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 . If status of the application as subject to 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 a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-15 are pending in the application. Claims 6-15 are withdrawn. Claims 1-5 are presently examined.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-5), in the reply filed on 1/26/2026, is acknowledged. Claims 6-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US20080138548A1 (Sciara).
Sciara teaches the following claim 1 limitations (Figure A below):
A secondary battery (paragraph 45; figure 6: accumulator 8) comprising:
an electrode assembly (paragraphs 45-46; figure 6: electrochemical bundle 9);
a battery case (paragraphs 45-46; figure 6: container 10) in which the electrode assembly (9) is housed, the battery case (10) having an opened upper part (paragraphs 45-46: open end; figure 6: upper end of container 10); and
a cap assembly (paragraphs 45-46; figure 6: cover 11) coupled to the opened upper part of the battery case (10),
wherein the cap assembly (11) comprises a safety vent exposed to an outside,
wherein the safety vent includes a discharge hole (paragraphs 45-46; figure 6: opening 2), and
wherein a block (paragraphs 45-46; figure 6: ball 1) is filled into the discharge hole (2)
Figure A: Annotated Sciara Figure 6
PNG
media_image1.png
609
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, Sciara teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Sciara also teaches the following claim 2 limitation:
the block is joined to the discharge hole by ball welding (paragraph 46; figures 1-6)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20080138548A1 (Sciara), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US20200091482A1 (Min). Sciara fails to teach the following limitations, which are taught by Min:
Claim 3
one end of the upper part of the battery case (paragraph 36; figure 1: can member 100) is bent to wrap around an outer peripheral part of the safety vent (paragraphs 41-43; figure 2: safety vent 120) and form a crimping part (Figure B below)
Claim 4
the safety vent comprises a curling part (Figure B below) that is bent at the outer peripheral part (Figure B below) of the safety vent (120), and wherein the crimping part (Figure B below) wraps around the curling part (Figure B below) to form a crimp coupling (Figure B below)
Claim 5
wherein the cap assembly (paragraph 41; figure 2: top cap assembly 110) comprises a current interrupt device (paragraph 41; figure 2: current interruption member 160) below the safety vent (120),
wherein a central part (Figure B below) of the safety vent (120) and the current interrupt device (160) are connected to each other (paragraph 43; figure 2; Figure B below: connected by central portion 161), and
wherein the discharge hole (paragraph 42; figure 2: notch part 123) is between the central part (Figure B below) and the outer peripheral part (Figure B below) of the safety vent (120)
Figure B: Annotated Min Figure 2
PNG
media_image2.png
536
1238
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Min is directed to a secondary battery with an improved safety vent which prevents short-circuit pressure from being reduced (paragraph 11). It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for Sciara’s container 10 and cover 11 to have a crimp coupling and current interruption member, as taught by Min, for a battery with an improved safety vent which prevents short-circuit pressure from being reduced.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WEST whose telephone number is 703-756-1363 and email address is Robert.West@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am - 7 pm ET.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684.
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.
/R.G.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721