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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-4, 9-10 remain pending in the application. The examiner respectfully acknowledges the cancellation of claims 5-8. The application filed 11/24/2025 has been entered but does not place the application in condition for allowance. The original rejection is maintained.
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 1-4, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ban et al (KR 20200117177 A, disclosed in IDS filed 02/06/2023) in view of Kim et al (KR 20180038765 A).
Regarding claim 1, Ban teaches a pouch forming apparatus (Figs. 2-4, [0001]) comprising:
a die unit in which a forming groove is recessed
(Machine translation of [0072] and Figs. 2 and 4 teach die unit 30 has a forming groove 33),
the forming groove being a portion of the die unit configured to receive a pouch film disposed therein
([0072] and Figs. 3-4 teach forming groove 33 is a portion of die unit 30 and teaches pouch film 20 is pressed into forming groove 33; therefore, it is configured to receive the pouch film disposed therein)
a partition plate that divides the forming groove into at least two regions each defining a wall surface therein,
([0049] teaches the partition plate 35 divides the forming groove 33 into two sides (i.e., regions); Fig. 2 shows forming groove 33 as two regions; the surface of each forming groove region wherein the forming groove contacts the protrusions of pressing unit 50 defines a wall surface therein),
a connecting part extending between the partition plate 35 and the die unit 30 (shown in annotated Fig. 4 of Ban below);
Annotated Fig. 4 of Ban
PNG
media_image1.png
280
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a pressing unit that is configured to press the pouch film into the forming groove of the die unit to form an electrode assembly-receiving part,
([0072] and Figs. 3-4 teach the pressing unit 50 lowers and presses pouch material 20 into the forming groove 33 of the die unit 30 to form forming parts 21 as described in Fig. 5 and [0075]; parts 21 overlap to form an installation part 25 of a closed space shown in [0085] and Fig. 7, within which the electrode assembly 10 is inserted [0086]; therefore, the installation part 25 is an electrode assembly-receiving part)
wherein a chamfer part is formed at a lower end of the partition plate.
([0047] teaches the partition plate portion 35 of the die unit may be formed such that the longitudinal edges connected to the bottom surface of the die (i.e., the lower end of the partition plate) are rounded; Fig. 3 also shows this visually; the rounded edge at the lower end of the partition plate reads on a chamfered part, as chamfer is defined by Cambridge Dictionary as “a cut on the edge or corner of something that makes it slope slightly rather than being perfectly square”).
Ban does not teach a blank holder located between the pressing unit and the die unit. In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches a blank holder located between the pressing unit and the die unit.
Machine translation of [0017], [0059], [0068], and Fig. 5 of Kim teach a blank holder 100 attached to the laminate sheet, i.e. pouch film 1, to improve the formability of the pouch film 1; 100 is a blank holder, because it is used to fix (i.e., hold) the attached and undeformed pouch film (i.e., the blank) in a fixed position in a die assembly 20. In [0076], Kim describes that by performing a deep drawing process to form a storage portion while attaching a molding film member (i.e., the blank holder) 100 and then removing the film member 100 after the storage portion is formed, it is possible to minimize external defects in the pouch film 1 and increase the formability of the stretched pouch film 1, thereby reducing the thickness of the battery case manufactured from it. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Ban’s pouch forming apparatus with the molding film member 100 as a blank holder affixed to pouch film 20 for the advantages of minimizing external defects in the pouch film 1 and reducing the thickness of the battery case manufactured from it.
Within the pouch forming apparatus of modified Ban, 100 as the blank holder as taught by Kim would be located between the pressing unit 50 of Ban (30 in Kim) and the die unit 30 of Ban (23 in Kim). Fig. 5 of Kim and Fig. 3 of Ban are reproduced below for reference.
PNG
media_image2.png
382
605
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
300
410
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Ban: Fig. 5 of Kim:
Kim of the combination further teaches the blank holder 100 is configured to fix the pouch film to an upper end part of the die unit (Fig. 5 of Kim). Within the pouch forming apparatus of modified Ban, the blank holder 100 as taught by Kim would fix the pouch film (Ban: 20, Kim: 1) to an upper end part of the die unit (Ban: 30, Kim: 23).
Kim of the combination also teaches the blank holder comprises a protrusion part that is configured to about a connecting part between the partition plate and the die unit.
Kim teaches in Fig. 7 and [0073] that the stretching of the blank holder 100 by the pressing unit 30 results in a conforming structure wherein the blank holder 100 and the pouch film 1 have a rounded bottom protrusion that abuts a connecting part extending between vertical portion 23 of the die unit and the flat bottom surface of 22 the die unit. Within the combined prior art, wherein Kim’s blank holder 100 is affixed to Ban’s pouch film 1 as described in [0061], the bottom protrusion of the blank holder 100 would be expected to abut the connecting part.
Kim of the combination further teaches wherein: the protrusion part of the blank holder has an inclined end that has a shape that is complimentary to the chamfer part formed at the lower end of the partition plate.
Figs. 7-8 of Kim, described in [0073]-[0074] teach the pressing unit 30 forms a receiving portion by pressing the portion to be formed in the sheet 100A (including blank holder 100) until it is in close contact with the inner surface of the forming groove. Fig.4 and [0063] - [0065] of primary reference Ban also teach that the contours of pressing unit 50 corresponds to that of partition plate 35; accordingly, when the pressing unit presses the pouch film, the pouch film is rounded where it contacts the partition plate ([0065]). One of ordinary skill in the art would also expect the pouch film to conform to the shape of the corresponding portion of the partition plate, including to the shape of the chamfer part, based on [0063] and Fig. 4. Given that the blank holder 100 is affixed to the pouch film (Kim: [0061]) within the combination of prior art, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious that the forming process would also cause the blank holder 100 to be rounded where it meets the partition plate and conform to the shape of the partition plate, thereby forming a protrusion part with a sloped, i.e. inclined, end that has a shape that is complimentary to the chamfer part formed at a lower end of the partition plate.
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the pouch forming apparatus of claim 1, wherein: a lower end part of the partition plate is connected to the die unit
(Fig. 2 and [0047] of Ban teach the longitudinal edges of the partition plate 35 are connected to the bottom surface of the die unit 30, i.e., the lower end part of the partition plate is connected to the die unit),
and the chamfer part is formed at a portion where the die unit and the partition plate are connected
([0047] and Fig. 3 of Ban teach that portion where they are connected has a rounded edge, i.e. is chamfered, thereby reading on a chamfer part)
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches the pouch forming apparatus of claim 2, wherein: the partition plate and the die unit are integrally formed.
Ban in [0045] teaches, and in Fig. 2 illustrates, that the partition plate 35 is formed as an upward protrusion at the center of forming groove 33 which is part of the die unit 30, and [0047] also teaches the partition plate 35 is connected to the die unit 30; thus, the partition plate is integrally formed with die unit 30.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the pouch forming apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the partition plate is connected to the wall surface of the each of the at least two regions of the forming groove.
Ban shows in Fig. 3 that the partition plate 35 is connected to the surface of each of the two forming groove regions where the forming groove 33 would contact the protrusions of pressing unit 50; the surface reads on the wall surface of the each of the two regions of the forming groove.
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches the pouch forming apparatus of claim 1, and further teaches wherein: the blank holder comprises a first blank holder and a second blank holder configured to be disposed adjacent to a left side and a right side of the lower end part of the partition plate, respectively.
As previously pointed out in addressing claim 1, Kim of the combination teaches in [0061] the blank holder 100 is affixed to the pouch film; within Ban in view of Kim, the blank holder would thus accordingly extend over the two regions of forming groove 33 on the left and the right side of the partition plate 35, shown in Fig. 4 of Ban. Within this combination, the pressed blank holder would thus have a first blank holder configured to be disposed adjacent to the left side of the lower end part of the partition plate, in the left region of forming groove 33, and a second blank holder configured to be disposed adjacent to the right side of the lower end of the partition plate in the side of the right region of forming groove 33, similar to how the structure of the pressed pouch film 20 is illustrated by Ban in Fig. 4.
Regarding claim 10, the combination above teaches the pouch forming apparatus of claim 9 and further teaches the chamfer part of the partition plate comprises a first chamfer part that is configured to abut the first blank holder and a second chamfer part that is configured to abut the second blank holder.
As previously pointed out in addressing the limitations of claim 1, it would be obvious to a skilled artisan that the affixation of blank holder 100 to the pouch film (Kim: [0061]) within the combination of prior art would cause the blank holder 100 to be rounded where it meets the partition plate and conform to the shape of the partition plate, thereby forming a protrusion part with a sloped, i.e. inclined, end that has a shape that is complimentary to the chamfer part formed at a lower end of the partition plate. Fig. 4 of Ban shows the partition plate has a lower end on each of the left side and the right side, therefore the chamfer part on the lower end of the partition plate comprises a first chamfer part and a second chamfer part, respectively, on each of the left side and the right side. A skilled artisan would have found it obvious that the pressing of the pouch film (and its affixed blank holder) downward into the forming groove and its conforming to the shape of the partition plate would result in a first chamfer part that is configured to abut the first blank holder and a second chamfer part that is configured to abut the second blank holder.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 24, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states that the complimentary shapes of the protrusion part of the blank holder and the chamfer part at the lower end of the partition plate provides a helpful advantage over prior art designs for reducing damage to the partition plate (p5 of Remarks). However, the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed product, and the argument is drawn to the function of the blank holder but does not structurally differentiate the claimed invention from the prior art. The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)). Thus, amending the claim to provide structural differentiation over a prior art apparatus is advised.
Applicant also argues that blank holder 100 of Kim cannot simultaneously read on the limitation of being “configured to fix the pouch film to an upper end part of the die unit” as recited in original claim 6 and while also satisfying the limitation of “the protrusion part of the blank holder has an inclined end that has a shape that is complimentary to the chamfer part” as recited in original claim 8 (p5 of Remarks).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Within the combination of prior art, the film member 100 of Kim corresponds to a blank holder because it holds laminate sheet 1, which corresponds to the blank. Kim teaches the film member 100 is attached, i.e. fixed, to a laminate sheet 1 (i.e., a pouch film) and also fixed to the upper surfaces of a die unit (Kim: [0068]); within the combination, the upper surfaces of the die unit correspond to the upper surfaces of 30 of Ban. Because film member (i.e., blank holder) 100 is an intervening structure between the laminate sheet 1 and an upper end part of die unit, as taught by Kim, it satisfies the limitation of being configured to fix the pouch film (i.e., laminate sheet) to an upper end of the die unit. The film member 100, i.e. blank holder, has a center region that forms the protrusion part that has an inclined end that has a shape that is complimentary to a shape of the chamfer part where it meets the partition plate during the forming process. Figs. 5-7 of Kim, which show the forming process, indicate that the blank holder is affixed to the pouch film (laminate sheet 1) throughout the forming process; therefore, the blank holder continues to be configured to fix the pouch film to an upper end part of the die unit while forming the protrusion part with a shape that is complimentary to a shape of the chamfer part. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GIGI LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2017. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 - 6.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/G.L.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1726
/BACH T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726 03/05/2026