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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action regarding Application No. 18/166,485 to Ariga, assigned to Honda Motor Co. Ltd., filed 02/09/2023, and published on 10/05/2023 as U.S. PG Publication 2023/0318012 is in response to applicant’s arguments/remarks and claim amendment field 12/30/2025. Applicant’s response has been given full consideration.
Status of the Claims
Applicant has amended claim 1 for clarity purposes. The status of the claims stand as follows:
Currently amended 1, 4
Original 2-3, 5-8
Claims 1-8 are currently pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on12/23/2025 has been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered by the examiner. A duly initialed and signed copy is attached herewith. Accordingly, information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed by Examiner.
Withdrawal of Objection to the Drawing
The objection to the drawing for failing to show the fixing member element D is withdrawing in view of the drawing presented in Replacement Sheet of Fig. 4 showing the fixing member D and applicant’s explanation and remarks.
Claim Rejections -35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in this section can be found in the prior Office Action.
Claim 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2020/0044276) in view of Muraoka et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2009/0061304)
This rejection was presented in the previous non-final Office action and is maintained in this Office action.
Regarding claim 1 Sakai discloses a cylindrical battery (Sakai paragraph 0015) comprising a winding-type electrode 14, including a positive electrode 11, a negative electrode 12, and at least one separator 13, having a winding structure in which the positive and the negative electrode are spirally wound, and an exterior package 15 receiving the electrode body (Sakai Fig. 1, paragraph 0016, 0018).
Sakai discloses a pressing member provided between the electrode body and the exterior package and the electrode body is pressed by a pressing member 40 to an inner surface of the exterior package 15 (Sakai paragraph 0006, 0019, 0027), and the pressing member 40, provided between the electrode body and the case main body, is a tape to be adhered to the electrode body and adhesive layer formed on at least one surface of the tape base material (Sakai paragraph 0032). The pressing member is considered equivalent to the fixing member that fixes an end of the wound electrode group. The exterior package is equivalent to the exterior member that winds around the wound electrode group and the fixing member. Thus, the fixing member overlaps with the wound electrode body and the exterior member.
Sakai is silent that the cylindrical battery has a shaft member. Muraoka discloses a non- aqueous electrolyte secondary battery include an electrode group and a cylindrical center pin arranged in the hollow cavity extending in the axial direction of the electrode group (Muraoka paragraph 0018), the center pin is equivalent to the shaft member. Muraoka discloses that if the center pin is no present the hollow cavity the electrode group can expand inwards (Muraoka paragraph 0007), and with the center pin inserted in the hollow cavity of the electrode group, the inward expansion of the electrode group is suppressed and the deformation of part of the electrode plates near the hollow cavity is suppressed; as a result, the short circuit is less likely to occur (Muraoka paragraph 0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the cylindrical battery of Sakai by the center pin of Muraoka and to have used a center pin, equivalent to the shaft member, in the wound electrode of Sakai for the benefit of suppressing the deformation of part of the electrode plates near the hollow cavity; as a result of which , the short circuit is less likely to occur (Muraoka paragraph 0007). According to the MPEP such a modification is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 IC).
Regarding claim 2 Sakai discloses the fixing member is a tape and is formed by applying an adhesive member on the tape formed of resin-made sheet, the resin being an organic material such as a polystyrene, a co-polymer of styrene and an alpha olefin, or a fluorine resin (Sakai paragraph 0033); thus, it is an insulator. Sakai discloses the length of the pressing member 40 preferably corresponds to 50% or more of the length of the electrode body 14 in the axial direction, and the pressing member 40 may be bonded to the approximately entire length of the electrode body 14 in the axial direction (Sakai paragraph 0037). However, making it slightly larger than the length of the electrode body is considered a mere change in size. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Regarding claim 3 Sakai discloses the pressing member 40, equivalent to the fixing member, provided between the electrode body and the case main body, is a tape to be adhered to the electrode body and adhesive layer formed on at least one surface of the tape base material (Sakai paragraph 0032). Thus, the adhesive member can be formed on both sides of the tape, meting the limitation of the fixing member is a double-side tape, one side fixes the wound electrode body and other side fixes the exterior member (Sakai Fig .1).
Regarding claim 4 Sakai is silent about the fixing member has an inclination in which the fixing member has a larger thickness on the wound electrode group side than on the exterior member side. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary kill to have changed the shape of the fixing member, since such change in shape or size is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Regarding claim 5 Sakai discloses the thickness of the exterior member is smaller than the thickness of the electrode laminate (Sakai Fig .1).
Regarding claim 6 Sakai is silent about explicitly disclosing the thickness of the exterior member has a larger thickness than thickness obtained by subtracting a thickness of the positive electrode or the negative electrode from a thickness of the electrode laminate. However, a change in shape or size of a component of the battery is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Regarding claim 7 a winding-type electrode 14, including a positive electrode 11, a negative electrode 12, and at least one separator 13, having a winding structure in which the positive and the negative electrode are spirally wound, with the separator 13 interposed therebetween. (Sakai Fig. 1, paragraph 0016, 0018). The separator is considered equivalent to the solid electrolyte, and the winding-type electrode is a laminate in which the positive electrode and the negative electrode are laminated via the solid electrolyte.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sakai et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2020/0044276) in view of Muraoka et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2009/0061304) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Honbou (U.S. PG Publication 2010/0143773)
This rejection was presented in the previous non-final Office action and is maintained in this Office action
The discussion of Sakai and Muraoka as presented above for claim 1 is fully incorporated here and is relied upon for the limitation of the claim in this section.
Regarding claim 8 both Sakai and Muraoka are silent about a battery module comprising a plurality of the cylindrical batteries. Honbou discloses lithium secondary battery and secondary battery module having high output power (Honbou paragraph 0008). Honbou discloses plurality of lithium secondary battery arranged in a battery module have high output power and high energy density (Honbou paragraph 0074). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have made plurality of cylindrical batteries of Sakai, as modified by Muraoka, in a battery module to have high output power and high energy densities as disclosed by Honbou (Honbou paragraph 0074). According to the MPEP such a modification is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 I C).
Response to Argument
Regarding the objection to the drawing applicant has filed a replacement sheet of Fig.4. Applicant also explains that the hatching has been removed and shows how far the fixing member extends up and down along the length of the cylindrical battery. Examiner notes that the objection in view of the applicant’s explanation of Fig. 4 as presented by the replacement sheet overcomes the previously presented objection. The objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant traverses the rejection of the claims presented in the previous non-final Office action dated 10/10/2025. Regarding the rejection of claim 1-7 under 103 over Sakai et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2020/0044276) in view of Muraoka et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2009/0061304) and the rejection of claim 8 also under 103 over Sakai et al. in view of Muraoka and further in view of Honbou (U.S. PG Publication 2010/0143773) applicant argues that the instant invention according to claim 1 has the effect of providing a cylindrical battery that can reduce level difference in the winding direction of a wound electrode group, and in contrast the applied references of Sakai, Muraoka, and Honbou do not disclose or suggest the invention of claim 1 having the above unexpected effect (Remarks page 6-7)
Examiner notes that the invention as claimed is rendered obvious by the combined teaching of the applied references of Sakai, Muraoka, and Honbou; and that the “unexpected effect” referred to by applicant is not established from the claim language or any experimental evidence presented by applicant or included in the instant specification. Without such evidence and support the presented argument of “unexpected effect” or “unexpected results” is un-substantiated and, therefore, not persuasive. The argument of “unexpected effect” or “unexpected result” can not only be a statement by applicant, but must be supported by experimental results that shows that the claimed invention indeed provides such an effect or results that are not shown by the applied reference or references.
Examiner, therefore, notes that neither the amendment to the claims nor the argument presented by applicant overcomes the previously presented rejection. The rejection is still considered proper and valid and is maintained in this Office action. This Office action is made final.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 OMAR M KEKIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00 pm,.
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, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/OMAR M KEKIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights