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 Invention I, claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 12/11/2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS’ filed 2/13/2023, 4/24/2024, and 12/26/2024 have been considered by examiner.
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.
Claim 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 currently reads:
A battery cell, comprising:
a housing;
a first body structure, disposed in the housing, wherein the first body structure comprises a first positive electrode plate and a first negative electrode plate; and
a second body structure, disposed in the housing, wherein the second body structure comprises a second positive electrode plate and a second negative electrode plate, wherein
the first body structure and the second body structure are spaced out along a first direction, an end of the first positive electrode plate, which is oriented away from the second body structure along the first direction, protrudes beyond the first body structure and contacts a first inner surface of the housing, and the first negative electrode plate is insulated from the first inner surface of the housing; and/or, an end of the second positive electrode plate, which is oriented away from the first body structure along the first direction, protrudes beyond the second body structure and contacts a second inner surface of the housing, the second negative electrode plate is insulated from the second inner surface of the housing, and the first inner surface is disposed opposite to the second inner surface” (emphasis added).
It is unclear whether the limitation “the first body structure and the second body structure are spaced out along a first direction” is meant to be included in the “and/or” statement of the claim, or if “the first body structure and the second body structure are spaced out along a first direction” is meant to be a separate limitation required for all embodiments of the claim, given that the “and/or” statement references “the first direction”. Thus, the claim is rendered indefinite. For compact prosecution purposes, claim 1 is interpreted by examiner as if it were written as follows:
A battery cell, comprising:
a housing;
a first body structure, disposed in the housing, wherein the first body structure comprises a first positive electrode plate and a first negative electrode plate; and
a second body structure, disposed in the housing, wherein the second body structure comprises a second positive electrode plate and a second negative electrode plate, wherein
the first body structure and the second body structure are spaced out along a first direction, and wherein:
an end of the first positive electrode plate, which is oriented away from the second body structure along the first direction, protrudes beyond the first body structure and contacts a first inner surface of the housing, and the first negative electrode plate is insulated from the first inner surface of the housing; and/or,
an end of the second positive electrode plate, which is oriented away from the first body structure along the first direction, protrudes beyond the second body structure and contacts a second inner surface of the housing, the second negative electrode plate is insulated from the second inner surface of the housing, and the first inner surface is disposed opposite to the second inner surface”.
Further regarding claim 1, the first clause of the “and/or” statement recites “an end of the first positive electrode plate, which is oriented away from the second body structure along the first direction, protrudes beyond the first body structure and contacts a first inner surface of the housing, and the first negative electrode plate is insulated from the first inner surface of the housing”. The second clause of the “and/or” statement recites “an end of the second positive electrode plate, which is oriented away from the first body structure along the first direction, protrudes beyond the second body structure and contacts a second inner surface of the housing, the second negative electrode plate is insulated from the second inner surface of the housing, and the first inner surface is disposed opposite to the second inner surface” (emphasis added). It is not clear how to meet the “or” statement of claim 1, given that the second clause requires features of the first clause (“the first inner surface”) to be evaluated (i.e. “…and the first inner surface is disposed opposite to the second inner surface.”). Therefore, this claim is rendered indefinite.
Claims 2-18 are rejected due to their dependency on a rejected base claim.
Claim 4 is 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.
The term “close to” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close to” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the position of “the end of the first body structure” relative to “the second body structure” and the position of “the end of the second body structure” relative to “the first body structure” is rendered indefinite.
Claim 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 11 recites the limitation “the second adapter is connected to a second end of the second inner post, and the second end of the second inner post passes through the second sleeve and is connected to the second sleeve on an outer side of the housing” in lines 4-7. It is unclear how the second end of the second inner post can be both connected to the second adapter and also passing through the second sleeve to connect to the second sleeve on an outer side of the housing, thus rendering the claim indefinite.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 12-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minagata et al. (US 2018/0277822, hereinafter "Minagata").
Regarding claim 1, Minagata teaches a rechargeable battery (“battery cell”) comprising a case (“housing”), which accommodates an electrode assembly [Minagata Fig. 1, 0019]. Minagata teaches that the electrode assembly comprises positive electrodes and negative electrodes alternately stacked in a stacking direction (“first direction”) [0020, “the positive electrodes 14 and the negative electrodes 24 are alternately stacked one on another with a separator member 21 of the electrode accommodation separators 20 located in between”, 0021, “The direction in which the electrode accommodation separators 20 and the negative electrodes 24 are stacked one on another is referred to as the stacking direction of the electrode assembly 12”]. Each grouping of one negative electrode (24) and one positive electrode (14) can be considered a “body structure” as claimed (see annotated Minagata Fig. 3 below). Fig. 3 of Minagata shows these body structures spaced out along the stacking direction. Minagata teaches that a second edge of the negative electrodes (24b), which is oriented away from the neighboring body structures, protrudes beyond a second edge of the positive electrode (14b) and contacts an inner bottom surface (“first inner surface”) of the case [Minagata Fig. 3, 0027, “The second edge 24b of the negative electrode 24 is longer than the second edge 14b of the positive electrode 14”, 0033, “the second edges 24b are in contact with the inner bottom surface 11d of the case 11”]. Minagata teaches that the positive electrodes are insulated from the inner bottom surface of the case by a distance L [Minagata Fig. 3, 0035, “he bottom side contact portions 20b separate the second edges 14b of the positive electrodes 14 from the inner bottom surface 11d of the case 11 by the dimension L”].
PNG
media_image1.png
825
950
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1: Minagata Fig. 3 annotated by examiner
It is noted that while Minagata teaches that it is the negative electrodes which are in contact with the inner bottom surface of the case, the battery taught by Minagata is a rechargeable battery, wherein the designation of “positive” and “negative” is entirely dependent upon whether the battery is in a state of charge or discharge with the polarities reversing. This concept would have been immediately known to a person having ordinary skill in the art, and the designation of “positive” and “negative” does not lend itself to any implicit or explicit structure, but rather the polarity state at a given point in a charge/discharge cycle. Therefore, the negative electrodes of Minagata are equated to the claimed first and second “positive electrode plates”, and the positive electrodes of Minagata are equated to the claimed first and second “negative electrode plates”.
Further regarding claim 4, as best understood in light of the 112(b) issues mentioned above, Minagata teaches that the negative electrodes each have a negative electrode tab (27) extending from the body structures and that each of the positive electrodes have a positive electrode tab (17) extending from the body structures [Minagata Fig. 2 0022, “The positive electrode 14 includes a positive electrode tab 17, which is a non-applied portion projecting from the first edge 14a”, 0025, “The negative electrode 24 includes a negative electrode tab 27, which is a non-applied portion projecting from the first edge 24a”]. Minagata teaches that the negative electrode tabs and positive electrode tabs are disposed at the same end toward the upper side of the rechargeable battery [Minagata Fig. 2]. Minagata also teaches that the ends are close enough to each other to stack the negative electrode tabs on one another, and to stack the positive electrode tabs on one another [0032, “The positive electrode tab group 17a is formed by stacking the positive electrode tabs 17 one on another. The negative electrode tab group 27a is formed by stacking the negative electrode tabs 27 one on another”].
PNG
media_image2.png
526
787
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2 Minagata Fig. 2 annotated by examiner
Further regarding claim 7, Minagata teaches a negative conductive member (42) (“first adapter”) and a negative terminal (40) (“positive post”), wherein the negative electrode tabs of the body structures are connected to the negative conductive member, which is connected to the negative terminal [Minagata Fig. 1, 0037, “he negative terminal 40 is electrically connected to the negative electrode tab group 27a of the electrode assembly 12 by the negative conductive member 42”]. Minagata also teaches a positive conductive member (32) (“second adapter”) and a positive terminal (30) (“negative post”), wherein the positive electrode tabs of the body structures are connected to the positive conductive member, which is connected to the positive terminal [Minagata Fig. 1, 0039, “he positive terminal 30 is electrically connected to the positive electrode tab group 17a of the electrode assembly 12 by the positive conductive member 32”].
Further regarding claim 12, Minagata teaches that the negative conductive member has a flat rectangular shape (“first connecting structure”), extending in a direction perpendicular to the stacking direction, connecting to the negative electrode tabs at one end, and to the negative terminal at another end [Minagata Fig. 1, 0037, “The lower end portion of the negative terminal 40 is joined to a flat rectangular negative conductive member 42”].
Further regarding claim 13, Minagata teaches that the positive conductive member has a flat rectangular shape (“third connecting structure”), extending in a direction perpendicular to the stacking direction, connecting to the positive electrode tabs at one end, and to the positive terminal at another end [Minagata Fig. 1, 0039, “The lower end portion of the positive terminal 30 is electrically connected to a flat rectangular positive conductive member 32”].
Further regarding claim 14, Minagata teaches that the positive terminal may include a positive electrode head [0058, “A positive terminal 62 includes a positive electrode head 63”]. Minagata further teaches a first positive insulation member (“first insulator”) which electrically isolates the positive electrode head of the positive terminal from the lid of the case [0061, “The first positive insulation member 69 limits contact of the lid 11b with the positive electrode head 63”].
Further regarding claim 16, Minagata teaches that the case is made of a metal material [0019, “The case 11 includes a case body 11a, which has the form of a tetragonal tube having a closed end and is formed from metal (e.g., aluminum or aluminum alloy), and a lid 11b, which closes an opening of the case body 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.
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.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minagata (US 2018/0277822) as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Ji et al. (CN 113300034, making reference to examiner-provided translation thereof, hereinafter "Ji").
Regarding claim 8, Minagata teaches the battery of claim 7, as described in the rejection of instant claim 7 above. Minagata does not specifically teach the negative terminal being mounted on a first side face of the housing and the positive terminal being mounted on a second side face of the housing , wherein the first side face is disposed opposite to the second side face.
Ji teaches analogous art of a sealed battery comprising a casing/housing and at least two electrode cores inside the casing [0005, “A sealed battery includes: a casing defining a receiving cavity open at least one end; a separator disposed within the receiving cavity to divide the receiving cavity into at least two chambers; at least two electrode cores”]. Ji teaches that the two ends of the housing are open and opposite to each other, and that a first end plate covers one end of the housing, and a second end plate covers the other end of the housing [0050, “the two ends of the housing 1 are open and opposite to each other. The cover plate includes a first end plate 31 and a second end plate 32. The first end plate 31 covers one end of the receiving cavity, and the second end plate 32 covers the other end of the receiving cavity”]. Ji teaches that a positive electrode post may be disposed on the first end plate (“first side face of the housing”), and the negative electrode post may be disposed on the second end plate (“second side face of the housing”) [0050, “The positive electrode post 41 of each electrode post group is disposed on the first end plate 31, and the negative electrode post 42 is disposed on the second end plate 32”]. Ji teaches that the positive post is electrically connected to the positive electrode of the electrode assembly, and the negative post is electrically connected to the negative electrode of the electrode assembly [0049].
The negative and positive terminals of Minagata and the positive and negative posts of Ji both allow for the battery on which they are disposed to be able to connect to an external electronic device, in order to provide power to the device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery taught by Minagata by rearranging one of the positive terminal or negative terminal to be disposed on a side face of the case opposite to the side face of the case on which the other terminal is disposed, both side faces being parallel to the stacking direction, as taught by Ji, in order to yield the predictable result of a battery having terminals allowing it to connect to an external electronic device. It would have been obvious to try this configuration out of the finite number of possibilities of the arrangement of the terminals on the battery case [see MPEP 2143(I)(E)]. See also the following case law in MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C):
In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); and
In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice)
The rearrangement of the terminals of Minagata would not have modified the operation of the battery; the battery would still provide power to an electronic device.
Further regarding claim 9, Minagata teaches an opening (11a) (“first opening”) of the case body, and a lid (11b) (“first end cap”) which closes the opening of the case body disposed on a first side face of the case [0019, “and a lid 11b, which closes an opening of the case body 11a”]. Minagata is silent regarding a second opening and a second lid disposed on a second side face of the case disposed opposite to the first side face of the case.
As described in the rejection of instant claim 9 above, Ji teaches that the two ends of the housing are open and opposite to each other, and that a first end plate covers one end of the housing, and a second end plate covers the other end of the housing [0050, “the two ends of the housing 1 are open and opposite to each other. The cover plate includes a first end plate 31 and a second end plate 32. The first end plate 31 covers one end of the receiving cavity, and the second end plate 32 covers the other end of the receiving cavity”].
Both Minagata and Ji teach a battery comprising an opening which is sealed by a lid/end plate which comprises the negative and positive terminals on its exterior.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to have modified the case of Minagata to make the side face of the case opposite to the lid be separable, and covering a second opening on the case, as taught by Ji. See also the following case law in MPEP 2144.04(V)(C):
In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961) (The claimed structure, a lipstick holder with a removable cap, was fully met by the prior art except that in the prior art the cap is "press fitted" and therefore not manually removable. The court held that "if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the end of [the prior art’s] holder to which the cap is applied, it would be obvious to make the cap removable for that purpose.")
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minagata (US 2018/0277822) in view of Ji (CN 113300034) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Kitaoka et al. (US 2016/0293929, hereinafter "Kitaoka").
Regarding claim 10, modified Minagata teaches the battery of claim 9, as described in the rejection of instant claim 9. Minagata does not specifically teach the structure recited in claim 10.
Kitaoka teach analogous art of a prismatic battery comprising an electrode body, a prismatic outer body housing the electrode body, and a positive electrode terminal (7) (“positive pole”) and a negative electrode terminal (9) (“negative pole”) [Kitaoka Fig. 1, 0013]. Kitaoka teaches that the positive electrode terminal comprises a flange portion (7a) (“first outer post”) and an insert portion (7b) (“first inner post”) [Kitaoka Fig. 2, 0078, “The positive electrode terminal 7 has a flange portion 7a and an insert portion 7b”]. Kitaoka also teaches a gasket (11) (“first sleeve”) disposed on a sealing plate of the prismatic outer body (“end cap”), wherein the flange portion is disposed on an outer side of the sealing plate, connected to the gasket [Kitaoka Fig. 2]. A first end of the insert portion is connected to a positive electrode current collector (6) (“first adapter”), and a second end of the insert portion passes through the gasket and is connected to the gasket on an outer side of the prismatic outer body [Kitaoka Fig. 2, 0080, “The positive electrode current collector 6 has a base portion 6a to be connected to the positive electrode terminal 7”].
Kitaoka teaches that the positive electrode terminal comprising these parts is integrally secured [0078, “thus the positive electrode terminal 7, the gasket 11, the sealing plate 2, the insulating member 10, and the positive electrode current collector 6 are integrally secured”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the terminals of modified Minagata to comprise the structure taught by Kitaoka, in order to ensure that the terminals are integrally secured.
Regarding claim 11, modified Minagata teaches the battery of claim 9, as described in the rejection of instant claim 9. Minagata does not specifically teach the structure recited in claim 11.
Kitaoka teach analogous art of a prismatic battery comprising an electrode body, a prismatic outer body housing the electrode body, and a positive electrode terminal (7) (“positive pole”) and a negative electrode terminal (9) (“negative pole”) [Kitaoka Fig. 1, 0013]. Kitaoka teaches that the negative electrode terminal comprises a flange portion (9a) (“second outer post”) and an insert portion (9b) (“second inner post”) [Kitaoka Fig. 2, 0079, “The negative electrode terminal 9 has a flange portion 9a and an insert portion 9b”]. Kitaoka also teaches a gasket (13) (“second sleeve”) disposed on a sealing plate of the prismatic outer body (“end cap”), wherein the flange portion is disposed on an outer side of the sealing plate, connected to the gasket [Kitaoka Fig. 2]. A first end of the insert portion is connected to a negative electrode current collector (8) (“second adapter”), and a second end of the insert portion passes through the gasket and is connected to the gasket on an outer side of the prismatic outer body [Kitaoka Fig. 2].
Kitaoka teaches that the negative electrode terminal comprising these parts is integrally secured [0079, “thus the negative electrode terminal 9, the gasket 13, the sealing plate 2, the insulating member 12, and the negative electrode current collector 8 are integrally secured”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the terminals of modified Minagata to comprise the structure taught by Kitaoka, in order to ensure that the terminals are integrally secured.
PNG
media_image3.png
556
753
media_image3.png
Greyscale
3: Kitaoka Fig. 2 annotated by examiner
Claims 1-3, 15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (CN 214176205, making reference to examiner-provided translation thereof, hereinafter "Wu") in view of Jang et al. (US 2023/0025048, hereinafter "Jang") and Chen et al. (US 2022/0006115, hereinafter "Chen").
Regarding claim 1, Wu teaches a battery cell unit including a first battery cell (“first body structure”) and a second battery cell (“second body structure”) spaced out along a first direction [Wu Fig. 1, 0006, “A battery cell unit, comprising multiple battery cells, including an adjacent first battery cell and a second battery cell“]. Wu teaches that the battery cell unit may be disposed inside a support frame (“housing”) [0037, “the battery cell unit is located inside the support frame, and the battery cell unit is fixedly connected to the support frame”]. Wu is silent regarding the first battery cell comprising a first positive electrode plate and a first negative electrode plate and the second battery cell comprising a second positive electrode plate and a second negative electrode plate.
Chen teaches analogous art of a battery including a battery housing, a first current collector (10) (“positive electrode plate”), and a second current collector (20) (“negative electrode plate”), the current collectors being disposed inside the battery housing (60) [Abstract]. Chen teaches that the first current collector is in contact with the battery housing, and that the first and second current collectors have different polarities [0006, “Polarities of the first current collector and the second current collector are different, and the first current collector is in contact with the battery housing”]. Chen discloses that if the first current collector is a positive electrode current collector, the second current collector is a negative electrode current collector [0007, “In an embodiment of the application, if the first current collector is a positive electrode current collector, the second current collector is correspondingly a negative electrode current collector”]. Chen teaches that the second current collector is insulated from the battery housing by being separate from the housing at a preset distance (L2) [0068, “Therefore, the second preset distance L2 is reserved, in the second direction, between the second current collector 20 and the battery housing 60, to improve safety of the cell during operation”]. Fig. 1 of Chen shows that an end of the first current collector protrudes beyond the second current collector and contacts a first inner surface of the housing. Chen also teaches two battery posts (70, 71), each connected to the first current collector and the second current collector, respectively, on an opposite side from where the first current collector contacts the battery housing [Chen Fig. 7a, 0092].
Chen teaches that when the first current collector is brought into contact with the battery housing, a part of the heat generated by a cell can be directly conducted to the battery housing through the first current collector, thus improving the heat dissipation of the cell [0006].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the battery cell unit of Wu by substituting both the first battery cell and the second battery cell with the battery taught by Chen, in order to improve the heat dissipation of the battery cell unit. Since Wu teaches that the battery cell unit may be bonded to the support frame, the first current collectors would be disposed in indirect contact with the support frame, through their respective housings. Furthermore, since Chen teaches that the first current collector contact with the housing occurs at an end opposite to an end on which the battery posts are disposed, when the batteries of Chen are substituted into the battery cell unit of Wu, the ends where the first current collector makes contact with the housing in each battery would be disposed on opposite surfaces to each other [see annotated figure below].
PNG
media_image4.png
492
1304
media_image4.png
Greyscale
4: Chen Fig. 2 annotated by examiner, shown inside the construct of Wu
While Wu teaches a battery cell unit further comprising two battery cells, the battery cell unit of Wu may also constitute “a battery cell” as claimed. Jang teaches analogous art of a battery cell, wherein a battery cell is defined as including “at least two battery units, each including a plurality of electrode leads, wherein the electrode leads of one battery unit are connected to the other [Abstract]. Therefore, the difference between the claim language of “a battery cell” and the “battery cell unit” taught by Wu is simply a matter of word choice, and, as evidenced by Jang, a battery cell may be constituted of two cells with their own terminals and housings that are electrically connected to one another.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1.
Chen teaches that the first current collector is coated with an active substance (40) (“active material layer”) [Chen Fig. 1, 0071]. Chen teaches that the coating range of the active substance does not extend the full length of the first current collector, and that the first current collector protrudes beyond the coating range of the active substance to contact the inner surface of the housing [Chen Fig. 1, 0071, “the first current collector 10 is coated with an active substance 40, and a coating range of the active substance 40 on the first current collector 10 does not extend, in the second direction, beyond the separator 30”].
Chen teaches that if the active substance were coated on the part of the first current collector which extends to the housing, the active substance may come into contact with an adjacent second current collector, resulting in a short circuit [0072].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by modified Wu to have the first current collector protrude beyond an end of the coating range of the active substance as taught by Chen, in order to prevent a short circuit. Furthermore, since Chen teaches that the first current collector contact with the housing occurs at an end opposite to an end on which the battery posts are disposed, when the batteries of Chen are substituted into the battery cell unit of Wu, the ends where the first current collector makes contact with the housing in each battery would be disposed on opposite surfaces to each other [see annotated figure above].
Regarding claim 3, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1.
Chen teaches that the second current collector may be at a preset distance (L2) from the battery housing [Chen Fig. 1, 0066].
Chen teaches that when the first current collector is in contact with the battery housing, if the second current collector were to also contact the battery housing, the cell may be short-circuited, therefore the preset distance between the end of the second current collector and the battery housing is reserved in order to improve safety of the cell during battery operation [0067].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by modified Wu to have the ends of the second current collectors of each battery cell oriented away from each other in a first direction to be at a preset distance from the housing as taught by Chen, in order to prevent a short-circuit and improve battery cell safety.
Regarding claim 17, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Wu discloses that the battery cell may be included in a battery module (“battery”) [0070, “This utility model embodiment also provides a battery module, including at least one of the above-described battery cell components”].
Regarding claim 18, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1. Wu does not specifically teach an electrical device comprising the battery module. However, since batteries are meant to provide electrical energy and power to electrical devices, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the battery module of Wu in an electrical device in order to supply electrical energy to the electrical device. This is evidenced by Jang, which teaches an electronic device (“electrical device”), such as a smartphone or computer, including a battery pack (“battery”) [0089].
spacer.
Regarding claim 15, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1 above.
Chen teaches that the battery may further include a separator, and that the first current collector, second current collector, and separator may be stacked and rolled using a third direction as an axis (“winding centerline”) [0009]. Chen teaches that the third direction is the direction in which the first current collector extends to contact the battery housing [0009].
Chen teaches that separator acts as a barrier between an active substance coated on the first current collector and the second current collector, which improves the safety of the cell during operation [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by modified Wu to include a separator wound with the first current collector and the second current collector in each battery cell, in order to improve the safety of the battery cell during operation. Furthermore, since the rolling axis is parallel with the direction in which the first current collector extends to contact the battery housing, the rolling axis of both battery cells is thus parallel to the first direction.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (CN 214176205) in view of Jang (US 2023/0025048) and Chen (US 2022/0006115) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US 2021/0083256, hereinafter "Liu").
Regarding claim 5, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 1, as described in the rejection of instant claim 1 above. Wu is silent regarding a bracket disposed between the first body structure and the second body structure.
Liu teaches analogous art of a battery (“battery cell”) comprising at least one pair of pole cores, each pair of pole cores comprising a first pole core (11) (“first body structure”) and a second pole core (12) (“second body structure”) [Liu Fig. 5, 0082, “The pole core 10 of the battery 100 may include at least one pair of pole cores 10, and each pair of pole cores 10 includes a first pole core 11 and a second pole core 12”]. Liu also teaches that the battery comprises an insulating spacer (50) (“bracket”) between the first pole core and the second pole core, on an underside of tabs (20) connected to the pole cores [Liu Fig. 5, 0048, “the battery 100 according to the embodiments of the present disclosure may include: a housing (not shown in the figure), a pole core 10, a cover plate 30, a terminal 40, and an insulating spacer 50”].
Liu teaches that the insulating spacer can effectively prevent deformation or damage of the tabs by cooperating with a cover plate of the battery to fasten the tabs [0052, “The insulating spacer 50 cooperates with the cover plate 30 to fasten the softer tab 20 and prevent deformation of the tab 20, 0053, “The battery 100 according to the embodiments of the present disclosure includes the insulating spacer 50, and can effectively prevent deformation or damage of the tab 20”]. Liu also teaches that the insulating spacer improves the structure firmness of the tab [0056].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by modified Wu to include an insulating spacer as taught by Liu, in order to prevent deformation or damage to the battery cell. While Liu does not specifically teach that the insulating spacer functions to keep a positive electrode plate in contact with an inner surface of the housing, the structure of the insulating spacer is capable of performing the same function. The insulating spacer reduces the amount of free space within the battery, thus preventing the tabs and pole cores from shifting away from the battery’s housing. "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) [see MPEP 2114(II)].
Further regarding claim 6, modified Wu teaches the battery cell of claim 5, as described in the rejection of instant claim 5 above.
Liu teaches that the insulating spacer may further comprise reinforcing ribs (502) (“first and second support structures”) protruding towards the pole cores [0068, “a side surface that is of the insulating spacer 50 and that faces away from the cover plate 30 may be provided with a reinforcing rib 502 that protrudes toward the pole core 10”]. As shown in Fig. 5 of Liu, one reinforcing rib serves as a support between the first pole core and the tabs (20) of the first pole core, and the other reinforcing rib serves as a support between the second pole core and the tabs of the second pole core (only one tab of the first pole core and the second pole core can be seen in Fig. 5). The reinforcing ribs are connected by the middle portion of the insulating spacer (“third support structure”) [Liu Fig. 5].
Liu teaches that the reinforcing ribs can enhance the strength of the insulating spacer, and prevent the insulating spacer from being deformed or broken [0068].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery cell taught by modified Wu to include insulating ribs on the insulating spacer as taught by Liu, in order to strengthen the insulating
Duty of Disclosure, Candor, and Good Faith
See MPEP 2001 Duty of Disclosure, Candor, and Good Faith:
37 C.F.R. 1.56 Duty to disclose information material to patentability
(a) A patent by its very nature is affected with a public interest. The public interest is best served, and the most effective patent examination occurs when, at the time an application is being examined, the Office is aware of and evaluates the teachings of all information material to patentability. Each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application has a duty of candor and good faith in dealing with the Office, which includes a duty to disclose to the Office all information known to that individual to be material to patentability as defined in this section. The duty to disclose information exists with respect to each pending claim until the claim is cancelled or withdrawn from consideration, or the application becomes abandoned. Information material to the patentability of a claim that is cancelled or withdrawn from consideration need not be submitted if the information is not material to the patentability of any claim remaining under consideration in the application. There is no duty to submit information which is not material to the patentability of any existing claim. The duty to disclose all information known to be material to patentability is deemed to be satisfied if all information known to be material to patentability of any claim issued in a patent was cited by the Office or submitted to the Office in the manner prescribed by §§ 1.97(b) -(d) and 1.98. However, no patent will be granted on an application in connection with which fraud on the Office was practiced or attempted or the duty of disclosure was violated through bad faith or intentional misconduct.
(c) Individuals associated with the filing or prosecution of a patent application within the meaning of this section are:
(1) Each inventor named in the application;
(2) Each attorney or agent who prepares or prosecutes the application; and
(3) Every other person who is substantively involved in the preparation or prosecution of the application and who is associated with the inventor, the applicant, an assignee, or anyone to whom there is an obligation to assign the application.
(d) Individuals other than the attorney, agent or inventor may comply with this section by disclosing information to the attorney, agent, or inventor.
(e) In any continuation-in-part application, the duty under this section includes the duty to disclose to the Office all information known to the person to be material to patentability, as defined in paragraph (b) of this section, which became available between the filing date of the prior application and the national or PCT international filing date of the continuation-in-part application.
See also MPEP 2001.06(b) Information Relating to or From Copending United States Patent Applications:
The individuals covered by 37 CFR 1.56 have a duty to bring to the attention of the examiner, or other Office official involved with the examination of a particular application, information within their knowledge as to other copending United States applications which are "material to patentability" of the application in question. This may include providing the identification of pending or abandoned applications filed by at least one of the inventors or assigned to the same assignee as the current application that disclose similar subject matter that are not otherwise identified in the current application. As set forth by the court in Armour & Co. v. Swift & Co., 466 F.2d 767, 779, 175 USPQ 70, 79 (7th Cir. 1972):
[W]e think that it is unfair to the busy examiner, no matter how diligent and well informed he may be, to assume that he retains details of every pending file in his mind when he is reviewing a particular application . . . [T]he applicant has the burden of presenting the examiner with a complete and accurate record to support the allowance of letters patent.
See also MPEP § 2004, paragraph 9.
Accordingly, the individuals covered by 37 CFR 1.56 cannot assume that the examiner of a particular application is necessarily aware of other applications which are "material to patentability" of the application in question, but must instead bring such other applications to the attention of the examiner. See Regeneron Pharm., Inc. v. Merus B.V., 144 F. Supp. 3d 530, 560 (S.D.N.Y. 2015), and Dayco Prod., Inc. v. Total Containment, Inc., 329 F.3d 1358, 1365-69, 66 USPQ2d 1801, 1806-08 (Fed. Cir. 2003). For example, if a particular inventor has different applications pending which disclose similar subject matter but claim patentably indistinct inventions, the existence of other applications must be disclosed to the examiner of each of the involved applications. Similarly, the prior art references from one application must be made of record in another subsequent application if such prior art references are "material to patentability" of the subsequent application. See Dayco Prod., 329 F.3d at 1369, 66 USPQ2d at 1808.
In a search of the instant application, the Examiner found U.S. Application 18/106,504, Pub. No. US 2023/0187790, sharing at least one of common inventors and/or legal representation claiming and/or disclosing similar subject matter with the instant application. This and any other copending US applications should be disclosed to the Office, made known to all Examiners in all applications, as well as any prior art references considered “material to patentability” cited provided to the Office in each application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA F OROZCO whose telephone number is (571)272-0172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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.
/M.F.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1729
/ULA C RUDDOCK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1729