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 amendment filed on 09/22/2025 does not place the application in condition for allowance.
The basis of the rejection of claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 is maintained.
New analysis follows.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicants’ argument that Karasawa is silent about the buckling part digging into the inner side of the first tab, the examiner is unclear what is meant by "digging in" as this is not in the claims or specification, however if applicant is referring to the last three lines of newly amended claim 1 where the buckling part is positioned on the first active material layer side please see the rejection to newly amended claim 1 below. In response to applicants’ argument solder material is required for the embodiment of Figure 15D and that is would cause an insufficient joint, the examiner points out multiple methods of attachment are provided such as a surface treatment with Ni plate material (¶0057]) and there does not appear to be a structural limitation in the claims limited by the solder, even if it were present within the corrugated portion such as in Figure 11A.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karasawa (US20040226153A1) in view of Hayashi (US20070092791).
Regarding claim 1, Karasawa discloses a battery comprising a power comprising a power generating element (i.e. cell 6, ¶0035]), wherein:
the power generating element includes a negative electrode plate which includes a first active material layer and a current collector (i.e. Ni punched metal) and a positive electrode plate which includes a current collector (i.e. Ni foam)(¶[0040]) and a liquid electrolyte added to the cell (¶[0006]) which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize forms a layer between the positive and negative electrode plates. Karasawa also discloses the electrode plates include lead portions 18a/19a which act a first tab and contain cuts 34 (slits) which form a bent portion 33, therefore providing a buckling part (¶[0054], see annotated Fig. 15D below). The tabs are connected to collector plates 21/22 (i.e. current collecting terminal) with a base portion extending the length of the tab and corrugated portions 29 with a protruding part which connects with the tabs (¶[0054], see annotated Fig. 15D below). The terminal and tab electrically connected to generate electric power (¶[0039]). Karasawa does not disclose a second active material on the positive electrode.
Hayashi, related to nickel hydride batteries, teaches a positive electrode with a Ni foam current collector and an active material layer (¶[0040]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized using the electrode of Hayashi including the active material layer and Ni foam current collector as an alternative electrode would have yielded the predictable result of a functioning positive electrode.
The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.).
PNG
media_image1.png
430
618
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 15D of Karasawa
Karasawa further discloses wherein the tab 18a/19a contain a plurality of cuts/slits which correspond to a plurality of corrugated portions (protruding parts) in the current collecting terminal (see two slits defining a protruding part 33 contacting the collector plate protruding parts 29, Fig. 15D, ¶[0054]) and in a plan view in a thickness direction of the power generating element, an end part of the first current collecting terminal side of the buckling part is positioned on the first active material layer side compared to the end part Ti of the first tab (see active material layers on 18a and 19a in Fig. 5 repeatedly stacked where the bucking part 33 in the embodiment of Fig. 15D in positioned on the active material side since there is active material in both directions. Furthermore one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the buckling part may bend in either direction as long as the end is in contact with the collector plates).
Regarding claim 2, modified Karasawa discloses the battery according to claim 1, and Karasawa further discloses wherein, the tab portion 18a/19a is separate from the main part of the electrode and the slits 35 (i.e. end part Ts) do not extend through the entirety of the tab and are spaced away from the active material layer placed on electrode plate 18/19 (i.e. Tf) (see annotated Fig. 15D).
Regarding claims 3, modified Karasawa discloses the battery according to claim 1, and Karasawa further discloses wherein a plurality of corrugated portions (protruding parts) are present along the length the current collecting terminal (Figs. 15A, ¶[0054]).
Regarding claims 4, modified Karasawa discloses the battery according to claim 1, and Karasawa further discloses wherein the base part of the first current collecting terminal contacts the first tab when the bent portion is bent by the protruding portion to provide effective electrical connection of the lead portions and collector plates (see collector plate 21 or 22 is pressed against the electrode plates, because of the bent portion 33 smoothly bending and adjusting, so that the edges of the electrode plates 18, 19 together form a uniform, flat end surface, which will be in favorable contact with the collector plates 21, 22 ¶[0054]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Karasawa discloses the battery according to claim 1, and Karasawa further discloses wherein the cells 6 (power generating element) contain the electrode plate 5 which is in a sheet shape (see shape in Fig. 4, ¶[0036]).
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 KAREN J. ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (703)756-1243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am-6 pm EST.
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, Jeffrey Barton can be reached at (571) 272-1307. 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.
/K.J.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1726 /RYAN S CANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726