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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 05/05/26, have been fully considered. Claim(s) 1–3 and 5 is/are amended; claim(s) 4 and 6–9 stand(s) as originally or previously presented; and claim(s) 10–13 remain withdrawn; no new matter has been added. Examiner affirms that the original disclosure provides adequate support for the amendment.
Upon considering said amendment and arguments, the previous claim objections as well as 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 103 rejections set forth in the Office Action mailed 02/06/26 has/have been withdrawn. Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. The text forming the basis for the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 may be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim(s) 1–4, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20170025702 A1) (Jung) in view of Ko et al. (KR 20170094916 A, from 07/11/24 IDS, with machine translation from 11/26/25 PTO-892) (Ko).
Regarding claims 1 and 3, Jung discloses a method of manufacturing an electrode assembly (fig. 3), the method comprising the steps of (a) mounting unit cells on an upper surface of a separation film to prepare an array body (mounting electrode assemblies 10 on separator film 20, annot. fig. 3 below), wherein the upper surface of the separation film faces a thickness direction perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the separation film (facing conventional z-axis, orthogonal to longitudinal direction of separator in conventional y-dir.);
(b) heat-treating (via bonding part 120 across bonding surface 121 spanning length of electrode assembly; see also fig. 5 and ¶ 0054; such further reads on claim 3’s “heat-treating … using a heater, the heater being a heating type” because the bonding part applies heat) a first end of each of the unit cells (upper surface corresponding to bonding surface 122 of fig. 5), where the first end of each of the unit cells comprises electrode tabs (tabs 12), a second end of each of the unit cells (lower surface corresponding to bonding surface 124 of fig. 5), where the second end is opposite the first end (per fig. 3),
and portions of the separation film corresponding to the first end and the second end (corresponding portions of 20 along respective bonding surfaces, figs. 3 and 5), wherein the first end and the second end are spaced apart from each other in a direction parallel to the longitudinal direction of the separation film and parallel to a winding direction of the array body (spaced apart along conventional y-axis, which runs parallel to longitudinal dir. of separator, as well as spaced apart/extending along conventional x-axis, which runs parallel to winding direction, per fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
311
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jung further discloses that the spacing distance between the electrode assemblies may be determined according to the final battery’s structure and exemplifies jelly-roll type, stack-folding type, and so on (¶ 0052), but Jung fails to disclose with sufficient specificity a wound battery and, thus, (c) winding the heat-treated unit cells with the separation film.
Ko teaches an analogous stack-folding battery (¶ 0004–0010, fig. 1), teaching that the battery is conventionally produced by winding unit cells about a separation film after heat-bonding (¶ 0007–0009, 0015–0019, figs. 6–8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely wind Jung’s cells about the separation film after heat-treating as a known method step with the reasonable expectation of producing a successful winding/folding-type battery, as taught by Ko.
Regarding claim 2, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1, wherein the electrode tabs of the first end of each of the unit cells comprise a first electrode tab having a first polarity and a second electrode tab having a second polarity (tabs 12, each necessarily with opposed polarities for +/- output).
Regarding the requirement that in step (a) the unit cells are mounted on the upper surface of the separation film so that the first electrode tabs having the first polarity are aligned in the thickness direction after winding and the second electrode tabs having the second polarity are aligned in the thickness direction, as seen in annot. fig. 3, Jung’s tabs appear aligned at the same positions about the thickness direction. Thus, the requirement that the same-polarity tabs are aligned across cells merely amounts to the polarity of each tab selected when mounting each cell, for which a small, finite number of combinations exists.
For example, as seen in Ko’s figs. 7–12, the cells are wound such that the same-polarity tabs appear aligned in the thickness direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely configure Jung’s cells to be mounted such that the first and second tabs having their respective first and second polarities are aligned in the thickness direction with the reasonable expectation of successfully winding the cells and producing a successful overall battery/module, as suggested by Ko.
Regarding claim 4, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1 but fails to articulate a heat-treatment temperature and, thus, that the heat-treating of step (b) is performed at 50–200°C.
One skilled in the art, however, would recognize that the heating must be hot enough to sufficiently join each cell to the separation film (as in Jung, ¶ 0045) without risking damaging the cell and/or separation film. To balance these considerations, then, it would have been obvious to arrive at the recited range by routinely optimizing the heating temperature (MPEP 2144.05 (II)).
Regarding claim 7, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1 but fails to explicitly disclose that the heat-treating in step (b) and the winding in step (c) are performed continuously.
Ko further appears to suggest winding about the mandrel while passing each unit cell through die 180 for thermal bonding (fig. 7/8, ¶ 0075, 0076). Further, the skilled artisan would appreciate that heating while winding would necessarily speed up processing and, thus, improve productivity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to perform the heat-treating in step (b) and the winding in step (c) continuously with the reasonable expectation of achieving a successfully wound/folded battery and with higher efficiency, as suggested by Ko (see also MPEP 2144.04 (V.)(E.), where making a process continuous is generally prima facie obvious, absent unexpected results).
Regarding claim 9, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1, wherein each of the unit cells is a mono-cell (in including one set of cathode, separator, and anode in each electrode assembly 10 in Jung, ¶ 0030).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20170025702 A1) (Jung) in view of Ko et al. (KR 20170094916 A) (Ko), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Seo (US 20110129701 A1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1, wherein the unit cells each comprise an electrode (electrode 11, Jung, ¶ 0030).
However, in appearing unconcerned with the specific configuration of the tabs relative to the active material layer, modified Ko fails to explicitly disclose that the electrode has a flat portion where a thickness of an active material layer of the electrode is constant and an inclined portion where the thickness of the active material layer decreases from both ends of the flat portion, and the first end of each of the unit cells and the second end of each of the unit cells include a region corresponding to the inclined portion.
Seo teaches an analogous electrode assembly with a pair of tabs at one end of each cell (fig. 10), where, in each electrode, the active material layer includes a flat portion with constant thickness, as well as an inclined portion where the thickness decreases from both ends of the flat portion (e.g., fig. 3B), and a tab is formed at a region corresponding to the inclined portion (see tabs 136/226 protruding from inclined coating portion in figs. 5 and 6, respectively, and compare to instant fig. 2). Seo teaches that this structure enhances battery characteristics by allowing uniform coating on the electrode current collector (e.g., ¶ 0047, 0062, 0128).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to adopt Seo’s electrode-tab configuration within each of Jung’s cells—so that the electrode has a flat portion where a thickness of an active material layer of the electrode is constant and an inclined portion where the thickness of the active material layer decreases from both ends of the flat portion, and the first end of each of the unit cells and the second end of each of the unit cells include a region corresponding to the inclined portion—with the reasonable expectation of enhancing battery characteristics by allowing uniform coating on the electrode current collector, as taught by Seo.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20170025702 A1) (Jung) in view of Ko et al. (KR 20170094916 A) (Ko), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Min et al. (US 20130209848 A1) (Min).
Regarding claim 6, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1.
However, in being unconcerned with the winding speed, modified Jung fails to articulate a speed and, thus, that the winding speed of step (c) is 5–30 rpm.
Min teaches an analogous device for manufacturing a stacked/folded electrode assembly with unit cells by winding (Abstract), where the winding jig may be operated at 20–200 rpm (¶ 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the claimed invention's effective filing date, that Jung’s winding must necessarily be performed at some speed, and, as demonstrated by Min, the skilled artisan would find it obvious to wind at 20–200 rpm as an appropriate speed. It would have been further obvious to select within the overlap of 20–200 rpm and 5–30 rpm with a reasonable expectation of successfully winding at a suitable speed (MPEP 2144.05 (I)).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 20170025702 A1) (Jung) in view of Ko et al. (KR 20170094916 A) (Ko), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Choi et al. (US 20170207481 A1, from 05/11/23 IDS) (Choi).
Regarding claim 8, modified Jung discloses the method of manufacturing an electrode assembly according to claim 1.
However, in appearing unconcerned with the specific configuration of the active material layers within the electrode assembly, Jung fails to explicitly disclose that the electrode assembly includes a single-sided electrode in which an active material layer is formed only on the inner side of the electrode located at the outermost portion in a wound state.
Choi teaches an analogous stacked/folded electrode assembly where unit cells are wound about a separation film (Abstract), where the outermost electrodes are single-sided electrodes in which no electrode mixture is applied to the outer surface of a current collector facing the assembly’s outside (¶ 0016). Choi teaches that such prevents shorting that otherwise occurs when active material contacts conductive material such as metal in the casing upon breakage (e.g., ¶ 0005, 0012).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to adopt Choi’s single-sided electrode as the outermost electrode in Jung’s electrode assembly, where an active material layer is only applied to the inner side, with the reasonable expectation of preventing shorting that otherwise often occurs upon the battery’s breaking, as taught by Choi.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered. Applicant’s amendment overcame the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection—which, as noted above, has been withdrawn—and necessitated the new grounds of rejection citing the new reference(s) Jung, as established above. Additionally, for compact prosecution, Examiner addresses Applicant’s arguments against Ko that Jung addresses.
Applicant argues that 1) Ko only heats one unit cell, while claim 1 requires heating every unit cell; 2) Ko heats perpendicularly to the winding direction at the lateral face of each cell, whereas claim 1 requires heating parallel to winding direction along upper and lower portions of the cells; 3) Ko’s heating die targets the separator surplus portion to prevent overfolding, while claim 1 heats the inclined electrode portions at both ends of each cell to bond with the separation film.
1) Examiner respectfully submits that claim 1 does not require concurrently heating all cells, meaning Jung’s sequential heating would meet this limitation. 2) Jung’s bonding surface 121, in applying heat throughout, would heat the cells’ longitudinal ends at bonding portions 122/124 (fig. 5) and, thus, heat parallel to winding direction. 3) Jung’s process seems to achieve the same effect of promoting bonding between longitudinal ends of unit cells and the separation film because Jung’s design allows full contact with and heating of the electrode assembly to improve bonding to the separation film (¶ 0012). Thus, these arguments are unpersuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JOHN S MEDLEY whose telephone number is (703)756-4600. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00–5:00 EST M–Th and 8:00–12:00 EST F.
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, Jonathan Leong, can be reached on 571-270-192. 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.
/J.S.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 9/17/2026
Prosecution Insights