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 Restriction
The applicant’s election of claims 1 – 18 with traverse is acknowledged.
The arguments presented traversing the restriction are considered unpersuasive. The applicant submits that the restriction is improper as there is no undue burden and the inventions are exempt from restriction as they are a special exception as set forth in 37 C.F.R 1.475(b)(4).
The inventions having the relationship defined by 37 C.F.R 1.475(b)(4) does not negate the requirement for the claims to have a special technical feature. The inventions having a combination as set forth in 37 C.F.R 1.475(b)(4) prevents a lack of unity “a priori,” but does not prevent a showing that the technical relationship of the inventions does not contain a technical feature that defines a contribution over the prior art (ie. special technical feature).
Separately, search burden does not need to be established in a unity of invention analysis.
The restriction is hereby made final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 5 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) by Watanabe, JP6119137B2 (cited in IDS filed 03/27/23).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe teaches a battery cell (20) manufacturing method for a battery cell [pg. 5 para. 3] having a battery can (case (30))[fig. 3] accommodating an electrode assembly (power generation elements (26))[fig. 5] and an electrolyte [pg. 15 para. 2] therein, the battery can (30) having an opening at a first side (side (25a))[fig. 1],
the method comprising:
disposing the battery can (30) within an exhaust chamber (11)[fig. 5],
adjusting the exhaust chamber to an inert atmosphere (inert gas in the container)[pg. 16 para. 2];
performing a pre-charge on the electrode assembly (initial charging)[pg. 5 para. 3]; and
discharging exhaust gas generated due to the pre-charge through the exhaust chamber (exhaust gas formed during initial charging)[pg. 6 para. 6].
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 1, adjusting the exhaust chamber includes injecting inert gas to the exhaust chamber (inert gas in the container)[pg. 16 para. 2].
Regarding claim 6, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 5, wherein the inert gas is nitrogen gas (inert gas in the container is nitrogen)[pg. 16 para. 2];
Regarding claim 7, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 1, wherein the exhaust chamber includes an inlet part configured to inject inert gas and an exhaust part configured to discharge the exhaust gas (ducts (12a)(12b)(12c) for injecting and discharging gas)[fig. 3]
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 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP6119137B2 as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 1,
wherein, in adjusting the exhaust chamber, an oxygen concentration within the exhaust chamber is adjusted (inert gas in the container)[pg. 16 para. 2].
Watanabe does not explicitly teach an oxygen concentration within the exhaust chamber is adjusted to 4 vol % or less.
One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the use of an inert gas/atmosphere during manufacturing as taught by Wantanabe above removes/reduces (approaching 0%) non-inert gas such as oxygen resulting in an overlapping range with the instant claimed invention. Then, arriving at the claimed range is considered to be within the skill of an ordinary artisan as a matter of routine optimization wherein inert gas ensures a manufacturing environment with minimal potential for oxidation.
Regarding claim 8, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 7, wherein, in adjusting the exhaust chamber, inert gas is injected through the inlet part (inert gas in the container)[pg. 16 para. 2];
Watanabe does not explicitly teach an oxygen concentration within the exhaust chamber is adjusted to 4 vol % or less.
However, Watanabe teaches that an inert atmosphere is create during battery manufacturing wherein it is known in the art that the presence of non-inert gases such as oxygen during manufacturing can cause unintended reactions to occur. Then, arriving at the claimed range is considered to be within the skill of an ordinary artisan as a matter of routine optimization.
Claims 2, 3, 14, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP6119137B2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee, KR20200020173A (cited in IDS filed 03/27/23).
Regarding claim 2, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 1, wherein the electrode assembly includes a first electrode, a separation membrane, and a second electrode (cathode, anode, separator)[pg. 5 para. 2][pg. 8 para. 6], which are stacked and wound (stacked assembly (26))[fig. 5], wherein the battery cell further includes an electrode terminal electrically connected with the second electrode (electrodes connected to tabs (27a)(27b))[fig. 1]
Watanabe does not teach wherein the first electrode and the battery can are electrically connected.
Lee teaches a battery cell [pg. 5 para. 1 – 3] wherein the first electrode and the battery can are electrically connected (second electrode (112) is electrically connected to the can (120) through lead (160))[fig. 3]. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate electrically coupling an electrode to the can reduces the number of terminal components needed thereby simplifying the construction. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the electrode connection of Lee into the battery of Watanabe to simplifying construction.
Regarding claim 3, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 2.
Further, Watanabe teaches wherein the first electrode is a negative electrode and the second electrode is a positive electrode (anode, cathode)[pg. 5 para. 2].
Regarding claim 14, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 2.
Further, Watanabe teaches wherein the method includes disposing of the battery can within the exhaust chamber (disposing the battery can (30) within an exhaust chamber (11))[fig. 5], wherein at least one of the first electrode or the second electrode includes a current collector and an electrode active material layer provided on the current collector [pg. 8 para. 5].
Further, Lee teaches a battery cell [pg. 5 para. 1 – 3] wherein the first electrode is electrically connected with a bottom of the battery can (second electrode (112) is electrically connected to the can (120) through lead (160))[fig. 3] the current collector includes an uncoated portion (inherent feature of collectors connected to terminals) that does not include the electrode active material layer, wherein the battery cell further includes a current collector plate (180) electrically connected with the uncoated portion of the second electrode (first electrode (111) collector)[fig. 3].
Regarding claim 15, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 14.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the current collector plate (180) electrically connected with the uncoated portion of the second electrode further includes a lead tab (150) electrically connected with the electrode terminal (130)[fig. 3].
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP6119137B2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Arai, JP2015088324A (cited in IDS filed 04/23/24).
Regarding claim 9, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 1.
Watanabe does not teach further comprising injecting inert gas into the exhaust chamber before disposing the battery can within the exhaust chamber.
Arai teaches a battery cell manufacturing method [pg. 3 para. 1] wherein the method includes coupling the exhaust chamber (vent portion (4)) to the opening (vent hole (5))[fig. 5] further comprising injecting inert gas into the exhaust chamber before disposing the battery can within the exhaust chamber or coupling the exhaust chamber to the opening (chamber is filled with inert gas before charging)[0024][0025]. Both Arai and Watanabe teach creating an inert atmosphere for battery manufacturing. Without explicit criticality, the claimed feature is considered to be within the skill of an ordinary artisan as an obvious change of sequence [MPEP 2144.04 IV C].
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP6119137B2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee, KR20200020173A, and Arai, JP2015088324A.
Regarding claim 10, Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 1.
Watanabe does not each wherein the method includes coupling the exhaust chamber to the opening, and
wherein the battery can further include an electrode terminal riveted through a through-hole in a bottom of the battery can and a gasket provided between the electrode terminal and an outer diameter of the through-hole.
Arai teaches a battery cell manufacturing method [pg. 3 para. 1] wherein the method includes coupling the exhaust chamber (vent portion (4)) to the opening (vent hole (5))[fig. 5]. Further, Arai teaches coupling the exhaust chamber to the opening increases processing speed [0051]. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the exhaust chamber coupling of Arai into the method of Watanabe to increase processing speed.
Lee teaches a battery cell [pg. 5 para. 1 – 3] wherein the first electrode and the battery can are electrically connected (second electrode (112) is electrically connected to the can (120) through lead (160))[fig. 3], and wherein the battery can further include an electrode terminal riveted through a through-hole in a bottom of the battery can (rivet terminal (130)) and a gasket (gasket (140)) provided between the electrode terminal and an outer diameter of the through-hole (terminal hole (124))[fig. 3]. Further, insulating a first rivet terminal from the can and then electrically coupling a second electrode to the can reduces the number of terminal components needed thereby simplifying the construction. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the electrode connection of Lee into the battery of Watanabe to simplifying construction.
Regarding claim 11, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 10.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the electrode terminal includes (rivet terminal (130)): a body portion (131) inserted into the through-hole (124); an outer flange portion (133) extended along an outer surface of the bottom of the battery can (120) from a circumference of a first side of the body portion exposed through the outer surface of the bottom of the battery can (exposed outside the can (120))[fig. 3];
an inner flange portion (132) extended toward an inner surface of the bottom of the battery can from a circumference of a second side of the body portion exposed through the inner surface of the bottom of the battery can (exposed inside of can (120))[fig. 3]; and a flat portion provided inside the inner flange portion (inner flange (132) is flat)[fig. 3].
Claims 12, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP6119137B2, Lee, KR20200020173A, and Arai, JP2015088324A as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Tsukui, US20160087304A1.
Regarding claim 12, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 10.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the battery cell includes a negative electrode terminal provided by the bottom of the battery can (negative electrode (112) connected to can (120)), wherein the riveted electrode terminal is a positive electrode terminal (positive electrode (111) connected to rivet terminal)[fig. 3], and
Combined Watanabe does not teach wherein performing the pre-charge includes connecting a first charging terminal to the negative electrode terminal and connecting a second charging terminal to the positive electrode terminal.
Tsukui teaches a battery cell manufacturing method [0001] wherein performing the pre-charge includes connecting a first charging terminal to the negative electrode terminal and connecting a second charging terminal to the positive electrode terminal (external terminals (50) are connected to power source device terminals to perform initial charging)[0060]. Further, charging terminals for a charging device for charging a battery cell are necessarily present when performing charging of a battery cell. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the charging terminals of Tsukui into the initial charging step of Watanabe as a necessary feature required for charging.
Regarding claim 13, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 12.
Further, Tsukui teaches wherein the negative electrode terminal and the positive electrode terminal are provided at a bottom surface of the battery can (terminals (50) formed on the same side)[fig. 1].
Regarding claim 18, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 12.
Further, Tsukui teaches wherein the second charging terminal includes a (+) charging pin and the first charging terminal includes a (−) charging pin (inherently has a + and – to perform charging)
Claim 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP6119137B2, Lee, KR20200020173A as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Tsukui, US20160087304A1.
Regarding claim 16, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 14.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the battery cell includes a negative electrode terminal electrically connected with the first electrode at a first end of the battery cell (negative electrode (112) connected to can (120))[fig. 3] and wherein the electrode terminal connected to the second electrode is a positive electrode terminal at a second end of the battery cell opposite the first end of the battery cell (positive electrode (111) connected to rivet terminal)[fig. 3].
Combined Watanabe does not teach wherein performing the pre-charge includes connecting a first charging terminal to the negative electrode terminal and connecting a second charging terminal to the positive electrode terminal.
Tsukui teaches a battery cell manufacturing method [0001] wherein performing the pre-charge includes connecting a first charging terminal to the negative electrode terminal and connecting a second charging terminal to the positive electrode terminal (external terminals (50) are connected to power source device terminals to perform initial charging)[0060]. Further, charging terminals for a charging device for charging a battery cell are inherently present when performing charging of a battery cell. Then, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to combine the charging terminals of Tsukui into the initial charging step of Watanabe as a necessary feature required for charging.
Regarding claim 17, combined Watanabe teaches the battery cell manufacturing method of claim 16.
Further, Lee teaches wherein the negative electrode terminal is located at the bottom of the battery can (negative electrode (112) connected to can (120))[fig. 3], and the positive electrode terminal is located at a top of the electrode assembly facing the bottom of the battery can (positive electrode (111) connected to rivet terminal)[fig. 3].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M GREENE whose telephone number is (571)270-1340. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)270-5256. 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.
/PATRICK MARSHALL GREENE/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724