Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/036,746

ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 12, 2023
Examiner
CANTELMO, GREGG
Art Unit
1725
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Maxell, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
989 granted / 1329 resolved
+9.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1361
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1329 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 . Response to Amendment The preliminary amendment filed May 12, 2023 is acknowledged. Action on the merits of claims 1-5 follows. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed May 12, 2023; September 20, 2024 and July 7, 2025 have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits. With respect to foreign language references and foreign language patent office communications with no translation of the document: “If no translation is submitted, the examiner will consider the information in view of the concise explanation and insofar as it is understood on its face, e.g., drawings, chemical formulas, English language abstracts, in the same manner that non-English language information in Office search files is considered by examiner in conducting searches.” See MPEP §609.04(a)(II) (D) and 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(ii). Drawings The drawings received May 12, 2023 are acceptable for examination purposes. Specification The specification received May 12, 2023 has been reviewed for examination purposes. Claim Interpretation The term “recoverable” in the claim is interpreted to be recoverable in the manner consistent with the plain meaning of the term, able to be regained or retrieved. An element provided in the same place as the claimed recoverable sheet having the same claimed features and functionality, can be held to be recoverable. For example, the components inside a cell can be recoverable when recycled or can be recoverable if having the ability to change (such as a change in shape or form). 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. Claims 1, 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yabushita et al. (JP 2008-186711A) in view of Nanno et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0019663). As to claim 1, Yabushita discloses a battery 1 comprising: an exterior can 2 having a bottom with a recessed portion 15 recessed toward an outside and a cylindrical side wall 16; a seal can 3 having a flat portion 20 and a peripheral wall 21 for covering an opening of the exterior can 2: a power generation element 5 including a cathode layer 6, an anode layer 7 and a separator 8 located between the cathode layer 6 and the anode layer 7, the power generation element 5 located between an inner bottom surface of the recessed portion 15 of the exterior can 2 and the flat portion 20 of the seal can 3: a gasket 4 to be crimped between the cylindrical side wall 16 of the exterior can 2 and the peripheral wall 21 of the seal can 3; and a recoverable conductive sheet 30 located between the power generation element 5 and at least one of the inner bottom surface 15 of the recessed portion and the flat portion of the seal can (Fig. 1). The conductive 30 includes deformable portions 35 have a degree of dimensional change which can thus have the ability to have a recoverable dimension or shape (Figs. 3-4). PNG media_image1.png 362 682 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 362 593 media_image2.png Greyscale As to claim 2, the conductive sheet 30 is located between the inner bottom surface of the recessed portion 15 and the power generation element 5; and The recessed portion has a depth larger than the thickness of the conductive sheet 30 planar portion (Fig. 1). As to claim 4, the recessed portion 15 has a depth (depth between recessed portion 15 and peripheral portion 10) smaller than a height from the inner bottom surface of the recessed portion to an upper end of a peripheral surface of the separator, located further from the recessed portion than the depth noted above (Fig. 1). The depth of the recess is less than the height from the inner bottom surface of the recess to the separator. As to claim 1, Yabushita does not teach of the battery being an all-solid-state battery wherein the electrolyte is a solid electrolyte layer. Nanno discloses a coin or button shaped all-solid-state battery wherein the electrolyte layer is a solid electrolyte layer in place of conventional liquid based electrolytes. Liquid based electrolytes were known to have certain disadvantages including leakage (paras. [0008], [0011]). Replacing the electrolyte of Yabushita with a solid electrolyte layer, (i.e., an all solid state battery) would have provided a battery having improved safety and performance. In short, the focus when making a determination of obviousness should be on what a person of ordinary skill in the pertinent art would have known at the time of the invention, and on what such a person would have reasonably expected to have been able to do in view of that knowledge. Replacing a liquid electrolyte with a solid electrolyte was highly conventional in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and the such a modification to Yabushita would have been of routine skill in the art for improved safety and performance. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention Yabushita by replacing the electrolyte of Yabushita with a solid electrolyte layer, (i.e., an all solid state battery) as taught by Nanno since it would have provided a battery having improved safety and performance. Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanno et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0019663) in view of Takashi et al. (JP 2005-203170A). As to claim 1, Nanno discloses an all-solid-state battery comprising: an exterior can 25 having a bottom and a cylindrical side wall; a seal can 26 having a flat portion and a peripheral wall for covering an opening of the exterior can 25: a power generation element including a cathode layer 21, an anode layer 22 and a solid electrolyte layer 23 located between the cathode layer 21 and the anode layer 22, the power generation element located between an inner bottom surface of the exterior can 25 and the flat portion of the seal can 26 a gasket 27 to be crimped between the cylindrical side wall of the exterior can 25 and the peripheral wall of the seal can 26; and a recoverable conductive sheet 24a located between the power generation element and the inner bottom surface of the exterior can 25 and a recoverable conductive sheet 24b located between the flat portion of the seal can 26 (Fig. 2). The conductive layers 24a and 24b formed of a sheet of graphite and binder have a degree of dimensional change which can thus have the ability to have a recoverable dimension or shape. PNG media_image3.png 396 754 media_image3.png Greyscale As to claim 3, a first recoverable conductive sheet 24a is located between the inner bottom surface of the exterior can 25 and the power generating element and a second recoverable conductive sheet 24b is located between the flat portion of the seal can 26 and the power generation element (Fig. 2 above). As to claim 5 the recoverable conductive sheets 24a and 24 be are graphite (para. [0071]). As to claims 1, 3 and 4, Nanno does not teach of the exterior can having a recessed portion (claim 1), of the recoverable conductive sheet located between the recessed bottom portion (claims 1 and 3), of the recessed portion having a depth smaller than a height from the inner bottom surface of the recessed portion to an upper end of a peripheral portion of the electrolyte layer (claim 4). Takashi teaches of a battery case for a button cell wherein the exterior can 1 includes a bottom with a recessed portion 13 deformed outward toward an outside of the battery (Fig. 1, for example). PNG media_image4.png 314 578 media_image4.png Greyscale The inclusion of the outwardly extending recessed portion 13 in the exterior can was known to mitigate any internal pressure within the battery with a peripheral portion 16 which still permits engagement with the seal for holding the gasket 3 therein (claims 1 and 3). The recoverable conductive sheets 24a and 24b, in light of the modified exterior can of Nanno would have effectively provided the lower sheet 24a between the positive electrode and exterior can in the region 13, such as where element 14 is shown in Takahashi (claim 3). As to claim 4, the recessed portion 13 has a depth (depth from recessed portion to peripheral portion 16 of the can) smaller than a height from the inner bottom surface of the recessed portion 13 to an upper end of a peripheral surface of the separator 5 (Fig. 1). The depth of the recess is less than the height from the inner bottom surface of the recess to the separator. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the exterior can of Nanno to include an outwardly extending recessed bottom portion as taught by Takashi since it would have provided a for the battery which would have predictably mitigated any internal pressure within the battery while still providing for an effective seal region at the peripheral portion of the exterior can. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JP 1-134876 discloses a solid state button/coin shape battery having an flat bottom exterior can. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGG CANTELMO whose telephone number is (571)272-1283. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7am to 5pm. 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, Basia Ridley can be reached at (571) 272-1453. 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. /GREGG CANTELMO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 12, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603359
BATTERY THERMAL BARRIER SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603377
PROTECTIVE COVER, BATTERY, POWER CONSUMING DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING PROTECTIVE COVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603354
PORTABLE ENERGY-STORAGE POWER SUPPLY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597660
BATTERY MODULE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597671
ENERGY STORAGE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 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
74%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+7.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1329 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month