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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/15/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment and arguments filed 04/15/2026 have been fully considered. Claim(s) 1 is/are amended; claim(s) 4-7, 11-12, 16-17 remain withdrawn. Examiner affirms that the original disclosure provides adequate support for the amendment.
Upon considering said amendment and arguments, the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 set forth in the Office action mailed 01/16/2026 has/have been withdrawn. Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is presented below.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kato et al. US20160126583A1.
Regarding the limitation of a “movement restricting direction” recited in claim 1, it is noted that the instant specification recites the following:
¶[0014]: “The movement restricting direction represents a direction in which movement of the electrode body is restricted by the movement restricting member fixed thereto. In addition, the “restricting movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction” includes reducing movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction as compared with a configuration provided with no movement restricting member”
For purposes of clarity, Examiner notes that any reduction in movement of the electrode body through the structure of the movement restricting member is recognized as “[restricting] the movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction” as recited in clause 12 of claim 1. Similarly, any direction where movement of the electrode body is limited relative to a battery without a movement restricting member is interpreted as a “movement restricting direction” in this claim.
Regarding claim 1, Kato discloses a power storage device (“battery”) comprising:
a can (102, “case”); and
an electrode body (310) housed in the can (102) ([0100], FIGs. 1, 8), the electrode body including electrode sheets (120, “positive plates”, 130, “negative plates”) ([0097]),
wherein the electrode body (310) has outer surfaces including a thickness-direction outside surface (311, 312, “end surfaces”) located outside in a thickness direction of the electrode sheets ([0101], FIG. 8).
Kato’s power storage device further comprises a protection member (350) ([0111]). This protection member increases the accuracy of positioning the electrode body (310) in the battery case (102) ([0112]), limiting the potential movement of the electrode body (310) (FIG. 8) and thus being recognized as a movement restricting member (350) as claimed.
The movement restricting member (350) has a portion disposed on the fixing surface (311) of the electrode body (310) ([0106], FIGs. 8, 9). Fixing tapes (370, 371) wrapped around the movement restricting member (350) allow for a “binding force” to be applied inward towards the electrode body ([0109], FIGs. 8, 9); thus, the portion of the restricting member (350) disposed on the fixing surface (311) of the electrode body (310) which applies this binding force is understood as an electrode-body bonding portion (see Annotated Kato FIG. 9, below) bonded to a fixing surface that is at least a part of the thickness-direction outside surface as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
1511
2988
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kato FIG. 9
The movement restricting member (350) further includes an extended portion (351, 352, 353, 354, “protrusions”) extending from the electrode-body bonding portion and protruding more than the electrode body in a movement restricting direction ([0112], FIGs. 1, 8). Furthermore, as fixing tapes (370, 371) having at least some amount of thickness are wrapped around the edges of the extended portions ([0114], FIG. 8), at least some amount of clearance equal to at least the thickness of the tapes is inherently present between the extended portion and the inner surface of the can in the movement restricting direction (i.e., in the direction that the extended portions protrude) (FIG. 8, see Annotated Kato FIG. 1 below)
PNG
media_image2.png
1774
3662
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kato FIG. 1
While Kato fails to explicitly discuss movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction as claimed in claim 1, paragraph [0004] of the instant specification, discussing the general state of the art, recites:
¶[0004]: “if the power storage device is subjected to external strong impacts or shocks…the electrode body housed in the can may significantly move, or become displaced. This movement may…damage the electrode body itself due to collision with the inner surface of the can” (emphasis by Examiner).
In other words, external impacts cause inherent movement of the electrode body, such as movement relatively with respect to the can which causes the electrode body to collide with the can; thus, Kato’s electrode body is configured to (i.e., capable to) move relatively with respect to the can in the movement restricting direction (i.e., in the directions of in which extended portions 351, 352, 353, 354 protrude).
Furthermore, the extended portion (351, 352, 353, 354) of the movement restricting member (350) protrudes beyond the electrode body ([0112]) towards the inner peripheral surface of the can (FIGs. 8, 1). As protection members (350, 360) are noted for having a high bending strength ([0098]) and limit the positional shift of the electrode body ([0109, 0112]), contact of the extended portions (351, 352, 353, 354) of the movement restricting member (350) with the inner peripheral surface of the can (102) (FIG. 1) would restrict movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction, this being while the electrode body moves relatively with respect to the can as claimed.
Regarding claim 2, Kato discloses the power storage device according to claim 1, wherein the can is a rectangular can having a rectangular parallelepiped box shape (Kato FIGs. 1, 5), including:
a pair of parallel rectangular main face parts (see Annotated Kato FIG. 5 below); and
a bottom face part, a top face part opposite the bottom face part (Annotated Kato FIG. 1), a first lateral face part, and a second lateral face part opposite the first lateral face part (Annotated Kato FIG. 5), these face parts joining the pair of rectangular main face parts (Annotated Kato FIGs. 1, 5),
PNG
media_image3.png
1110
3337
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kato FIG. 5
the fixing surface of the electrode body is parallel to the pair of the rectangular main face parts of the rectangular can (FIG. 5), and the movement restricting member (350) includes, as the extended portion:
a bottom-side extended portion (352) protruding more than the electrode body toward the bottom face part;
a top-side extended portion (351) protruding more than the electrode body toward the top face part;
a first lateral-surface-side extended portion (353) protruding more than the electrode body toward the first lateral face part; and
a second lateral-surface-side extended portion (354) protruding more than the
electrode body toward the second lateral face part ([0112], FIGs. 8, 9).
Regarding claim 3, Kato discloses the power storage device according to claim 2, wherein the movement restricting member (350) is a flat plate (“plate-like member”) extending in parallel to the pair of rectangular main face parts of the can ([0098], FIG. 8).
Regarding claims 8-10, Kato discloses the power storage device according to claims 1-3, wherein the movement restricting member (350) is bonded, at the electrode-body bonding portion, to the fixing surface facing the can, of the electrode body (310) (i.e., on the end surfaces 311 of electrode body 310) ([0098], Annotated Kato FIG. 9)
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. US20130078505A1.
Regarding the limitation of a “movement restricting direction” recited in claim 1, it is noted that the instant specification recites the following:
¶[0014]: “The movement restricting direction represents a direction in which movement of the electrode body is restricted by the movement restricting member fixed thereto. In addition, the “restricting movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction” includes reducing movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction as compared with a configuration provided with no movement restricting member”
For purposes of clarity, Examiner notes that any reduction in movement of the electrode body through the structure of the movement restricting member is recognized as “[restricting] the movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction” as recited in clause 12 of claim 1. Similarly, any direction where movement of the electrode body is limited relative to a battery without a movement restricting member is interpreted as a “movement restricting direction” in this claim.
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a power storage device (300, “rechargeable battery”, [0094], FIG. 8) comprising:
a can (20, “case”); and an electrode body (10, “electrode assembly”) housed in the can (20) ([0042]), the electrode body (10) including electrode sheets ([0045], “a positive electrode and a negative electrode are each formed with a plurality of sheets”),
wherein the electrode body (10) has outer surfaces including a thickness-direction outside surface located outside in a thickness direction of the electrode sheets ([0018-0019], FIG. 8).
Kim’s power storage device (300) further comprises a separating member (84) ([0095], FIG. 8), which functions to fix the electrode assembly inside the case (i.e., to restrict movement) and is thus broadly and reasonably interpreted as claim 1’s movement restricting member (84) placed in the can.
PNG
media_image4.png
2059
2780
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kim FIG. 8
The movement restricting member (84) includes:
an electrode-body bonding portion (84 c, “fixing wall”) bonded to a fixing surface that is at least a part of the thickness-direction outside surface ([0018-0019]; [0097], FIG. 8);
an extended portion (84 a, “body portion”) extending from the electrode-body bonding portion (84 c) and protruding more than the electrode body in a movement restricting direction ([0095], FIG. 8; see Annotated Kim FIG. 2 below, protrusion beyond electrode body indicated with dashed lines); and having a clearance (see annotation) between an inner peripheral surface of the can (20) and the extended portion in the movement restricting direction.
PNG
media_image5.png
1052
2363
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kim FIG. 2
Kim further discloses the movement restricting member (80, equivalent to 84; see [0096]) serves to absorb external impacts to prevent damage to the electrode assembly and physically separate the electrode assembly from the case ([0069]). Paragraph [0004] of the instant specification, discussing the general state of the art, recites:
¶[0004]: “if the power storage device is subjected to external strong impacts or shocks…the electrode body housed in the can may significantly move, or become displaced. This movement may…damage the electrode body itself due to collision with the inner surface of the can” (emphasis by Examiner).
In other words, external impacts are known to cause inherent movement of the electrode body. Furthermore, the electrode body would need to undergo movement relative to the can during impact in order to collide with the can.
Thus, as Kim recognizes that the battery may receive external impacts, which the instant specification notes as causing movement and displacement of the electrode body, it would be understood that Kim’s electrode body is thus “configured to move (i.e., capable of moving) relatively with respect to the can” as claimed in claim 1. This movement is additionally “in the movement restricting direction” as claimed in claim 1 because Kim’s movement restricting member restricts this movement of the electrode assembly directly into contact with the can.
Furthermore, when subjected to external impacts (causing the electrode body to move relatively with respect to the can, as recited in clause 11 of claim 1), the movement restricting member (“separating member”) serves to absorb the impact and ensure separation of the electrode body from the can (“case”) ([0069], [0113-0114]). As the extended portion (84a, 84b) of the movement restricting member (84) is provided between the electrode body (10) and inner peripheral surface of the can (FIGs. 8, 2), it would be understood that Kim’s extended portion (84a, 84b) would inherently “contact the inner peripheral surface of the can” when absorbing impact, and “restrict movement of the electrode body in the movement restricting direction” as claimed when separating the moving electrode body from the can.
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses the power storage device according to claim 1 wherein the can (20) is a rectangular can having a rectangular parallelepiped box shape (“quadratic or prismatic shape”, [0043], FIGs. 1, 2), including:
a pair of parallel rectangular main face parts (see Annotated Kim FIG. 1 below); and
a bottom face part, a top face part opposite the bottom face part, a first lateral face part, and a second lateral face part opposite the first lateral face part, these face parts joining the pair of rectangular main face parts,
the fixing surface of the electrode body (10) is parallel to the pair of the rectangular main face parts of the rectangular can (Annotated Kim FIG. 8);
PNG
media_image6.png
1720
2522
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kim FIG. 1
the movement restricting member includes, as the extended portion (84a, 84b):
a bottom-side extended portion protruding more than the electrode body (10) toward the bottom face part;
a top-side extended portion protruding more than the electrode body toward the top face part;
a first lateral-surface-side extended portion protruding more than the electrode body toward the first lateral face part (Annotated Kim FIG. 2, Annotated Kim FIG. 8; [0069, 0096]);
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 13-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato (US-20160126583-A1) as applied to claims 1-3 and 8 in view of Kudo (JP-2020102418-A; cited in 02/13/2024 IDS; machine translation with 06/26/2025 Office action).
Regarding claims 13-15 and 18, Kato discloses the power storage device according to claims 1-3 and 8.
Kato’s electrode body comprises electrode sheets (120, 130) and separators (140) interposed between the electrode sheets ([0044, 0046], FIG. 3), reading on portions of the limitations of claims 13-15 and 18. Additionally, preventing the positional shift of the electrodes and separators in the electrode body is pertinent to Kato’s disclosure ([0109]). However, Kato fails to further describe the electrode body as being an integrated electrode body in which the electrode sheets and separators interposed between the electrode sheets are integrally bonded to each other as claimed in claims 13-15 and 18.
Kudo, directed to an electrode body (“electrode plate group”) comprising a stack of electrode sheets with separators interposed between the electrode sheets (“electrode plates”, Kudo [0008]), teaches integrally bonding the electrodes and separators through adhering the separator to the positive and negative electrode plates to prevent displacement of the electrode sheets ([0023]).
As such, in seeking to further prevent displacement of the electrode sheets, it would be obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application for one having ordinary skill in the art to integrally bond Kato’s electrode sheets and separators to each other through adhesion as taught by Kudo, with a reasonable expectation of success as Kudo desires to prevent displacement of the electrode plates. In doing so, a skilled artisan produces an electrode body which is “an integrated electrode body in which the electrode sheets and separators interposed between the electrode sheets are integrally bonded to each other” as claimed in claims 13-15 and 18.
Regarding claims 19-20, modified Kato discloses the discloses the power storage device according to claims 13 and 14 respectively, wherein the electrode sheets are positive electrode sheets (120) and negative electrode sheets (130) (Kato [0044], FIG. 3) and the integrated electrode body is an integrated laminated electrode body in which a plurality of the positive electrode sheets (120) and a plurality of the negative electrode sheets (130) are alternately laminated with the separators interposed therebetween ([0046], FIG. 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous rejection of claims 1-3 and 8-10 under 35 U.S.C. 102 in view of previously cited prior art Motokawa (WO2020066729A1) (Remarks filed 04/15/2026 pp. 9-13) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVERETT T CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-1331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00-8:00.
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 G Leong can be reached on (571) 270 1292. 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.
/E.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 7/10/2026
Prosecution Insights