Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/036,460

CYLINDRICAL BATTERY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 11, 2023
Examiner
KLINE, SYDNEY LYNN
Art Unit
1729
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Panasonic Energy Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
20 granted / 26 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
68
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
71.4%
+31.4% vs TC avg
§102
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§112
11.7%
-28.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 26 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Information Disclosure Statement Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted May 11, 2023 has been received and considered by the examiner. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Interpretation All “wherein” clauses are given patentable weight unless otherwise noted. Please see MPEP 2111.04 regarding optional claim language. 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, 3, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Okutani et al. WO-2018173453-A1 (US-20200013994-A1 used as translation and cited in PTO-892) (hereinafter “Okutani”) in view of Campbell et al. US-20190296311-A1 (hereinafter “Campbell”). Regarding Claims 1, 3, and 4, Okutani discloses a cylindrical battery (battery can with cylindrical body) 100 in Figs. 1-3 (see abstract and paragraphs [0008] and [0023]), comprising: an electrode assembly 18 including a positive electrode 15 and a negative electrode 16 in Fig. 3 (see paragraphs [0008] and [0037]); a bottomed cylindrical outer can (can body 110 with bottom section 130) which houses the electrode assembly 18 and which is connected the negative electrode 16 (negative electrode lead 16a, from the negative electrode 16, is connected to the inner surface of the bottom section of the battery can 100) in Figs. 1-3 (see paragraphs [0023] and [0039]); and a sealing assembly connected to the positive electrode 15 (the positive electrode lead 15a, from the positive electrode 15, is connected to the metal plate 13 where a cap is fitted at the opening to close the opening section, i.e. a sealing assembly), wherein the outer can has a grooved portion 120G, and an opening end portion 120 extending radially outward (opening section 120 of battery extends radially outward as it is the opening to a cylinder) in Figs. 1-3 (see comparison of Okutani and Instant Application below) (see paragraphs [0002], [0039], and [0060]), and the sealing assembly is fixed by being crimped, via a gasket 21, between the opening end portion 120 and the grooved portion 120G (see paragraphs [0039] and [0060]). PNG media_image1.png 526 470 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure 1. FIgure 3 of Okutani PNG media_image2.png 769 579 media_image2.png Greyscale Figure 2. Figure 1 of Instant Application Okutani is silent on a pressing member joined to the opening end portion. However, in the same field of endeavor of cylindrical batteries (see abstract), Campbell discloses a pressing member (bridge) 160 bonded to the lip of the battery can in Fig. 7 (see 160 in Fig. 7 below) (see paragraphs [0026]-[0029]). PNG media_image3.png 506 641 media_image3.png Greyscale Figure 3. Fig. 7 of Campbell Campbell also discloses the pressing member may be made of electrically conductive materials such as metals (meeting Claim 2) and may be made from the same material selected for the housing (meeting Claim 4) (see paragraph [0026]). Campbell additionally discloses including the pressing member on the lip of the battery provides a significantly larger bonding surface to which a wire or other conductive element can be bonded so the bonding can be achieved more easily (see paragraphs [0026], [0029], and [0033]). In the combination of Campbell and Okutani, including this pressing member on the lip would result in the sealing assembly being fixed by being crimped, via a gasket, between a pressing member joined to the opening end portion and the grooved portion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cylindrical battery of Okutani to include a pressing member joined to the opening end portion, as disclosed by Campbell, in order to provide a significantly larger bonding surface to which a wire or other conductive element can be bonded so the bonding can be achieved more easily. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okutani in view of Campbell and alternatively further in view of Li et al. US-20180358605-A1 (hereinafter “Li”). Regarding Claim 3, modified Okutani discloses the cylindrical battery according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Okutani is silent on the pressing member being ring shaped. However, Campbell discloses the pressing member 160 can have a shape that is larger or smaller than a semicircle, as long as it provides a larger bonding surface (see paragraph [0029]), which a skilled artisan would expect to include a ring shape and it is within the ambit of a skilled artisan to choose the appropriate shape for the pressing member to fit their battery. Alternatively, if Campbell is found to be insufficient, in the same field of endeavor of cylindrical batteries (see abstract), Li discloses a sealing device for a cylindrical battery wherein the sealing device is located beneath an upper pressing member 1 comprising a through hole 11 (thus being ring shape), so the pressing member 1 can appropriately seal the battery and still allow for connection to the polar end (terminal) in Figs. 2, 4, and 6 (see paragraphs [0030]-[0032]). A skilled artisan would recognize this as an appropriate shape for the pressing member of a cylindrical battery. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the cylindrical battery of Okutani and Campbell wherein the pressing member is ring shaped, as disclosed by Li, in order to appropriately seal the battery and still allow for connection to the polar end. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYDNEY L KLINE whose telephone number is (703)756-1729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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. /S.L.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 1729 /ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 11, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597643
LAMINATED ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597612
NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING NONAQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE ENERGY STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12580240
Battery Pack for Exchangeable Insertion into a Receiving Compartment
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12580190
POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL AND LITHIUM SECONDARY BATTERY USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12548810
BATTERY, ELECTRIC APPARATUS, METHOD FOR PREPARING BATTERY, AND APPARATUS FOR PREPARING BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.4%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 26 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month