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 .
Summary
This is a non-final office action for application 18/159,093 filed on 01/25/2023. Claims 1-6 are pending.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2022-011516 filed on 01/28/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/25/2023 is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-4, in the reply filed on 11/28/2025 is acknowledged. Group(s) II, claims 5-6 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/28/2023.
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 1-2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US-20180323415-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses a flat-shaped wound electrode assembly (see e.g. "the electrode assembly 100 is wound to be manufactured in a jelly-roll shape" in paragraph [0056]), comprising:
an elongated negative electrode (see e.g. "negative electrode" in paragraph [0066] and part number 110 in FIG. 6);
an elongated positive electrode (see e.g. "positive electrode" in paragraph [0066] and part number 120 in FIG. 6);
an elongated first separator (see e.g. "first separator sheet 130" in paragraph [0056] and part number 130 in FIG. 6); and
an elongated second separator (see e.g. "second separator sheet 140" and part number 140 in FIG. 6), wherein
the negative electrode, the positive electrode, the first separator, and the second separator are stacked and wound around a winding axis in a longitudinal direction (see e.g. "the electrode assembly 100 has a structure in which the first electrode sheet 110, the first separator sheet 130, the second electrode sheet 120, and the second separator sheet 140 are laminated and wound" in paragraph [0056]),
the first separator is arranged between the negative electrode and the positive electrode (see e.g. part number 130 in FIG. 6),
the second separator is arranged on an outermost surface of the wound electrode assembly (see e.g. "the second separator sheet 140 adheres to an outer surface of the second electrode sheet" in paragraph [0058] and part number 140 in FIG. 6),
on each of both main surfaces of the first separator and both main surfaces of the second separator (see e.g. "the electrode assembly 100 has to comprise the second separator sheet 140 on the outermost portion thereof so that the electrode assembly 100 is wound to be manufactured in a jelly-roll shape" in paragraph [0056] and "both surface of the second electrode sheet 120 may have the same adhesion force." in paragraph [0058] and FIG. 6 of Lee), an adhesion layer is located in stripe patterns with predetermined pitches (see e.g. part numbers 131 and 141 in FIG. 6; this is a side view presented in a stripe pattern), and
when viewed from a flat side surface of the wound electrode assembly, an angle of the adhesion layer of the first separator in a predetermined direction of the winding axis direction with respect to the winding axis on the main surface of the first separator is different from an angle of the adhesion layer of the second separator in the predetermined direction of the winding axis direction with respect to the winding axis on the main surface of the second separator opposed to the main surface of the first separator and sandwiching the negative electrode or the positive electrode with the main surface of the first separator (see e.g. FIG. 5 of Lee and annotated figure below; FIG. 5 of Lee discloses an adhesive layer 132 that covers the separator).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to apply the adhesive layers of the first and second separators at different angles relative to the winding axis. Lee discloses adhesive layers in stripe patterns on multiple surfaces (see FIG. 6 and paragraphs [0056] and [0058]). Furthermore, Lee discloses different widths of strips including a version where 100% of the surface of the separator is covered. In the annotated figure below this example version with different angles can be seen. This inherently provides a choice in the orientation of these stripes. Choosing different angles for the first and second separators is a predictable design modification.
PNG
media_image1.png
419
873
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Examiner created annotated figure for illustration)
Regarding Claim 2, Lee discloses the wound electrode assembly of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lee further discloses that a difference between the angle of the adhesion layer of the first separator with respect to the winding axis and the angle of the adhesion layer of the second separator with respect to the winding axis is 90° (see e.g. FIG. 5 of Lee and annotated figure below; FIG. 5 of Lee discloses an adhesive layer 132 that covers the separator). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to apply the adhesive layers of the first and second separators at different angles relative to the winding axis. Lee discloses adhesive layers in stripe patterns on multiple surfaces (see FIG. 6 and paragraphs [0056] and [0058]). Furthermore, Lee discloses different widths of strips including a version where 100% of the surface of the separator is covered (see e.g. part number 132 in FIG. 5). In the annotated figure below this version can be seen where an angle of the first striped adhesion layer is 90° and the angle of the 100% covered adhesion layer is 180°. 180° - 90° = 90°.
Thus Lee discloses a point that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a point within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
PNG
media_image1.png
419
873
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Examiner created annotated figure for illustration)
Regarding Claim 4, Lee discloses a battery (see e.g. "The unfinished electrode assembly is wound in a jelly-roll shape to manufacture a finished electrode assembly 100." in paragraph [0063]), comprising the wound electrode assembly according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US-20180323415-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US-20210242538-A1), hereinafter referred to as Lee II.
Regarding Claim 3, Lee discloses the wound electrode assembly of claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above).
Lee is silent as the amount of the first and second separator that is covered by the adhesive layer and thus does not disclose that each of a rate of the main surface of the first separator covered by the adhesion layer and a rate of the main surface of the second separator covered by the adhesion layer is equal to or more than 50% and not more than 90%.
Lee II, however, in the same field of endeavor, patterned separators for use in wound electrode assemblies discloses a separator that has an adhesive layer formed on it at a ratio of 70-95% based on the total area of the separator (see e.g. "the patterned electrode adhesive layer is formed on the separator at a ratio of 70-95% based on the total area of the separator." in paragraph [0017] of Lee II).
Lee II discloses a range that overlaps with the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a range that overlaps with the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Lee II also teaches that when the adhesive is formed at a ratio less than the lower limit is difficulty for adhesion to form between the separator and the electrode and that when the adhesive is formed at a ratio larger than the upper limit is not possible to improve the electrolyte impregnation property of an electrode, thus it is important that the adhesive layer is formed in the disclosed ratio (see e.g. paragraph [0049] of Lee II). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rate of the rate of the main surface of the first separator covered by the adhesion layer and the rate of the main surface of the second separator covered by the adhesion layer of Lee e a. such that the rate of the main surface of the first separator covered by the adhesion layer and the rate of the main surface of the second separator covered by the adhesion layer is 70-95% based on the total area of the separator as taught by Lee II et al. in order to ensure proper adhesion between the separator and the electrode as well as improve the electrolyte impregnation property of the electrode as suggested by Lee II.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Sun et al. (KR 2019-0114122-A)
Yamashita et al. (US-20230095398-A1)
Kusada et al. (US-20230198099-A1)
Kown et al. (US-20180315971-A1)
Azuma et al. (US-20190074551-A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSE EFYMOW whose telephone number is (571)270-0795. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 10:30 am - 8:30 pm 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, TONG GUO can be reached at (571) 272-3066. 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.
/J.J.E./Examiner, Art Unit 1723
/TONG GUO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723