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 received 3/2/2026 (“Amendment”) has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 3/2/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US20150155528A1 (Takahashi).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20150155528A1 (Takahashi).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches a power storage unit [abs]; a secondary battery, comprising: an electrode assembly [#100] including a current collection tab protruding to one side; a case including a main body having an accommodating part accommodating the electrode assembly, and a cover [#107; 0052] covering the main body; and an electrode lead [#104] electrically connected to the current collection tab [#101a; 0115] and drawn out of the case [please refer to the annotated fig below that depicts the structural components], wherein: the current collection tab is bent twice [illustrated twice]; Takahashi is silent with respect to a length of the current collection tab is substantially twice a thickness of the electrode assembly.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi and adjust the length of the current
collection tab to be twice the thickness of the electrode assembly as claimed, as this is an
obvious variation in the sizes of the thickness with no change in the function of the
electrochemical system and it would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of
ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143). Similarly, the instant specification teaches [0062] even if
the thickness of the electrode assembly 110 were to be reduced, the current collection tab 111
could still be bent and stored inside the case 120. Thus, the area of the sealing portion 124 may
be reduced and the capacity of the secondary battery 100 per unit area may be increased. In an
implementation, by accommodating the current collection tab 111 inside the case 120 by
bending the current collection tab 111, the energy density may be secured by increasing the
utilization rate of the internal space of the case 120. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would
be able to adjust the length of the current collection tab to be twice the thickness of the
electrode assembly as claimed as one would expect a reasonable expectation of success.
Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative
dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not
perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from
the prior art device, Gardner V. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir.
1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
PNG
media_image1.png
297
876
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Takahashi teaches wherein: the current collection tab includes: a front end portion connected to an electrode uncoated portion of the electrode assembly; a terminal end portion to which the electrode lead is connected; and a center point located between the front end portion and the terminal end portion, and the current collection tab is bent upwardly at the front end portion and bent downwardly from the center point [depicted below; fig. 2a].
PNG
media_image2.png
297
876
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Takahashi teaches wherein an angle formed by the current collection tab bent at the center point is less than 90 degrees [depicted above in claim 2; the center point is at an acute point, which is less than 90 degrees].
Regarding claim 4, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is coupled to a lower side of the current collection tab and is between the front end portion and the terminal end portion [this can be seen on the X1 side of fig. 2a, wherein #104, i.e. lead is couple to lower side of current collector].
Regarding claim 5, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is coupled to an upper side of the current collection tab and is located outside the bent current collection tab [illustrated above in claim 2, fig. 2A].
Regarding claim 6, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is bent at the accommodating part and drawn out of the case [#220; 0087].
Regarding claim 7, Takahashi teaches a secondary battery, comprising: an electrode assembly including a current collection tab protruding to one side; a case including a main body having an accommodating part accommodating the electrode assembly, and a cover covering the main body; and an electrode lead electrically connected to the current collection tab and drawn out of the case [please refer to claim 1 as these limitations are recited and rejected therein], wherein: the current collection tab is bent three times [depicted below], and a length of the current collection tab is two or more than the thickness of the electrode assembly.
PNG
media_image3.png
155
503
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Takahashi teaches wherein: the current collection tab includes: a front end portion connected to an electrode uncoated portion of the electrode assembly; a terminal end portion to which the electrode lead is connected; and a first point and a second point located between the front end portion and the terminal end portion [please refer to claim 2 as these limitations are recited and rejected therein]. Takahashi is silent with respect to the first point is a point that is located at substantially 1/3 of the length of the current collection tab, and the second point is a point that is located at substantially 2/3 of the length of the current collection tab. With regards to the claimed "the first point is a point that is located at substantially 1/3 of the length of the current collection tab, and the second point is a point that is located at substantially 2/3 of the length of the current collection tab," the term "substantially is considered to be a broad term.
Although, Takahashi does not explicitly teach these lengths, it is the Examiner's position, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi and adjust the lengths as required by the instant claim as this is an obvious variation in the sizes of the thickness with no change in the function of the electrochemical system and it would yield nothing more than predictable results to one of
ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143). Where the only difference between the prior art and the
claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the
claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is
not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner V. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338,
220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 9, Takahashi teaches wherein the current collection tab is bent at the front end portion, the first point, and the second point [illustrated in fig. 2A and claim 1]
Regarding claim 10, Takahashi teaches wherein the current collection tab is bent such that the front end portion meets the second point and the first point meets the terminal end portion [fig. 2A].
Regarding claim 11, Takahashi teaches wherein a region of the current collection tab between the front end portion and the first point is located at an outermost side of the current collection side [depicted below].
PNG
media_image4.png
204
503
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is coupled to the lower side of the current collection tab and is interposed between the first point and the terminal end portion [fig. 2A and please refer to the rejection of claim 4 as the limitations are recited therein and is rejected accordingly].
Regarding claim 13, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is coupled to the upper side of the current collection tab and is between the electrode uncoated portion and the terminal end portion [fig. 2A and please refer to the rejection of claim 5 as the limitations are recited therein and is rejected accordingly].
Regarding claim 14, Takahashi teaches wherein a region of the current collection tab between the second point and the terminal end portion is located at the outermost side [depicted below].
PNG
media_image5.png
225
521
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is coupled to the lower side of the current collection tab and is located outside the bent current collection tab [fig. 2A and please refer to the rejection of claim 4 as the limitations are recited therein and is rejected accordingly].
.
Regarding claim 16, Takahashi teaches wherein the electrode lead is coupled to the upper side of the current collection tab and is between the a first region and the terminal end portion [fig. 2A and please refer to the rejection of claim 5 as the limitations are recited therein and is rejected accordingly].
.
Regarding claim 17, Takahashi teaches wherein: the electrode assembly comprises a first electrode plate, a second electrode plate, and a separator between the first and second electrode plates [0052], the first and second electrode plates each comprise a plurality of electrode uncoated portions on which an active material is not applied 0063-0064], and the current collection tab is formed by the plurality of electrode uncoated portions.
Regarding claim 18, Takahashi teaches wherein the current collection tab comprises a region where the plurality of electrode uncoated portions are coupled [fig. 2a; 0063-0064].
Regarding claim 19, Takahashi teaches wherein: the electrode assembly comprises a first electrode plate, a second electrode plate, and a separator between the first and second electrode plates [0052-0053], the first and second electrode plates each comprise a plurality of electrode uncoated portions on which an active material is not applied, and the current collection tab is formed by the plurality of electrode uncoated portions [0063-0064].
Regarding claim 20, Takahashi teaches wherein the current collection tab comprises a region where the plurality of electrode uncoated portions are coupled [fig. 2a; 0063-0064].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARIKA GUPTA whose telephone number is (571)272-9907. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Ula Ruddock can be reached at 571-272-1481. 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.
/S.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729
Prosecution Insights