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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 10-12 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US20070020515) in view of Hosokawa (US20100247991).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses a secondary battery ([003]) comprising:
An outer package member having a flat and columnar shape and including a first bottom part and a second bottom part opposed to each other (cylindrical side plate-310, bottom plate-320 and cap assembly-400 form outer package, [0079-0080], Fig. 1/2);
A battery device contained inside the outer package member, and having a first through hole extending from the first bottom part toward the second bottom part (electrode assembly disposed inside can, [0017], with center empty portion acting as first through hole, Fig. 2, [0046]); and
An insulating member adhered in part to the battery device between the second bottom part and the battery device and having a second through hole at a position overlapping with the first through hole (insulating plate-245 acts as insulating member with second through hole-246, [0051], Fig. 1/3).
Lee does not directly disclose wherein the insulating member has no other through hole other than the second through hole, wherein the insulating member includes an adhered part adhered to the battery device, and an unadhered part not adhered to the battery device.
Hosokawa discloses a cylindrical battery (Fig. 2). Hosokawa further discloses an insulating plate for the battery cylinder with a singular through hole (insulating plate-14, Fig. 3, through hole-10b, [0067]). Hosokawa further discloses wherein an insulating mask that acts as an insulating layer that can have one or more openings ([0089]). Hosokawa teaches that this structure provides improved higher energy density a higher output ([002]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee with the teachings of Hosokawa to have wherein the insulating member has no other through hole other than the second through hole, wherein the insulating member includes an adhered part adhered to the battery device, and an unadhered part not adhered to the battery device. This modification would yield the expected result of improved higher energy density and higher output.
Regarding Claim 10, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee further discloses wherein the battery devices includes a first electrode and second electrode wound with a separator interposed therebetween ([0047]), and
The first through hole comprises a space provided at a winding center of the battery device (Fig. 2 shows through hole at center of winding point of electrode assembly, [0047], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 11, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee further discloses wherein the battery devices includes a first electrode and second electrode wound with a separator interposed therebetween ([0047]), and
The secondary battery comprises an electrode wiring line coupled to one of the first electrode or the second electrode, and coupled to the second bottom part via the second through hole (negative electrode tab-225 acts as electrode wiring line, [0049], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 12, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee further discloses comprising an electrode terminal supported by the first bottom part and insulated from the first bottom part (positive electrode tab-215 acts as electrode terminal, [0048], Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee further discloses wherein the secondary battery comprises a lithium-ion secondary battery ([0014]).
Claim(s) 2-5 & 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US20070020515) in view of in view of Hosokawa (US20100247991) further in view of Kim (US20190229361).
Regarding Claim 2 & 3, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Lee does not directly an adhered part adhered to the battery device, and an unadhered part not adhered to the battery device, and further doesn’t disclose wherein the unadhered part comprises a base layer having an insulating property and a non-adhesion property, and the adhered part comprises an adhesive layer provided on one surface of the base layer.
Kim discloses a laminate case that includes an insulation layer that includes adhesive layers (insulation layer-120a, adhesives-130, Fig. 2D, [0062], [0076]). Kim further discloses wherein the adhesive material can be arranged on the film in dot array configuration, rectangular quadrilateral shape or a zigzag shape in which neighboring columns cross each other ([0015]). Kim teaches that this structure provides improved life characteristics of the battery ([007]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Lee with the teachings of Kim to have wherein an adhered part adhered to the battery device, and an unadhered part not adhered to the battery device and the unadhered part comprises a base layer having an insulating property and a non-adhesion property, and the adhered part comprises an adhesive layer provided on one surface of the base layer. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life characteristics of the battery.
Regarding Claim 4, Lee in view of Hosokawa further in view of Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Lee does not directly disclose wherein the adhered part and unadhered part are alternately disposed in stripes in a direction along an outer diameter of the insulating member.
Lee in view of Kim discloses the adhered part and unadhered part of the of the insulating member.
The examiner notes that the claim language “wherein the adhered part and unadhered part are alternately disposed in stripes in a direction along an outer diameter of the insulating member” can be interpreted to mean that the adhered part and unadhered parts can be disposed in any manner where there are portions of adhesive not present on the insulating members base part to form alternating regions of adhered parts and unadhered parts on the insulating member.
Kim discloses wherein the adhesive members can be formed in a dot array configuration ([0011], Fig. 3B).
The examiner notes that the configuration shown in Kim provides adhered portions and unadhered portion that form alternative formations.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Lee with the teachings of Kim to have wherein the adhered part and unadhered part are alternately disposed in stripes in a direction along an outer diameter of the insulating member. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life characteristics of the battery.
Regarding Claim 5, Lee in view of Hosokawa further in view of Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Lee does not directly disclose wherein a ratio of an area of the adhered part to a sum of the area of the adhered part and an area of the unadhered part is greater than or equal to 5 percent and less than or equal to 85 percent.
Kim discloses wherein the adhesive members can be present on the insulating film in an area of 30% to 90% (adhesives can be present in an area of 30% to 90% of an area of the electrode assembly, [0018], which is attached to the insulating film layer-120a, Fig. 2D), which overlaps the instant claim range of 5% to 85 %.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Lee with the teachings of Kim to have wherein a ratio of an area of the adhered part to a sum of the area of the adhered part and an area of the unadhered part is greater than or equal to 5 percent and less than or equal to 85 percent. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life characteristics of the battery.
Regarding Claim 8, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee does not directly disclose wherein a range in which the unadhred part is in contact with the second through hole is larger than a range in which the adhered part in contact with the second through hole.
The examiner notes that under the broadest reasonbale interpretation of the claim in view of the specifications, “wherein a range in which the unadhered part is in contact with the second through hole is larger than a range in which the adhered part in contact with the second through hole” can be interpreted to mean that the unadhred part is in contact with the second through hole in a larger area than the adhred part.
Lee discloses wherein the bottom insulator plate is in contact with the entirety of the second through hole (Fig. 3, shows bottom insulator plate-245 in contact with second through hole-246, Fig. 3, [0051]).
Kim discloses wherein the adhesive members can be present on the insulating film in an area of 30% to 90% (adhesives can be present in an area of 30% to 90% of an area of the electrode assembly, [0018]).
Therefore, since Kim teaches that the adhesive member coating can be adjusted, and Lee’s bottom insulator plate is in contact with the entirety of the second through hole, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee with teachings Kim to have wherein a range in which the unadhred part is in contact with the second through hole is larger than a range in which the adhered part in contact with the second through hole. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life characteristics of the battery.
Regarding Claim 9, Lee in view of Hosokawa further in view of Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee further discloses wherein the second through hole is disposed inside the unadhered part (Fig. 3, shows bottom insulator plate-245 in contact with second through hole-246, Fig. 3, [0051]).)
Claim(s) 6 & 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US20070020515) in view of Hosokawa (US20100247991) further in view of Kim (US20190229361) further in view of Li (CN112201769, see Machine Translation for citations).
Regarding Claim 6, Lee in view of Hosokawa further in view of Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee does not directly disclose wherein the adhered part and unadhered part are alternatively disposed in concentric circles in a direction from a center toward a periphery of the insulating member.
Li discloses a first insulating member disposed on a first current collecting disk ([0020]). Li further discloses a conductive adhesive ([0020]), wherein the first conductive part is formed of adhesive ([0058]). Li further discloses wherein the first conductive part forms a concentric region around the first current collecting disk that contains the insulating member (Fig. 5, 6 & 13). Li teaches that this structure provides improved electrochemical performance of the battery ([006]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee with the teachings of Li to have wherein the adhered part and unadhered part are alternatively disposed in concentric circles in a direction from a center toward a periphery of the insulating member. This modification would yield the expected result of improved electrochemical performance of the battery.
Regarding Claim 7, Lee in view of Hosokawa further in view of Kim discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee does not directly disclose wherein a ratio of an area of the adhered part to a sum of the area of the adhered part and an area of the unadhered part is greater than or equal to 5 percent and less than or equal to 85 percent.
Kim discloses wherein the adhesive members can be present on the insulating film in an area of 30% to 90% (adhesives can be present in an area of 30% to 90% of an area of the electrode assembly, [0018], which is attached to the insulating film layer-120a, Fig. 2D), which overlaps the instant claim range of 5% to 85 %.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the structure of Lee with the teachings of Kim to have wherein a ratio of an area of the adhered part to a sum of the area of the adhered part and an area of the unadhered part is greater than or equal to 5 percent and less than or equal to 85 percent. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved life characteristics of the battery.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US20070020515) in view of Hosokawa (US20100247991) further in view of Nishide (US20070172722).
Regarding Claim 13, Lee in view of Hosokawa discloses the limitations as set forth above. Lee further discloses a secondary battery according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), wherein
The outer package member further includes a sidewall part couple to each of the first bottom part and the second bottom part (cylindrical side plate-310, [0079], Fig. 1/Fig. 2),
The outer package member includes a cover member corresponding to the first bottom part (cap assembly-400, inwardly recessed beading portion-340, Fig. 1, [0079]), and
A container member containing the battery device inside, the container member corresponding to the second bottom part and the side wall part (electrode assembly-200 inside container member, Fig. 2, [0046]).
Lee does not directly disclose wherein the cover member is welded to the container member.
Nishide discloses a battery that can be a cylindrical battery with a cover member ([0011], [0029], [0048]). Nishide teaches that this structure provides improved safety ([0010]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lee with the teachings of Nishide to have wherein the cover member is welded to the container member. This modified structure would yield the expected result of improved safety.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments in view of their arguments, see Claims, filed December 31st, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 102 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 Lee in view of Hosokawa under 35 USC 103.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKITH R SRIPATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7:30 am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Martin can be reached at 571-270-7871. 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.
/ANKITH R SRIPATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 1728
/MATTHEW T MARTIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1728
Prosecution Insights