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 .
2. The Applicant's amendments filed on January 15, 2026, were received. Claim 1 has been amended. None of the Claims have been cancelled, withdrawn from consideration, or added as new. Therefore, Claims 1-16 are pending in this office action.
3. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S.C. code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action issued on November 4, 2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. Information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted February 10, 2026, has been received and considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. The rejection of Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11 and 13-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato et al. (JP 2006-164714 A), has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 5-6 of the Remarks dated January 15, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. The rejection of Claims 3, 8 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (JP 2006-164714 A), as applied to Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11 and 13-16 above, has been overcome based on the amendments to the Claims and the arguments presented on pages 5-6 of the Remarks dated January 15, 2026.
7. Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato et al. (JP 2006-164714 A) in view of Sugioka et al. (US 2018/0309139 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, a secondary battery comprising: an electrode assembly (4); and an exterior body (11) of a battery can (1) that houses the electrode assembly (4), wherein the exterior body (11) is provided with a flat plate-shaped terminal, called a sealing plate (6), joined to the exterior body (11) with an insulating member (13) interposed therebetween, the flat plate-shaped terminal (6) includes a first terminal member (61) and a second terminal member (62), the first terminal member (61) and the second terminal member (62) are formed from materials that have different linear expansion coefficients from each other, the first terminal member (61) and the second terminal member (62) are stacked on each other such that the first terminal member (61) is stacked on the second terminal member (62), and the flat plate-shaped terminal (6) is disposed on the insulating member (13) such that the second terminal member (62) faces the insulating member (13) (paragraphs 0002 0003). Sato et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the insulating member has adhesiveness or fusibility.
Sugioka et al. disclose a battery comprising an outer body battery case that accommodates a negative electrode, a positive electrode, a separator and a non-aqueous electrolyte inside, a combination of a metallic outer can having an opening and a lid or sealing plate (paragraph 0107). Sugioka et al. disclose wherein a gasket can be interposed between an outer can and a sealing plate and include materials such as polyolefin based resins including polyethylene and polypropylene, polyphenylene ether, polysulfone, polyarylate, polyethersulfone, polyphenylene sulfide, polyether ester ketone, nylon and fluororesins (paragraph 0109), all of which intrinsically embody adhesive properties, and are some of the materials noted in paragraphs [0076-0081] of the instant specification that have “adhesiveness” and/or “fusibility”. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the insulating member of Sato et al. to have adhesiveness and/or fusibility, because Sugioka et al. teach these materials reliably prevent water from entering into the battery and have a high melting point or heat decomposition temperature (paragraph 0109).
With regard to Claim 2, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein the flat plate shaped terminal (6) is capable of warping due to a rise in temperature to separate the flat plate-shaped terminal (6) from the insulating member (13) due to a weakness in the clad-bonding of the terminal elements (paragraphs 0002-0003).
The recitation, "capable of warping due to a rise in temperature to separate the flat plate-shaped terminal from the insulating member", is considered functional language which imparts intended use to the structural features of the product. Therefore, while the claim language has been considered with regard to structure, the intended use language it is not given patentable weight because it is directed to a process and not directed to the structural features of the product. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. See MPEP 2114. 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. See MPEP 2113.
With regard to Claim 3, Sato et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the first terminal member is larger in a linear expansion coefficient than the second terminal member. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art to rearrange parts of an invention involving only routine skill in the art (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)), since both the first and second terminals face the insulating member and either one of the first and second terminal could be considered a first terminal and the other terminal could be considered the second terminal, thereby disclosing the first terminal as element (62) and being formed of aluminum (having a known linear expansion coefficient of about 23.4 X 10-6/K), and the second terminal as element (61) and being formed of nickel (having a known linear expansion coefficient of 13.4 X 10-6/K) (paragraphs 0002-0003). Therefore, Sato et al. teach the claimed limitation of the first terminal member is larger in a linear expansion coefficient than the second terminal member.
With regard to Claims 4-5, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein the first terminal member (61) is made of nickel (having a known linear expansion coefficient of 13.4 X 10-6/K) and the second terminal member (62) is made of aluminum (having a known linear expansion coefficient of about 23.4 X 10-6/K), thereby resulting in the second terminal member (62) being larger in a linear expansion coefficient than the first terminal member (61), and wherein a difference in a linear expansion coefficient between the first terminal member (61) and the second terminal member (62) is
5 X 10-6/K or more (paragraphs 0002-0003).
With regard to Claim 6, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein a material that forms the first terminal member (61) is selected from the group consisting of nickel (paragraphs 0002-0003) and in another embodiment the first sealing plate (21) can be made of stainless steel or nickel (paragraph 0013).
With regard to Claim 7, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein a material that forms the second terminal member (62) is selected from the group consisting of aluminum (paragraphs 0002-0003).
With regard to Claim 8, Sato et al. do not specifically disclose wherein a material that forms the first terminal member is aluminum, whereas a material that forms the second terminal member is selected from the group consisting of stainless steel, copper, and nickel, or the material that forms the second terminal member is nickel, whereas the material that forms the first terminal member is selected from the group consisting of aluminum, stainless steel, and copper. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art to rearrange parts of an invention involving only routine skill in the art (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)), since both the first and second terminals face the insulating member and either one of the first and second terminal could be considered a first terminal and the other terminal could be considered the second terminal, thereby disclosing the first terminal as element (62) and being formed of aluminum (having a known linear expansion coefficient of about 23.4 X 10-6/K), and the second terminal as element (61) and being formed of nickel (having a known linear expansion coefficient of 13.4 X 10-6/K) (paragraphs 0002-0003). Therefore, Sato et al. teach the claimed limitation of a material that forms the first terminal member is aluminum, whereas a material that forms the second terminal member is selected from the group consisting of nickel.
With regard to Claim 9, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein a material that forms the first terminal member (21) is stainless steel (paragraph 0013), whereas a material that forms the second terminal member (62) is selected from the group consisting of aluminum (paragraphs 0002-0003).
With regard to Claim 10, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein a material that forms the first terminal member (61) is nickel, whereas a material that forms the second terminal member (62) is selected from the group consisting of aluminum (paragraphs 0002-0003).
With regard to Claim 11, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein the insulating member (13) has a raised part that covers at least a part of a peripheral edge of the flat plate-shaped terminal (6) (paragraphs 0002-0003).
With regard to Claim 12, Sato et al. do not specifically disclose wherein a thickness of the raised part that covers at least a part of the peripheral edge of the flat plate-shaped terminal is 5% or more and 20% or less of a thickness of the flat plate-shaped terminal. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to manufacture the thickness of the raised part covering at least a part of the peripheral edge of the flat plate-shaped terminal to be 5% or more and 20% or less of a thickness of the flat plate shaped terminal, since such a modification would only involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
With regard to Claim 13, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein the flat plate shaped terminal (6) is a positive electrode and the exterior body (11) is a negative electrode (paragraph 0002).
With regard to Claim 14, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein the exterior body (11) is a metal exterior body, and the metal exterior body (11) has a two-part configuration of a cup-shaped member (body) and a lid-shaped member (sealing plate) (paragraphs 0002-0003, 0017).
With regard to Claim 15, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein the secondary battery has a button shape or a coin shape (paragraph 0001).
With regard to Claim 16, Sato et al. disclose in Figures 5-6, wherein an electrode of the electrode assembly includes a positive electrode and a negative electrode inherently capable of occluding and releasing lithium ions (paragraphs 0002-0003).
The recitation, "capable of occluding and releasing lithium ions", is considered functional language which imparts intended use to the structural features of the product. Therefore, while the claim language has been considered with regard to structure, the intended use language it is not given patentable weight because it is directed to a process and not directed to the structural features of the product. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. See MPEP 2114. 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. See MPEP 2113.
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed January 15, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11 and 13-16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato et al. (JP 2006-164714 A), 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 Sugioka et al. (US 2018/0309139 A1).
Applicant argues that
Conclusion
9. 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.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARIE O APICELLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 5:00PM 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at 571-270-3879. 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.
/KARIE O'NEILL APICELLA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights