electrode non-coating portion are located at a winding end of the sheet-shaped negative electrode (noncoated portions are located at center of electrode tab-225, Fig. 2, [0036]).
Chang does not directly disclose wherein the negative tab is bonded to the lower support.
Hosoda discloses a cylindrical battery where the electrode assembly includes a positive electrode with an electrode lead that extends from the non-coated portion of the electrode (center pin-14, positive electrode lead-12 connected to positive current collector, [0073]). Hosoda further discloses wherein the positive electrode lead is connection to the center pin (positive electrode lead-1012 extend out of upper face side on one end of axial direction of the wound electrode body, and the center hole is formed where the center pin-14 is placed, Fig. 1 shows positive electrode lead is connected to top portion of center pin-14 via upper insulation plate-15, [0073]). Hosoda teaches that this structure provides a battery with improved life duration of charging/discharging cycle ([0091]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Chang with the teachings of Hosoda to have wherein the negative tab is bonded to the lower support. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life duration of charging/discharging cycle.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US20060275666) in view of Chang’ (US20060263676) further in view of Suehiro (US20190363330).
Regarding Claim 16, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang does not directly disclose wherein an insulating tape is attached to a portion, not protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly, of the first positive electrode non-coating portion.
Suehiro discloses a positive electrode lead that extends from a noncoated portion of the positive electrode ([0049]). Suehiro further discloses wherien an insulating tape is disposed in the positive electrode lead ([0067]). Suehiro teaches that this structure provides a battery with flexible leads ([0021]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Chang with the teachings of Suehiro to have wherein an insulating tape is attached to a portion, not protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly, of the first positive electrode non-coating portion. This modified structure would yield the expected result of flexible leads.
Regarding Claim 22, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang does not directly disclose wherein an insulating tape is attached to a portion, not protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly, of the first positive electrode non-coating portion.
Suehiro discloses a positive electrode lead that extends from a noncoated portion of the positive electrode ([0049]). Suehiro further discloses wherien an insulating tape is disposed in the positive electrode lead ([0067]). Suehiro teaches that this structure provides a battery with flexible leads ([0021]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Chang with the teachings of Suehiro to have wherein an insulating tape is attached to a portion, not protruding toward the core of the electrode assembly, of the first positive electrode non-coating portion. This modified structure would yield the expected result of flexible leads.
Claim(s) 24 & 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang (US20060275666) in view of Chang’ (US20060263676) further in view of Kim (US20100216013).
Regarding Claim 24 & 25, Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations as set forth above. Chang does not directly disclose wherein a horizontal cross-sectional area of the upper support is larger than a horizontal cross-sectional area of the core of the electrode assembly, and wherein a diameter of the upper support is larger than a diameter of the core of the electrode assembly.
Kim discloses a cylindrical battery that includes a center pin ([003], center pin-50, [0036], Fig. 1). Kim further discloses wherein the center pin has an upper support that is larger than the core of the electrode assembly (upper insulting plate-40, [0036], acts as upper support). Kim teaches that this structure provides an improved reliability of the secondary battery ([0124]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Chang with the teachings of Kim to have wherein a horizontal cross-sectional area of the upper support is larger than a horizontal cross-sectional area of the core of the electrode assembly, and wherein a diameter of the upper support is larger than a diameter of the core of the electrode assembly. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved reliability of the secondary battery.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 31st, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the combination of Chang in view of Chang’ does not disclose the amended claim limitations.
Applicant argues that the present invention is directed to placing a non-conductive member at the center of the electrode assembly for thermal insulation whereas the present invention is directed the providing an electrical path at the center of the electrode assembly.
The claim language reads “a center pin inserted into the core of the electrode assembly, the center pin being configured to elastically support the electrode assembly in a radial direction on an inner circumferential surface of the core, wherein the center pin comprises:an elastic body having a length;a lower support coupled to a first end of the elastic body; andan upper support coupled to a second end of the elastic body, the upper support being in contact with the cap assembly, wherein the upper support is a conductor, the lower support is a nonconductor, and the elastic body is a conductor, or the upper support is a nonconductor, the lower support is a conductor, and the elastic body is a conductor” which can be interpreted to be any center pin structure that is placed in the center of an electrode assembly and has upper and lower supports with appropriate materials. The claim language does not require any tab-like connection structure for the center pin.
Chang discloses a center pin inserted into a core of the electrode assembly and configured to support the electrode assembly in radial direction on an inner circumferential surface of the core by elasticity (center pin body is compressed by spring, [0015], center pin-120, [0035]),
Wherein the center pin comprises an elastic body having a length (center pin is elastic, [0057])
A lower support coupled to a first end of the elastic body, and an upper support coupled to a second end of the elastic body (lids-138 acts as upper and lower support, [0055], Fig. 5).
Chang does not directly disclose wherein the upper support being in contact with the cap assembly.
Chang’ discloses a cylindrical battery that includes a center pin ([0015]). Chang’ further discloses wherein the center pin is formed of an elastic body and an upper support structure (center pin-120, [0040], spring-133, [0043], and moveable member-132 acts as upper support, [0043]). Chang’ further discloses wherein the upper support contacts the cap assembly when in use (Fig. 3, [0050]). Chang’ teaches that this structure provides improved safety ([0023]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Chang with the teachings of Chang’ to have wherein the upper support being in contact with the cap assembly. This modification would yield the expected result of improved safety.
Chang further discloses wherein the upper support is a conductor, the lower support is a nonconductor, and the elastic body is a conductor (the upper support can be stainless steel, [0048], the lower support is a nonconductor formed of support can be made of polymer resins, [0016]), and the elastic body is a conductor that can be stainless steel, [0048]), and the tubular body is a conductor (center pin is formed of metal plate, [0041]).
Therefore Chang in view of Chang’ discloses the limitations of claim 1, and applicant’s arguments are not commensurate in scope with the claim language.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKITH R SRIPATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 am - 5:00pm.
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.
/ANKITH R SRIPATHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights