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 and Claim Status
The amendment filed 8 May 2026 has been entered. Claim 2, 6, and 7 are canceled. Claims 1, 3–5, and 8–12 are pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informality: “mass” in line 2 should instead read “weight” to enhance clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3–5, and 8–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the claim element "the battery" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this claim element in the claim. For the purposes of this office action, the claim element has been interpreted as “the pouch type secondary battery”.
Claim 1 recites the claim element “the unit cell positioned in an outermost layer of the jelly roll” in lines 7–8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this claim element in the claim. For the purposes of this office action, the claim element has been interpreted as “a unit cell of the plurality of unit cells that is positioned in an outermost layer of the jelly roll”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the outer layer separator is formed by a separator in any unit cell of the laminated unit cells being extended” in lines 9–10. It is unclear whether “a separator” is meant to refer to “a separator” first recited in line 2 of Claim 1, or a different separator, and furthermore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the claim element “the laminated unit cells”. For the purposes of this office action, the limitation has been interpreted as “wherein the outer layer separator is formed by the separator of any unit cell of the plurality of unit cells being extended”.
Claims 3–5 and 8–12 are rejected as they depend upon Claim 1 and do not resolve the indefinite language described above.
Further, Claim 10 recites the claim element “the unit cells” for which there is insufficient antecedent basis. Claim 10 also recites the claim element “a structure”; it is unclear whether this is the same “structure” first recited in Claim 1, or a different structure. For the purposes of this office action, Claim 10 has been interpreted as “The pouch type secondary battery of claim 1, wherein one or more unit cells of the plurality of unit cells have a mono-cell structure or a bi-cell structure”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3–5, and 8–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (WO 2020/060022 A1; US 2021/0265703 A1 used herein for translation and citation purposes; art already of record) in view of He et al. (CN 109411670 A; see attached machine translation) and further in view of Zhang et al. (“Liquid–Solid Phase-Change Behavior of Diethylenetriamine in Nonaqueous Systems for Carbon Dioxide Absorption”).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a pouch type secondary battery (see secondary battery, [0112], which can be embedded in a pouch, [0112]) comprising:
a jelly roll (see electrode assembly, [0066]) in which a plurality of unit cells (see monocells 100 and 101, [0065], FIG. 3a) including a structure of a separator (see separator 30, [0065], FIG. 3a) interposed between a positive electrode (see positive electrode 10, [0065], FIG. 3a) and a negative electrode (see negative electrode 20, [0065], FIG. 3a) are laminated ([0065]); and
an outer layer separator (see separator expansion part 31, [0065]–[0068], FIG. 3a),
wherein the pouch type secondary battery is in a form in which a unit cell of the plurality of unit cells that is positioned in an outermost layer of the jelly roll (100 and lowermost 101) is surrounded by the outer layer separator (31) ([0066]–[0068]; note that although not explicitly shown in FIG. 3a, [0066] discloses that the outer layer separator (31) surrounds the unit cell (100), and [0068] discloses that the outer layer separator (31) can cover the entire positive electrode (10) disposed at the uppermost layer),
wherein the outer layer separator (31) is formed by the separator of any unit cell (100) of the plurality of unit cells (100 and 101) being extended ([0065]–[0068], FIG. 3a).
Kim does not disclose wherein the outer layer separator is including a carbon dioxide adsorbent.
He teaches a secondary battery ([0043]) comprising: a separator ([0043]) including a carbon dioxide adsorbent (see organic amines, [0043]–[0044]). He teaches ([0009]) that this separator can significantly reduce gas production and extend the service life of the secondary battery under high temperature and high voltage.
Kim and He are analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of secondary batteries. It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pouch-type secondary battery of Kim such that the separator (including the outer layer separator) is the separator taught by He which includes a carbon dioxide adsorbent, for the purpose of significantly reducing gas production and extending the service life of the pouch-type secondary battery under high temperature and high voltage.
Modified Kim does not disclose wherein the carbon dioxide adsorbent includes diethylenetriamine (DETA). Instead, modified Kim (He [0065]) discloses that any organic amine can be utilized, with preference given to organic amines which have shorter carbon chains, low molecular weights, and a high number of basic sites.
Zhang teaches diethylenetriamine (DETA) as a carbon dioxide adsorbent (p. 1 ¶ “Diethylenetriamine (DETA), which…”). Zhang teaches (p. 1 ¶ “Global warming is…” and “Diethylenetriamine (DETA), which…”) that DETA has attracted much interest as a candidate for carbon dioxide capture due to its two primary and one secondary amino group (i.e. three basic sites), and that DETA has a higher reactivity towards carbon dioxide than monoethanolamine, a traditional amine utilized for carbon dioxide absorption, as well as better mass transfer performance, a lower heat of reaction, and lower regeneration heat duty at the same absorption capacity. Further, Zhang teaches (p. 6 ¶ “The liquid–solid phase-changing…”) that DETA can perform carbon dioxide capture in a variety of non-aqueous solvents.
Zhang is analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of carbon dioxide adsorption. It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pouch type secondary battery of modified Kim such that the carbon dioxide adsorbent includes DETA, as taught by Zhang, as it has higher reactivity towards carbon dioxide, better mass transfer performance, lower heat of reaction, and lower regeneration heat duty at the same absorption capacity compared to a traditional amine utilized for carbon dioxide absorption, can perform carbon dioxide capture in a variety of non-aqueous solvents, and has three basic sites.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above. Modified Kim further discloses wherein the carbon dioxide adsorbent is impregnated in pores of the outer layer separator (He [0080] teaches that the carbon dioxide adsorbent is firmly adhered to the surfaces of inorganic particles comprised in the separator, wherein the inorganic particles have porous structures, i.e. pores, on their surfaces; in other words, it can be understood that the carbon dioxide adsorbent is impregnated in pores of the inorganic particles, which are comprised in the separator).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein the pores of the outer layer separator have an average size of 1 to 10 Å.
However, modified Kim (He [0067]) does disclose wherein the pore size should be in the nanometer range, and thus can be understood to disclose wherein the average pore size is in the nanometer range. One of ordinary skill in the art will understand that the disclosed “nanometer range” will include a pore size of 1 nm, which is equivalent to 10 Å. He teaches ([0067]) that the disclosed pore size results in the inorganic particles having a large specific surface area, which can enhance adhesion of the carbon dioxide adsorbent to the surface of the inorganic particles, improving carbon dioxide adsorption.
When the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP § 2144.05.I). It would therefore have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the overlapping portion of the ranges for the average size of the pores of the outer layer separator with a reasonable expectation that such selection will successfully result in the inorganic particles having a large specific surface area, which can enhance adhesion of the carbon dioxide adsorbent to the surface of the inorganic particles, improving carbon dioxide adsorption.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein a content of the carbon dioxide adsorbent is 20 to 80 wt% with respect to the weight of the outer layer separator. However, He does teach ([0071]) that decreasing the content of carbon dioxide adsorbent decreases the absorption capacity of carbon dioxide, while increasing the content of carbon dioxide adsorbent can affect the function of the inorganic particles comprised in the separator, reduce the content of the inorganic particles, and limit the available adhesion sites for excessive carbon dioxide adsorbents.
A result-effective variable is a variable which achieves a recognized result. The determination of the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable is routine experimentation and therefore obvious (MPEP § 2144.05.II). In the instant case, the content of carbon dioxide adsorbent is a variable that achieves the recognized result of affecting the absorption capacity of carbon dioxide, the function and content of the inorganic particles comprised in the separator, and the number of available adhesion sites for excessive carbon dioxide adsorbents, as taught by He, thus making the content of the carbon dioxide adsorbent a result-effective variable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pouch type secondary battery of modified Kim such that the content of the carbon dioxide adsorbent is 20 to 80 wt% with respect to the weight of the outer layer separator via routine experimentation, for the purpose of achieving suitable levels of carbon dioxide absorption capacity, function and content of the inorganic particles, and available adhesion sites for excessive carbon dioxide adsorbents.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above. Modified Kim further discloses wherein the outer layer separator includes a porous substrate (see separator substrate, He [0043], which can specifically be a porous PE polymer film, He [0112]); and a coating layer (see coating, He [0043]) which is formed on the porous substrate and includes inorganic particles (He [0043]) and a binder (see adhesive, He [0072]) binding the inorganic particles (He [0072]–[0073]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above. Modified Kim (He [0073], [0076]) further discloses wherein the carbon dioxide adsorbent is combined with the binder.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above. Kim further discloses wherein all of the unit cells of the plurality of unit cells are have a mono-cell structure (see monocells 100 and 101, [0065]).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Kim discloses the pouch type secondary battery as set forth above. Kim further discloses a battery module (see secondary battery module, [0112]) comprising the pouch type secondary battery of Claim 1 as a unit battery.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Kim discloses the battery module as set forth above. Kim further discloses a device (see mobile device, [0003]) comprising the battery module of Claim 11 as a power source.
Response to Arguments
The Examiner acknowledges the affidavit filed 8 May 2026.
Applicant’s arguments in the Remarks filed 8 May 2026 pertaining to the references cited in the final rejection mailed 11 February 2026 not disclosing or suggesting component 2 of the present invention, i.e. the outer layer separator including a carbon dioxide adsorbent, wherein the carbon dioxide adsorbent includes diethylenetriamine (DETA), as set forth in p. 10–11 of the Remarks, 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.
Applicant’s arguments in the Remarks filed 8 May 2026 pertaining to unexpected results, as set forth in p. 11–13 of the Remarks, have been fully considered but are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant specifically argues that the difference between Example 1 (utilizing DETA as the carbon dioxide adsorbent, representative of the instant invention) and Comparative Example 1 (which does not utilize a carbon dioxide adsorbent, analogous to Kim ‘022) of the instant application is unexpected from the teachings of the cited references. Applicant further argues that Additional Comparative Example 3 (utilizing PEI as the carbon dioxide adsorbent, analogous to Kim ‘506) exhibited a significant thickness increase (26%) after charge and discharge when compared to the present invention (20%), which is also unexpected from the teachings of the prior art.
These arguments are not persuasive. Firstly, it is submitted that the above is not considered a comparison with the closest prior art (see MPEP § 716.02(e)), as the new ground of rejection differs from the prior grounds of rejection, e.g. the new ground of rejection utilizes the reference He and does not utilize the reference Kim ‘506. Further, it is noted that evidence relied upon should establish “that the differences in results are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance.” Ex parte Gelles, 22 USPQ2d 1318, 1319 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992) (see MPEP § 716.02(b).I). In the instant case, for example, the Applicant does not appear to have shown that the difference between Example 1 (utilizing DETA) and Additional Comparative Example 3 (utilizing PEI), which exhibited thickness increases after charge and discharge of 20% and 26%, respectively, is statistically and practically significant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA MARIE FEHR, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-0860. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/J.M.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/BASIA A RIDLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights