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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 9/30/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jiang et al. (WO 2021/218844, citations from US 2023/0032938).
Regarding claim 13, Jiang et al. discloses in Figs 1-11, a top cover assembly ([0005]) of a secondary battery ([0005]), wherein, the top cover assembly ([0005] comprises a top cover structure (refs 3 + 6) including: an insulating plate (ref 6), and the insulating plate (ref 6) is provided with a lower through hole (ref 61) penetrating up and down (Fig 2); a top cover plate (ref 3), and the top cover plate (ref 3) is located on a top of (Figs 2-3) the insulating plate (ref 6), and the top cover plate (ref 3) is provided with an upper through hole (ref 31) penetrating up and down (Fig 2), and the upper through hole (ref 31) is interconnected with (Fig 2) the lower through hole (ref 61); and a conductor (ref 9), and the conductor (ref 9) passes through (Figs 2-3) the upper through hole (ref 31) and the lower through hole (ref 61), the conductor (ref 9) is fixedly connected with (Figs 2-3) the top cover plate (ref 3) and the insulating plate (ref 7), and the conductor (ref 9) is provided with an intersecting hole (ref 921) passing through (Fig 2, [0042]) the conductor (ref 9).
Regarding claim 14, Jiang et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the top cover assembly ([0005]) further comprises: an adapter piece (refs 7) connecting to (Figs 2-4) a conductor (all of refs 9 structure, 91, 92, 921) in the top cover structure (refs 3 + 6); an insulating gasket (ref 41) arranged on a bottom (Figs 2-4) of the adapter piece (refs 7), the adapter piece (refs 7) is provided with a transfer-pad (ref 8, boss, [0042], Figs 2-4) extending into (Figs 2-4, [0042]) an intersecting hole (ref 921) of the conductor (ref 9), and the transfer-pad (ref 8, boss) is welded ([0042]) to the conductor (ref 9).
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 non-obviousness.
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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (WO 2021/218844, citations from US 2023/0032938) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Matsubara (US 2005/0014064).
Regarding claim 15, Jiang et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the secondary battery comprises an electric core ([0005], [0042], at refs 1, 2), the electric core ([0005], [0042] at refs 1, 2) has a plurality of tab ([0042]) located on a top ([0042]) of the electric core ([0005], [0042], at refs 1, 2), wherein, a quantity of the adapter piece is two (refs 7, Fig 2), and the two adapter pieces (refs 7) are set up on a top (Fig 2) of the electric core ([0005], [0042]), the plurality of tab ([0042]) are respectively welded to surfaces ([0042]-[0043] welding described) of the two adapter pieces (refs 7) to form a soldering area ([0042]-[0043]), but does not explicitly disclose at least one piece of a double-sided protective adhesive layer is attached above the two adapter pieces, both sides of the double-sided protective adhesive layer are of adhesive surfaces, and the double-sided protective adhesive layer at least covers the soldering area when attached above the adapter pieces.
Matsubara discloses in Figs 1-11, a battery (Abstract) including a cover structure having a cap plate (ref 1). Double sided adhesive (ref 9, [0044]) is utilized to adhere a top portion of the cover structure components together ([0044]). This double sided adhesive (ref 9, [0044]) enhances the sealing connection and overall structural integrity of the battery structure ([0044], [0021], [0022]).
Matsubara and Jiang et al. are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the double sided adhesive material of Matsubara into the cover assembly structure of Jiang et al. to enhance battery sealing constructure and overall structural integrity and ultimately performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Instant dependent claim 16 comprises structure including the lower through hole of the insulating plate and the upper through hole of the top cover plate are corresponding to each other respectively and interconnected to each other to form a first perforation hole, wherein the conductor includes a pole, the top cover structure also includes an upper plastic part and a lower sealing part, and the pole, the upper plastic part and the lower sealing part are arranged sequentially from top to bottom, wherein, the pole and the upper plastic part are set up above the top cover plate, the upper plastic part is arranged between the pole and the top cover plate, and the lower sealing part is arranged between the lower through hole of the insulating plate and the upper hole of the top cover plate; the intersecting hole of the conductor includes a pole hole, the upper plastic part has an upper plastic hole, the lower sealing part has a lower sealing hole; the pole hole, the upper plastic hole and the lower sealing hole are interconnected to each other to form a second perforation hole, and a second vertical projection of the second perforation hole is located in a first vertical projection of the first perforation hole; the top cover assembly further comprises a deflector, the deflector is set up below the insulating plate of the top cover structure, an upper surface of the deflector is provided with a deflector pole, wherein the deflector pole comprises a cylinder and a chassis, the cylinder is located on the chassis, the cylinder is suitable for passing through a first perforation hole and a second perforation hole in the top cover structure, and is further in contact with a hole wall of the second perforation hole.
Jiang et al. and Matsubara are considered to be the prior art references of record closest to the aforementioned instant claim limitations. However, neither of the aforementioned references alone or in combination discloses or renders obvious all of the aforementioned instant dependent claim structure. Namely, the structure of instant dependent claim 16 in totality and spatially related to the structure set forth in the independent claim is not disclosed or rendered obvious by the applied references. Further, no additional references were found that disclose or render obvious the structure of dependent claim 16. Further, claim 17 is objected to since it depends from claim 16.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH J DOUYETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8A - 4P 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.
/KENNETH J DOUYETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725