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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (CN 108336357 A, hereinafter Xu, previously cited) in view of Kim et al. (KR 10-2020-0081797 A, hereinafter Kim, previously cited).
Re Claim 1. Xu teaches a current collector (Fig. 1), comprising a first metal layer (item 2.1 and top of item 3) and a second metal layer (item 2.2 and bottom of item 3), which are provided in a laminated manner, wherein at least one first region (middle region) and at least one second region (far left or far right region) are comprised between the first metal layer and the second metal layer, and the first region and the second region are alternately arranged in a first direction (left-right direction);
the first region is provided with a polymer layer (item 1),
the first metal layer and the second metal layer cover an entire planar region of the current collector (Fig. 1);
the second region is a region in which no polymer layer is provided (Fig. 1), and the second region extends across the current collector in a second direction (in-out direction) perpendicular to the first direction; and a thickness of at least one of the first metal layer and the second metal layer is 0.5- 2 um (P3).
Xu fails to specifically teach that the polymer layer is respectively bonded to the first metal layer and the second metal layer through an adhesive layer.
Invention of Kim encompasses current collector. Kim teaches the polymer layer (Fig. 7-9, item 1010) is respectively bonded to the first metal layer and the second metal layer through an adhesive layer (item 1300).
In view of Kim, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the invention of Xu to employ an adhesive layer, since it would assist the bonding between the polymer layer and the metal layers.
Re Claims 4, 5, 15, and 16. The combination teaches wherein a thickness of the polymer layer is 4-10 µm (Xu, P3).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). "[A] prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness." In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See MPEP § 2144.05, I.
Re Claims 6, 7, 17, and 18. The combination teaches wherein a thickness of the adhesive layer is less than 50 µm (Kim, P5).
Re Claims 8 and 19. The combination teaches that a material of at least one of the first metal layer and the second metal layer is selected from at least one of aluminum, copper, nickel (Xu, P2).
Re Claim 10. The combination teaches wherein a material of the adhesive layer is selected from at least one of a polyvinyl acetate binder (Kim, P5).
Re Claim 11. The combination teaches wherein in the first direction, a length of the first region is greater than or equal to a length of the second region (Xu, Fig. 1).
Re Claim 12. The combination teaches an electrode plate (Xu, inherent to lithium ion battery & Kim, Fig. 7, item 1400), comprising the current collector according to claim 1.
Re Claim 13. The combination teaches wherein a thickness of at least one of the first metal layer and the second metal layer is 0.1- 5 um (Xu, P3).
Re Claim 20. The combination teaches a lithium ion battery (Xu, abstract & Kim, P3), comprising the electrode plate according to claim 12.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 10/30/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7, applicant argued that Xu does not teach that the first metal layer and the second metal layer cover an entire planar region of the current collector, since items 2.1 and 2.2 of Xu only cover part of item 1.
The examiner is equating combination of items 2.1/2.2 and item 3 as the claimed first/second metal layer.
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.
The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood from the texts. Only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out to emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, however, each reference as a whole should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN E YOON whose telephone number is (571)270-5932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM- 5 PM.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/KEVIN E YOON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
11/8/2025
Prosecution Insights