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 .
2. Claims 1-25 are pending in this office action.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. Information disclosure statements (IDS), submitted February 16, 2023; May 16, 2024; July 18, 2024; September 18, 2024; October 31, 2024; December 9, 2024; December 16, 2024; January 24, 2025; August 11, 2025; September 29, 2025, and December 11, 2025, have been received and considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, a pouch-type secondary battery (100) comprising: an electrode assembly (200) in which electrodes and separators are stacked (paragraphs 0053-0054); a pouch-type battery case (300) comprising a first case, called an accommodating part (310a), and a second case, called an accommodating part (310b), wherein at least one of the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) comprises a cup part, called an accommodating part, configured to accommodate the electrode assembly (200); a folding part, called folding lines (F1, F2), coupling the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) (paragraph 0064); and a protrusion, called a protruding part (315), protruding from a portion of each of opposing ends of the folding part, wherein the protrusion (315) has a length, or width (P) of greater than zero and less than a thickness (t) of the electrode assembly which is smaller than that of a conventional case at 1.5mm to 3.0mm (paragraphs 0055-0056), which meets the claimed limitation of 1.5 mm or less.
With regard to Claim 2, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, wherein the protrusion is a bat ear (see annotated figure below), and a length of the outermost end of the bat ear from an outer wall of the folding part (F1, F2) is 1.5 mm or less (paragraphs 0055-0056).
With regard to Claim 4, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, wherein the folding part (F1, F2) comprises a groove that is recessed inward as shown by (P) (paragraphs 0056-0057; see annotated figure below).
With regard to Claim 5, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, wherein the battery case (300) comprises a pair of protrusions protruding outward with the groove (P) therebetween, and a distance between an innermost portion of the groove (P) and an outermost portion of the protrusion is 0.8 mm or less, or less than ½ of 1.5mm (paragraphs 0055-0056, 0061; see annotated figure below).
With regard to Claim 6, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, wherein the cup part of the first case (310a) and second case (310b), comprises a plurality of punch edges, called bottom edges (a1, b1), which connect a plurality of outer walls of the cup part to a bottom part, called an inclined bottom surface, and at least one of the punch edges (a1, b1) is rounded (paragraph 0062; see annotated figure below).
With regard to Claim 10, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, wherein each of the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) comprises the cup part, and the pouch-type battery case (300) comprises a bridge, called a protruding part (315), formed between the cup part of the first case (310a) and the cup part of the second case (310b), wherein the bridge is rounded by having a curvature (paragraphs 0059-0065).
PNG
media_image1.png
156
413
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to Claim 20, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, a battery module, comprising: an electrode assembly (200) in which electrodes and separators are stacked (paragraphs 0053-0054); a pouch-type battery case (300) forming a cup part, called an accommodating part, accommodating a pouch-type secondary battery (100); and a housing, for example a cell phone or laptop computer (paragraph 0003), accommodating the secondary battery (100), wherein the battery case (300) comprises: a first case, called an accommodating part (310a), and a second case, called an accommodating part (310b), wherein at least one of the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) comprises the cup part; a folding part, called folding lines (F1, F2), coupling the first case (310a) to the second case (310b) (paragraph 0064); and a protrusion, called a protruding part (315), protruding from a portion of each of opposing ends of the folding part, wherein the protrusion (315) has a length, or width (P) of greater than zero and less than a thickness (t) of the electrode assembly which is smaller than that of a conventional case at 1.5mm to 3.0mm (paragraphs 0055-0056), which meets the claimed limitation of 1.5 mm or less.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 3, 7, 9, 11, 12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1), as applied to Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 20 above.
With regard to Claim 3, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the protrusion is greater than 151 degrees. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the secondary battery to have an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the protrusion to be greater than 151 degrees, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 7, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the punch edge has a radius of curvature that corresponds from 1/20 to 1/6 of a depth of the cup part. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the secondary battery to have a punch edge having a radius of curvature that corresponds from 1/20 to 1/6 of a depth of the cup part, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 9, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, including wherein at least one of the corners is rounded (see Figures), but do not specifically disclose wherein the at least one of the corners has a radius of curvature equal to or greater than a radius of curvature of at least one of the punch edge or the thickness edge. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the secondary battery to include at least one of the corners having a radius of curvature equal to or greater than a radius of curvature of at least one of the punch edge or the thickness edge, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the shape and/or size of a component. A change in shape and/or size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 11, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, including wherein the cup part has an inclined bottom surface having a depth t1 at the bottom edge a1 of the accommodating part 310a away from the protruding part 315 is greater than the depth t2 of the bottom edge a2 of the accommodating part 310a close to the protruding part 315 (paragraph 0065), but do not specifically disclose wherein the cup part has a depth of from 6.5 mm or more. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the cup part to have a depth of from 6.5 mm or more, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 12, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the electrode assembly has an area ranging from 15,000 mm2 to 100,000 mm2. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the electrode assembly to have an area ranging from 15,000 mm2 to 100,000 mm2, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 21, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the protrusion is a bat ear, and an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the bat ear is greater than 151 degrees. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the secondary battery to have an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the bat ear to be greater than 151 degrees, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
12. Claims 13 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1), as applied to Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 20 above, and in further view of Chu (US 2014/0099535 A1).
With regard to Claim 13, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, including wherein the pouch film comprises: a sealant layer made of a first polymer, or thermosetting resin, and formed at an innermost layer of the pouch film; a surface protection layer made of a second polymer, or insulating layer, and formed at an outermost layer of the pouch film; and a moisture barrier layer positioned between the surface protection layer and the sealant layer, wherein the moisture barrier layer is formed as an aluminum alloy film (paragraph 0060). Jung et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the aluminum alloy film has a thickness ranging from 50 µm to 80 µm and a grain size ranging from 10 µm to 13 µm, and the sealant layer has a thickness of ranging from 60 µm and 100 µm.
Chu discloses in Figure 3, a battery cell (10) including a stack (12), a pouch (14) having a cavity (15) which holds the stack (12) and electrolyte (20) in the cavity (15) (paragraph 0024). Chu discloses wherein the pouch film comprises: a sealant layer, called a sealing layer (36), made of a first polymer and formed at an innermost layer of the pouch film; a surface protection layer, called a mechanical protection layer (40), made of a second polymer and formed at an outermost layer of the pouch film; and a moisture barrier layer, called a main barrier layer (34), positioned between the surface protection layer (40) and the sealant layer (36), wherein the moisture barrier layer (34) is formed as an aluminum alloy film having a thickness of about 40 µm (paragraphs 0032-0039), and the sealant layer (36) has a thickness of about 80 microns (paragraph 0044), which meets the claimed limitation of ranging from 60 µm and 100 µm. Chu does not specifically disclose wherein the aluminum alloy film has a thickness ranging from 50 µm to 80 µm, and a grain size ranging from 10 µm to 13 µm. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the aluminum alloy film to have a thickness ranging from 50 µm to 80 µm, and a grain size ranging from 10 µm to 13 µm, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Also, before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the secondary battery of Jung et al. to include the above specified configuration of a pouch, because Chu teaches that this configuration permits use of the batter with a reduced risk of degradation from permeation of oxygen and moisture therein (paragraph 0024).
The recitation, “wherein the battery case is manufactured by molding a pouch film”, is considered a product-by-process limitation. Product-by-process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
With regard to Claim 16, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the moisture barrier layer has a thickness ranging from 55 µm to 65 µm, and the sealant layer has a thickness ranging from 75 µm to 85 µm.
Chu discloses in Figure 3, a battery cell (10) including a stack (12), a pouch (14) having a cavity (15) which holds the stack (12) and electrolyte (20) in the cavity (15) (paragraph 0024). Chu discloses wherein the pouch film comprises: a sealant layer, called a sealing layer (36), made of a first polymer and formed at an innermost layer of the pouch film; a surface protection layer, called a mechanical protection layer (40), made of a second polymer and formed at an outermost layer of the pouch film; and a moisture barrier layer, called a main barrier layer (34), positioned between the surface protection layer (40) and the sealant layer (36), wherein the moisture barrier layer (34) is formed as an aluminum alloy film having a thickness of about 40 µm (paragraphs 0032-0039), and the sealant layer (36) has a thickness of about 80 microns (paragraph 0044), which meets the claimed limitation of ranging from 75 µm to 85 µm. Chu does not specifically disclose wherein the aluminum alloy film has a thickness ranging from 55 µm to 65 µm. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the aluminum alloy film to have a thickness ranging from 55 µm to 65 µm, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claims 17-18, Jung et al. disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose an elongation assistance layer made of a third polymer and positioned between the surface protection layer and the moisture barrier layer, wherein the elongation assistance layer has a thickness ranging from 20 µm to 50 µm.
Chu discloses in Figure 3, a battery cell (10) including a stack (12), a pouch (14) having a cavity (15) which holds the stack (12) and electrolyte (20) in the cavity (15) (paragraph 0024). Chu discloses wherein the pouch film comprises: a sealant layer, called a sealing layer (36), made of a first polymer and formed at an innermost layer of the pouch film; a surface protection layer, called a mechanical protection layer (40), made of a second polymer and formed at an outermost layer of the pouch film; and a moisture barrier layer, called a main barrier layer (34), positioned between the surface protection layer (40) and the sealant layer (36) (paragraphs 0032-0039). Chu also discloses an elongation assistance layer, called a secondary barrier layer (38), made of a third polymer and positioned between the surface protection layer (40) and the moisture barrier layer (36), wherein the elongation assistance layer has a thickness of about 20 microns (paragraph 0035), which meets the claimed limitation of ranging from 20 µm to 50 µm. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the secondary battery of Jung et al. to include an elongation assistance layer made of a third polymer and positioned between the surface protection layer and the moisture barrier layer, wherein the elongation assistance layer has a thickness ranging from 20 µm to 50 µm, because Chu teaches that this layer provides additional resistance to the passage of oxygen and moisture therethrough from outside the battery cell (paragraph 0035).
13. Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1) in view of Chu (US 2014/0099535 A1), as applied to Claims 13 and 16-18 above, and in further view of Jin et al. (US 2002/0153068 A1).
With regard to Claims 14-15, Jung et al. and Chu disclose the pouch-type secondary battery in paragraph 12 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the aluminum alloy film comprises an AA8021 aluminum alloy; and, wherein the aluminum alloy film contains 1.3 wt% to 1.7 wt% of iron and 0.2 wt% or less of silicon.
Jin et al. disclose a quality aluminum foil containing 1.2 to 1.7 wt% Fe and 0.35 to 0.8 wt% Si, with the balance aluminum and incidental impurities (paragraph 0012), and aluminum alloy such as AA8021 having a nominal composition of less than 0.2 wt% silicon and 1.2 to 1.7 wt% iron (paragraph 0004). Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery of Jung et al. and Chu to include an AA8021 aluminum alloy as the aluminum alloy film; and, wherein the aluminum alloy film contains 1.3 wt% to 1.7 wt% of iron and 0.2 wt% or less of silicon, because Jin et al. teach that this type of aluminum alloy film is widely used in the production of foil (paragraph 0004), and has a low work hardening rate and hence good rollability, and high strength in the final foil product (paragraph 0010).
14. Claims 19 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1), as applied to Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 20 above.
With regard 19, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, a pouch-type secondary battery (100) comprising: an electrode assembly (200) in which electrodes and separators are stacked (paragraphs 0053-0054); a pouch-type battery case (300) comprising a first case, called an accommodating part (310a), and a second case, called an accommodating part (310b), w herein at least one of the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) comprises a cup part, called an accommodating part, configured to accommodate the electrode assembly (200); a folding part, called folding lines (F1, F2), coupling the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) (paragraph 0064); and a protrusion, called a protruding part (315), protruding from a portion of each of opposing ends of the folding part (paragraphs 0055-0056). Jung et al. do not specifically disclose wherein an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the protrusion is greater than 151 degrees. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the secondary battery to have an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the protrusion to be greater than 151 degrees, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 25, Jung et al. disclose in Figures 4-8, a battery module, comprising: an electrode assembly (200) in which electrodes and separators are stacked (paragraphs 0053-0054); a pouch-type battery case (300) forming a cup part, called an accommodating part, accommodating a pouch-type secondary battery (100); and a housing, for example a cell phone or laptop computer (paragraph 0003), accommodating the secondary battery (100), wherein the battery case (300) comprises: a first case, called an accommodating part (310a), and a second case, called an accommodating part (310b), wherein at least one of the first case (310a) and the second case (310b) comprises the cup part; a folding part, called folding lines (F1, F2), coupling the first case (310a) to the second case (310b) (paragraph 0064); and a protrusion, called a protruding part (315), protruding from a portion of each of opposing ends of the folding part (paragraphs 0055-0056). Jung et al. do not specifically disclose wherein an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the protrusion is greater than 151 degrees. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the secondary battery to have an angle between the folding part and an inner edge of the protrusion to be greater than 151 degrees, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
15. Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1), as applied to Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 and 20 above, and in further view of Choi et al. (US 2018/0294535 A1).
With regard to Claims 22-24, Jung et al. disclose the battery module in paragraph 7 above, but do not specifically disclose wherein the housing comprises a cooling plate configured to cool the secondary battery; further comprising a heat transfer material formed between the cooling plate and the folding part of the secondary battery; and, wherein the heat transfer material has a thickness of 1 mm or less within the housing.
Choi et al. disclose a battery module (10) including a battery cell (100), a heat transfer tape (200), a cooling plate (300), and a heat sink (400) (paragraph 0049). Choi et al. disclose wherein the cooling plate (300) is located below the battery cell (100) and discharges heat transferred from the battery cell (100) to the outside (paragraph 0073), Choi et al. also disclose wherein the heat transfer tape (200) is in contact with the battery cell (100) and transfers the heat of the battery cell (100) to the cooling plate (300), and may adhere the cooling plate (300) and the battery cell (100) to one another (0062). Choi et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the heat transfer material has a thickness of 1 mm or less within the housing, however, before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the heat transfer material to have a thickness of 1 mm or less within the housing, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the battery module of Jung et al. to include a cooling plate configured to cool the secondary battery and to further include a heat transfer material formed between the cooling plate and the folding part of the secondary battery, because Choi et al. teach that these materials have good thermal conductivity and good thermal adhesion (paragraphs 0063 and 0073).
Allowable Subject Matter
16. 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.
17. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art, Jung et al. (US 2019/0027714 A1), do not teach or fairly suggest wherein the cup part further comprises a thickness edge configured to connect adjacent outer walls, and wherein the edge is connected to adjacent punch edges to form corners.
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARIE O APICELLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 5:00PM 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/KARIE O'NEILL APICELLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725