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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 3-14 in the reply filed on February 24th, 2023 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 3-5, 8, 9 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kako (US20130130079) (Provided in Applicant’s IDS filed on June 24th, 2024).
Regarding Claim 3, Kako discloses a producing method of a power storage device comprising:
An electrode body (electrode plates form electrode body, [0105]);
A case body having an opening and housing the electrode body therein (case-BC, [0104]);
A lid of a flat-plate-like shape sealing the opening and having a liquid inlet penetrating therethrough in a lid thickwise direction (opening-13, top part of case, lid portion-2 acts as lid, Fig. 1, [0104]);
A positive electrode terminal and a negative electrode terminal conducting with the electrode body and penetrating through the lid to extend outside (positive electrode terminal-5, negative electrode terminal-7, [0106], Fig. 1);
A positive electrode insulator insulting the lid and the positive electrode terminal (packing 9 & 10 act as insulators, [0108], can be formed of rubber, [0139]);
A negative electrode insulator insulting the lid and the positive electrode terminal (packing 9 & 10 act as insulators, [0108], can be formed of rubber, [0139]);
A stopper welded by energy beam to a liquid inlet circumferential portion surrounding the liquid inlet of the lid to seal the liquid inlet (sealing plate-12 with sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, [0111], opening-13 acts as liquid inlet, stopper is welded, [0140]), wherein
The liquid inlet circumferential portion include:
A contact step portion of an annular shaped including a lid contact surface of an annular shape and surround the liquid inlet (Fig. 7 shows a contact step portion of an annular shape including sealing plate-12, [0141]); and
An outer step portion of an annular shape including an outer annular step surface of an annular flat shape and surrounding the contact step portion (Fig. 7 shows an outer step portion of an annular shape including sealing plate-12, [0141]),
The liquid contact surface is configured to
Be positioned on a lid thickwise inside than a lid outer plane of the lid and face toward a lid thickwise outside (Fig. 7),
The outer annular step surface is configured to
be positioned on a hole radial outside than the lid contact surface, on the lid thickwise inside than the lid outer plane and on the lid thickwise outside than the lid contact surface, and face toward the lid thickwise outside (Fig. 7, shows hole defined by opening-13, [0114]),
the stopper is configured to:
be positioned on a hole radial inside than the outer step portion (sealing plug-14, Fig. 7, [0114]); include
a stopper contact surface of an annular shape facing toward the lid thickwise inside to opposite and be contacted with the lid contact surface (sealing plug-14 has contact surface, Fig 7)
a peripheral outward surface of a flat shape facing toward the lid thickwise outside (sealing plug-14 has peripheral outward surface, Fig 7),
have an outer peripheral edge portion of an annular shape contacted with the contact step portion (sealing plug-14 has peripheral outward surface, Fig 7, retaining portion-ST defines outer peripheral edge portion),
a solidified molten portion of an annular shape made of metal, which is once molten and then solidified (opening has an aluminum plate member acting as solidified molten portion, [0121])
is formed between the outer step portion of the lid and the outer peripheral edge portion of the stopper (aluminum disc-21, Fig. 9, [0153]),
the solidified molten portion is configured to be positioned its entire circumference on the lid thickwise inside the lid outer plane of the lid (aluminum disc-21, Fig. 10, [0153]]),
a surface of the solidified molten portion in its entire circumference is configured to:
continue to the outer annular step surface and the peripheral outwards surface (aluminum disc-21, Fig. 10);
form a convex shape toward the lid thick wise (Fig. 7, 9 & 10 show convex shape), wherein
The outer step portion of the lid before welding and the outer peripheral edge portion of the stopper before welding and the outer peripheral edge portion of the stopper before welding include a to-be-molten protruding portion as at least any one of:
A to-be-molten outer protruding portion positioned on the hole radial inside than the outer annular step surface of the lid and protruding on the lid thickwise outside than the outer annular step surface; and a to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion position on the stopper radial outside than the peripheral outward surface of the stopper and protruding on the topper thickwise outside than the peripheral outward surface (welding areas act as to-be-molten outer protruding portion and to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion, [0104], [0122-0123], sealing plate is welding to lid portion along entire circumference of the sealing plate, [0140]),
The method includes:
Stopper arranging to arrange the stopper on the hole radial inside than the outer step portion of the lid in a state in which the stopper contact surface of the stopper opposes and comes to contact with the lid contact surface of the lid ([0127], Fig. 6); and
Stopper welding to weld to the outer step portion of the lid and the outer peripheral edge portion of the stopper over an entire circumference by energy beam ([0140], [0154]), and
The stopper welding is to perform welding by melting the to-be-molten protruding portion ([0155]).
Regarding Claim 4, Kako discloses the limitations as set forth above. Kako further discloses wherein the to-be-molten protruding portion is of an annular shape over its circumference (weld is circular shape, [0140]).
The examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, “wherein the to-be-molten protruding portion includes a sectional shape large enough to remain surplus molten metal even when a clearance between the outer peripheral edge portion of the stopper before welding and the outer step portion of the lid before welding becomes the maximum clearance, which is the largest clearance formed therebetween, is filled with the molten metal of the to-be-molten protruding portion” can be interpreted to mean any structure where the to-be-molten protruding portion is of a shape where there is a clearance between the “to-be-molten” protruding portion and the stopper.
Kako discloses wherein the lid portion and sealing plate-12 are welded together along an entire circumference of the sealing plate ([0140]). Kako further discloses wherein the weld creates a functional seal ([0076]). Kako further discloses wherein the stopper and welded portion have a clearance area (sealing plu-14 acting as stopper, opening-13, Fig. 7).
Therefore it is the examiner’s position that Kako discloses the claim 4 limitations.
Regarding Claim 5, Kako discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Kako discloses wherein the lid before welding includes the to-be-molten outer protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface (lid-2, to-be-molten outer protruding portion is welding area of sealing area-12, Fig. 7 shows that there is a protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface, [0113]),
The stopper before welding includes no to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion on the outer peripheral edge portion (sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, [0114]), and
The outer annular step surface of the lid is position on the lid thick wise inside than the peripheral outward surface of the stopper (Fig. 7, sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, 13b defines outer annular step surface, [0114]).
Regarding Claim 8 & 9, Kako discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Kako further discloses wherein the lid before welding includes the to-be-molten outer protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface (lid-2, to-be-molten outer protruding portion is welding area of sealing area-12, Fig. 7 shows that there is a protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface, [0113]), and the stopper before welding includes the to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion on the outer peripheral edge portion (sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, [0114]), the outer annular step suface of the lid is positioned on the lid thickwise inside than the peripheral outward surface of the stopper (Fig. 7, sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, 13b defines outer annular step surface, [0114]).
Regarding Claim 14, Kako discloses the limitation as set forth above.
Kako further discloses wherein the lid before welding includes the to-be-molten pouter protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface (lid-2, to-be-molten outer protruding portion is welding area of sealing area-12, Fig. 7 shows that there is a protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface, [0113]), and the stopper before welding includes the to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion on the outer peripheral edge portion (sealing resin-14 acts as stopper, [0114]).
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) 6, 7 & 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kako (US20130130079) (Provided in Applicant’s IDS filed on June 24th, 2024).
Regarding Claim 6 & 10-12, Kako discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Kako discloses wherein the lid before welding includes the to-be-molten outer protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface (lid-2, to-be-molten outer protruding portion is welding area of sealing area-12, Fig. 7 shows that there is a protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface, [0113]),
The stopper before welding includes no to-be molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion on the outer peripheral edge portion but includes an extended peripheral outward surface extending to the stopper radial outside from the peripheral outward surface and a stopper outer circumferential end face extending to the stopper thickwise inside from an outer peripheral edge of the extended peripheral outward surface and facing the stopper radial outside (sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, [0114], Fig. 7, outerperipheral edge portion and extended peripheral outward defined by ST and BC, Fig. 7).
Kako does not directly disclose wherein a height from the lid contact surface to an outer protruding portion top face of the to-be-molten outer protruding portion is as 1.1 to 1.4 times larges as a thickness from the stopper contact face to the extended peripheral outward surface of the stopper.
Kako discloses wherein the sealing resin plug can have an adjusted shape ([0114]). Kako further discloses wherein the electrolyte filling opening-13 is in the lid-2 of the battery and is sealed with a welded sealing portion structure ([0012]), which is the same as the function of the instant sealing member.
In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (Claims directed to a lumber package “of appreciable size and weight requiring handling by a lift truck” were held unpatentable over prior art lumber packages which could be lifted by hand because limitations relating to the size of the package were not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art.); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) (“mere scaling up of a prior art process capable of being scaled up, if such were the case, would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled.” 531 F.2d at 1053, 189 USPQ at 148.).
In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Therefore, since the function of the sealing part of both the instant and Kako are the same, absent a showing of criticality, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kako to have wherein a height from the lid contact surface to an outer protruding portion top face of the to-be-molten outer protruding portion is as 1.1 to 1.4 times larges as a thickness from the stopper contact face to the extended peripheral outward surface of the stopper.
Regarding Claim 7 & 13, Kako discloses the limitations as set forth above.
Kako discloses wherein the stopper before welding includes the to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion on the outer peripheral edge portion (lid-2, to-be-molten outer protruding portion is welding area of sealing area-12, Fig. 7 shows that there is a protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface, [0113], sealing plug-14 acts as stopper),
the lid before welding includes no to-be-molten outer protruding portion on the hole radial inside of the outer annular step surface but includes an extended outer annular step surface extending to the hole radial inside from the outer annular step surface and an inner step surface extending to the lid thickwise inside from an inner peripheral edge of the extended outer annular step surface to reach the lid contact surface and facing the hole radial inside (sealing plug-14 acts as stopper, [0114], Fig. 7, outerperipheral edge portion and extended peripheral outward defined by ST and BC, Fig. 7).
Kako does not directly disclose wherein a thickness from the stopper contact surface to a stopper protruding-portion top face of the to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion is as 1.1 to 1.4 times large as a height from the lid contact face to the extended outer annular step surface.
Kako discloses wherein the sealing resin plug can have an adjusted shape ([0114]). Kako further discloses wherein the electrolyte filling opening-13 is in the lid-2 of the battery and is sealed with a welded sealing portion structure ([0012]), which is the same as the function of the instant sealing member.
In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955) (Claims directed to a lumber package “of appreciable size and weight requiring handling by a lift truck” were held unpatentable over prior art lumber packages which could be lifted by hand because limitations relating to the size of the package were not sufficient to patentably distinguish over the prior art.); In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976) (“mere scaling up of a prior art process capable of being scaled up, if such were the case, would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled.” 531 F.2d at 1053, 189 USPQ at 148.).
In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Therefore, since the function of the sealing part of both the instant and Kako are the same, absent a showing of criticality, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art using the disclosure of Kako to have wherein a thickness from the stopper contact surface to a stopper protruding-portion top face of the to-be-molten stopper outer circumferential protruding portion is as 1.1 to 1.4 times large as a height from the lid contact face to the extended outer annular step surface.
Conclusion
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