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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 4/27/23, 12/19/24, and 8/26/25 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-10 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (KR 10-2021-0011154) in view of Kotik et al. (US 2021/0283671).
Regarding claim 1, Su teaches an electronic device, or mobile phone, having a battery mounting system (1) comprising a housing including a plate and a base member as shown in annotated Figure 1 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
668
673
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Further regarding claim 1 and with regard to claim 16, as is seen in annotated Figure 1 above, Su teaches a battery (200) disposed in an area of the base member, or receiving space (S), configured to supply power to the electronic device via terminals (bottom of p. 2 of translation of Su), wherein the battery includes an electrode assembly, or battery cell (210), having first and second portions that meet so as to form a corner portion (see annotated Figure 1 above).
Su further teaches a battery case, or pouch (220), including a receiving space that houses the electrode assembly (210) and a sealing portion, or sealing or suture side (223), disposed along an outer periphery of the electrode assembly (Figures 3-5).
Kotik teaches a battery case (110) including a receiving space, or recess (126), that houses an electrode assembly (200), and a sealing portion (Figures 5 and 9). Kotik further teaches a sealing portion, or planar portion (37) ([0053]).
Kotik further teaches a first curved structure formed at a corner portion, wherein the sealing portion includes a first elongated structure as seen in annotated Figure 8:
PNG
media_image2.png
408
996
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kotik further teaches that forming curved structures in the sealing portion of a battery case is desirable for preventing stretch and overstress on the corners of the metal laminated film of the case, thereby allowing for a reliable seal ([0021]).
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan at the time of the invention to form a curved structure in the sealing portion of the battery case of Su such as suggested by Kotik in order to prevent stretch and overstress in the corners of the case, thereby allowing for a reliable seal.
As for claims 2 and 17, it is seen in Figure 8 of Kotik above that the first elongated structure is formed based on the curvature of the first curved structure.
With regard to claims 3 and 18, concerning the relative sizes of the elongated structure and width of the sealing portion, the examiner finds that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select the appropriate width of the sealing portion and depth of the curved structure for the battery case in order to ensure that the case fits in the intended space and that the seal functions appropriately. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)
As for claims 4 and 19, Kotik teaches that the first elongated structure is formed by pressing using a die, or pressing jig, having a specific shape ([0005], [0037]).
Regarding claims 5 and 20, it is seen in Figure 8 of Kotik above that first and second elongated structures are formed in upper and lower cases of the battery case and overlap each other.
Regarding claim 6, Kotik teaches that the sealing portion including the first elongated structure is sealed based upon the curvature of the first curved structure, i.e. “corresponding to the waved portions” ([0053]).
As for claim 7, Su teaches first and second electrode portions but is silent on the relative sizes. However, Su teaches that various shapes of batteries have been proposed to maximize the use of the internal space of the housing (top of p. 2 of the translation). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to determine appropriate sizes of the first and second portions of the electrode assembly in order to select a shape of the battery that maximizes the use of the internal space. Changes in size and shape are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)
With regard to claim 8, it is seen in Figure 1 of Su above that the curved structure is formed at the corner portion where the first and second portions are perpendicular to each other.
Regarding claim 9, Kotik teaches the radius of curvature having the second structure (“a plurality of curves having a radius of curvature larger than 0 and smaller than 1/r are connected”) (Figure 5).
Regarding claim 10, it is seen in the Figures of both Su and Kotik that the cases include upper and lower cases wherein the lower cases include internal spaces formed in a shape corresponding to and accommodating the electrode assemblies.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su in view of Kotik as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang et al. (US 2015/0037664).
The teachings of Su and Kotik as discussed above are incorporated herein.
Su in view of Kotik teaches the electronic device of claim 1 but fails to teach specifically that the electrode assembly further includes a third portion. It is noted, as discussed above, that Su teaches that various shapes of batteries have been proposed to maximize the use of the internal space of the housing (top of p. 2 of the translation).
Kang teaches a battery including an electrode assembly including first, second, and third portions and wherein the electrode assembly is sealed in a case wherein the portions meet at corners:
PNG
media_image3.png
611
657
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Kang further teaches that the shape above, and various shapes of the electrode assembly, are desirable for maximally utilizing an internal space of a device ([0015]).
It would have been obvious to the skilled artisan to modify the space and battery shape of the device of Su in view of Kotik to use the battery shape of Kang in order to maximally utilize an internal space of a device.
Further regarding claim 11, it would further have been obvious to form curved structures at the corners of the battery of Su in view of Kotik and Kang for the reasons discussed above with regard to claim 1.
Claims 12-15 are rejected for the reasons provided above for claims 2-3, 6, and 9 respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yan et al. (US 2021/0218051) teaches a battery having a similar shape as claimed and curved structure formed in corner portions of the sealing portion (see, e.g., Figure 10).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALIX ECHELMEYER EGGERDING whose telephone number is (571)272-1101. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 4:30pm.
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.
/ALIX E EGGERDING/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1729