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 .
This is a final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 12/04/2025. Claims 1-5 are currently amended. Claims 6-7 are newly added. Claims 1-7 are pending review in this action. The previous objections regarding the drawings and the claims are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to the drawings and the claims. The previous 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to Claim 1. New grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendments are presented below.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/04/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
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 1, 4-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seong et al. (US 2010/0003583 A1) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 02/05/2024) further in view of Fujita et al. (US 2018/0248215 A1).
In Regards to Claim 1:
Seong discloses a sealed battery (secondary battery), comprising: a battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) that comprises a liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370); a sealing plug (cap, 380) that is attached to the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370) and that comprises an opposed surface (see annotated Figure 2B below) opposed to a surface (roughened surface, 372) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) at a periphery of the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370) (Figures 2A and 2B, [0051, 0053, 0057]). Seong further discloses that a sealing member (resin, 381) that is made of resin and that is disposed between the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) and the sealing plug (cap, 380), wherein the surface of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) comprises a rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) on at least a part of a portion in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381) (Figure 2B, [0057]). Seong further discloses that an arithmetic average roughness (Sa) of the rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) is between 1 µm and 17 µm (Figure 2B, [0027]). Seong further discloses that the rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) serves to increase the friction and adhesion between the sealing plug (cap, 380) and the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370), thus preventing the leakage of the electrolyte [0072].
Seong is deficient in disclosing that at least the opposed surface of the sealing plug comprises a rough surface area on at least a part of a portion in contact with the sealing member, and an arithmetic average roughness (Sa) of the rough surface area is equal to or more than 1 µm.
Fujita discloses a battery (RF battery, 1) comprising a cell stack (2) which include a plurality of cell frames (3) (Figures 1 and 6, [0039, 0041, 0047]). Fujita further discloses that the plurality of cell frames (3) include frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) which face each other and contact one another (Figure 6, [0047]). Fujita further discloses that the frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) each have a surface roughness such that friction is exerted between the frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) (Figure 6, [0047]). Fujita teaches that with such a configuration of each of the frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) having a surface roughness, the components of the cell stack (2) are less likely to be displaced from each other, thus the electrolytes are less likely to leak from the cell stack (2) [0047].
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the sealed battery of Seong to have the surface roughness be present on both the opposed surface of the sealing plug and the surface of the battery case at locations where they are in contact with the sealing member, as it is known in the art that having two opposing surfaces which come into contact with one another each possess a surface roughness can result in improved friction and therefore prevent a liquid electrolyte from leaking from a battery, as taught by Fujita. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon making the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
866
507
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2B (Seong US 2010/0003583 A1)
In Regards to Claim 4 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Seong as modified by Fujita discloses the sealed battery of Claim 1 as set forth above. As detailed in the rejection of Claim 1 above, modified Seong discloses that the rough surface area is provided on an entire area of the opposed surface (see annotated Figure 2B above) which is in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381). As such, the rough surface area is indeed present on a part equal to or more than 5% of the portion of the opposed surface (see annotated Figure 2B above) in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
In Regards to Claim 5 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Seong as modified by Fujita discloses the sealed battery of Claim 1 as set forth above. Seong further discloses that an arithmetic average roughness (Sa) of the rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) is between 1 µm and 17 µm (Figure 2B, [0027]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met.
In Regards to Claim 7 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Seong as modified by Fujita discloses the sealed battery of Claim 1 as set forth above. Seong further discloses that the outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) a comprises the rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) on a part of a portion in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381) (Figure 2B). Modified Seong further discloses that the rough surface area is provided on an entire area of the outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) which is in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381). As such, the rough surface area is indeed present on a part equal to or more than 5% of the portion of the outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 7 are met.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seong et al. (US 2010/0003583 A1) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 02/05/2024) further in view of Fujita et al. (US 2018/0248215 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, with evidentiary support from Gaugler (US 2018/0102511 A1).
In Regards to Claim 2 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Seong as modified by Fujita discloses the sealed battery of Claim 1 as set forth above. Seong further discloses that the sealing plug (cap, 380) comprises: a shaft part (see annotated Figure 2B below) that is inserted into the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370) and a flange part (see annotated Figure 2B below) which extends from the shaft part (see annotated Figure 2B below) along an outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350), the surface of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) including the outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) (Figure 2B, [0057-0058]). Seong further discloses that the sealing member (resin, 381) is disposed between the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) and the sealing plug (cap, 380) as the sealing member (resin, 381) surrounds an entirety of the sealing plug (cap, 380) (Figure 2B, [0057]). Seong further discloses that the sealing plug (cap, 380) may be pin-shaped [0059].
Gaugler discloses a pin-shaped current collector (107) in Figure 1, which has a shaft part (second section, 107c) and a flange part (head, 107d), wherein the flange part (head, 107d) is formed in a plate-shape (Figure 1, [0052]).
Thus, although Seong does not explicitly disclose that the flange part (see annotated Figure 2B below) is formed in a plate shape along an outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) at an outside of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350), the skilled artisan would appreciate that when the sealing plug (cap, 380) is pin-shaped, the sealing plug (cap, 380) would necessarily have a flange part (see annotated Figure 2B below) formed in a plate shape along an outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) at an outside of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350).
Furthermore, as the sealing member (resin, 381) is disposed around an entirety of the sealing plug (cap, 380), the skilled artisan would appreciate that the sealing member (resin, 381) is indeed between the outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) and an opposed surface of the flange part (see annotated Figure 2B below), and the outer surface (upper external surface) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) a comprises the rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) on at least a part of a portion in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381) (Figure 2B). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
PNG
media_image2.png
803
542
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2B (Seong US 2010/0003583 A1)
Claims 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seong et al. (US 2010/0003583 A1) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 02/05/2024) further in view of Fujita et al. (US 2018/0248215 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Kim et al. (US 2008/0160393 A1).
In Regards to Claim 3 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Seong as modified by Fujita discloses the sealed battery of Claim 1 as set forth above.
Seong is deficient in disclosing that a projection part is formed on the surface of the battery case or the opposed surface of the sealing plug, and the projection part is configured to protrude toward the sealing member and configured to surround the liquid injection hole in a plan view.
Kim discloses a sealed battery (secondary battery) comprising a battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) which includes a liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) (Figure 1, [0044, 0055]). Kim further discloses a sealing plug (372) which is attached to the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) (Figure 2A, [0054]). Kim further discloses that a surface (surface on which hollow portions, 364, are formed) of the battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) at a periphery of the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) includes hollow portions (364), which may be formed as a protrusion (Figure 2A, [0057]). Kim further discloses that the hollow portions (364) are configured to protrude towards the sealing plug (372) and are configured to surround the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) in a plane view (Figure 2A, [0056-0057]). Kim further teaches that in such a configuration, the sealing plug (372) seals the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) such that the electrolyte contained in the battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) does not leak outside of the battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) (Figures 1 and 2A, [0058]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to include on the surface of the battery case of Seong which is in contact with the opposed surface of the sealing plug of Seong, hollow portions in the form of a protrusion, such that the hollow portions extend towards the sealing plug and form a reliable seal to prevent the liquid electrolyte form leaking to an outside of the battery case, as taught by Kim. By making such a modification, the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation of success in improving the seal of the electrolyte injection hole and preventing the liquid electrolyte from leaking, thus improving the overall safety of the battery.
The skilled artisan would appreciate that upon the above modification, as the sealing member (resin, 381) is disposed around an entirety of the sealing plug (cap, 380), the hollow portions (i.e., projection part) is protruding towards the sealing member (resin, 381) as well as the sealing plug (cap, 380). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
In Regards to Claim 6 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Seong as modified by Fujita discloses the sealed battery of Claim 1 as set forth above.
Seong is deficient in disclosing that a projection part is formed on the surface of the battery case and the opposed surface of the sealing plug, and the projection part is configured to protrude toward the sealing member and configured to surround the liquid injection hole in a plan view.
Kim discloses a sealed battery (secondary battery) comprising a battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) which includes a liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) (Figure 1, [0044, 0055]). Kim further discloses a sealing plug (372) which is attached to the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) (Figure 2A, [0054]). Kim further discloses that a surface (surface on which hollow portions, 364, are formed) of the battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) at a periphery of the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) includes hollow portions (364), which may be formed as a protrusion (Figure 2A, [0057]). Kim further discloses that the hollow portions (364) are configured to protrude towards the sealing plug (372) and are configured to surround the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) in a plane view (Figure 2A, [0056-0057]). Kim further teaches that in such a configuration, the sealing plug (372) seals the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 362) such that the electrolyte contained in the battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) does not leak outside of the battery case (can, 200, and cap assembly, 300) (Figures 1 and 2A, [0058]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to include on the surface of the battery case and the opposed surface of the sealing plug of Seong which are in contact with one another, hollow portions in the form of a protrusion, such that the hollow portions of the surface of the battery case extend towards the sealing plug, and vice versa, and thus form a reliable seal to prevent the liquid electrolyte form leaking to an outside of the battery case, as taught by Kim. By making such a modification, the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation of success in improving the seal of the electrolyte injection hole and preventing the liquid electrolyte from leaking, thus improving the overall safety of the battery.
The skilled artisan would appreciate that upon the above modification, as the sealing member (resin, 381) is disposed around an entirety of the sealing plug (cap, 380), the hollow portions (i.e., projection part) is protruding towards the sealing member (resin, 381). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 6 are met.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 12/04/2025, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-5 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C.103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Seong et al. (US 2010/0003583 A1), Fujita et al. (US 2018/0248215 A1), Gaugler (US 2018/0102511 A1), and Kim et al. (US 2008/0160393 A1).
The Applicant’s argue that the skilled artisan would not be motivated to modify the cap (380) of Seong to have a rough surface area on the opposed surface as Seong teaches that the rough surface area serves to prevent the leakage of electrolyte from the secondary battery and the electrolyte would not cross the boundary between the cap (380) and the resin (381).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1, Seong discloses a sealed battery (secondary battery), comprising: a battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) that comprises a liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370); a sealing plug (cap, 380) that is attached to the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370) and that comprises an opposed surface (see annotated Figure 2B below) opposed to a surface (roughened surface, 372) of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) at a periphery of the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370) (Figures 2A and 2B, [0051, 0053, 0057]). Seong further discloses that a sealing member (resin, 381) that is made of resin and that is disposed between the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) and the sealing plug (cap, 380), wherein the surface of the battery case (can, 200, and flat cap plate, 350) comprises a rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) on at least a part of a portion in contact with the sealing member (resin, 381) (Figure 2B, [0057]). Seong further discloses that the rough surface area (roughened surface, 372) serves to increase the friction and adhesion between the sealing plug (cap, 380) and the liquid injection hole (electrolyte injection hole, 370), thus preventing the leakage of the electrolyte [0072].
Seong is deficient in disclosing that at least the opposed surface of the sealing plug comprises a rough surface area on at least a part of a portion in contact with the sealing member.
Fujita discloses a battery (RF battery, 1) comprising a cell stack (2) which include a plurality of cell frames (3) (Figures 1 and 6, [0039, 0041, 0047]). Fujita further discloses that the plurality of cell frames (3) include frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) which face each other and contact one another (Figure 6, [0047]). Fujita further discloses that the frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) each have a surface roughness such that friction is exerted between the frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) (Figure 6, [0047]). Fujita teaches that with such a configuration of each of the frame-facing surfaces (30f/30b) having a surface roughness, the components of the cell stack (2) are less likely to be displaced from each other, thus the electrolytes are less likely to leak from the cell stack (2) [0047].
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the sealed battery of Seong to have the surface roughness be present on both the opposed surface of the sealing plug and the surface of the battery case at locations where they are in contact with the sealing member, as it is known in the art that having two opposing surfaces which come into contact with one another each possess a surface roughness can result in improved friction and therefore prevent a liquid electrolyte from leaking from a battery, as taught by Fujita.
While the examiner acknowledges that the electrolyte would likely not come into direct contact with the opposed surface of the cap (380), the skilled artisan would appreciate that having the rough surface area be present on both the surface of the battery case and the opposed surface (with sealing member intervening) would nonetheless be expected to improve the friction between the two surfaces and therefore further prevent electrolyte from leaking along path “A” highlighted by the Applicant in annotated Figure 2B of Seong.
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 EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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.E.F./ Examiner, Art Unit 1724
/MIRIAM STAGG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1724