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
Applicant’s arguments and claim amendments submitted December 31, 2025 have been entered into the file. Currently, claim 8 is cancelled and claims 1, 5-7, and 9 are amended, resulting in claims 1-7 and 9 pending for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The instant disclosure does not provide support for the scope of “provided only on an outer perimetric part” in claims 1, 5, and 9.
On page 6 of the response received December 31, 2025, Applicant directs the Examiner to paragraphs [0027], [0032], [0037], [0040], and [0043] and Figures 2A and 2B for support for the amendments to claims 1, 5 and 9.
Paragraph [0027] of the instant specification states “the positive electrode insulating frames 11f are also formed on parts of the positive electrode tab 13”.
Paragraph [0032] of the instant specification describes materials constituting the negative electrode insulating frames.
Paragraph [0037] of the instant specification describes the material constituting the intermediate layers.
Paragraph [0040] of the instant specification describes the method of manufacturing a solid-state battery.
Paragraph [0043] of the instant specification does not provide any description of the positive electrode insulating frame or the negative electrode insulating frame.
Figures 2A and 2B depict the insulating frames (11f positive electrode insulating frame, 11h negative electrode insulating frame) physically contacting or “on” surfaces other that “only an outer perimetric part of the positive electrode composite layer” or “only on an outer perimetric part of the negative electrode composite layer”. Additionally, it is noted that the phrase “only provided” is not present in the instant specification.
Therefore, the instant disclosure does not provide support for the scope of the new limitations, stated above, that were added to claims 1, 5, and 9.
Claims 2-4 and 6-7 are dependent on claim 1 and therefore, for the reasons outlined with respect to claim 1, these claims also contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C 112, the inventor(s) at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kato (US 2019/0348717 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kato teaches a solid-state battery (claim 1; “as long as the first electrode and the second electrode are different electrodes, they are not particularly limited” [56]). Therefore, the ordinary artisan would recognize that the solid-state battery (Kato Fig. 2) can have a configuration wherein 1c is the negative electrode current collector or a configuration wherein 1c is the positive electrode current collector, both of which are taught by Kato (claim 1; “as long as the first electrode and the second electrode are different electrodes, they are not particularly limited” [56]). The configuration wherein 1c is the negative electrode current collector is described below.
Kato teaches the solid-state battery comprising:
Electrode laminates (annotated Kato Fig. 2 shown below)
Each of the electrode laminates being configured with a solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d, Kato Fig. 2) and a positive electrode composite layer (4c, 4d, Kato Fig. 2) that are sequentially laminated on a negative electrode current collector (1c, 1d, Kato Fig. 2)
A positive electrode current collector (5c, Kato Fig. 2) sandwiched between the electrode laminates,
Wherein the positive electrode composite layer is provided with a positive electrode insulating frame provided only on an outer perimetric part thereof (resin layer 41, Kato Fig. 2)
When the solid-state battery is viewed from above:
An outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode current collector (1c, 1d) exists inward of an outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d) (Kato Fig. 2)
An outer perimetric edge of the positive electrode insulating frame (Kato Fig. 2) exists outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d) (Kato Fig. 2)
PNG
media_image1.png
550
1189
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Kato teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Kato further teaches each of the electrode laminates being configured with a negative electrode composite layer (2c, 2d Kato Fig. 2), the solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d Kato Fig. 2) and the positive electrode composite layer (4c, 4d Kato Fig. 2) that are sequentially laminated on the negative electrode current collector (1c, 1d Kato Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Kato teaches all features of claims 1 and 4, as described above. Kato further teaches the negative electrode composite layer (2c, 2d Kato Fig. 2) being provided with a negative electrode insulating frame only on an outer perimetric part (41 resin layer, Kato Fig. 2), and, when the solid-state battery is viewed from above, the outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode insulating frame on the side on which the negative electrode tab extends exists outward of the outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode current collector (Kato Fig. 2 shows the negative electrode insulating frame and current collector; Fig. 1 shows that the negative electrode tab is on the side of the insulating frame).
Regarding claim 9, Kato teaches a solid-state battery (Kato Fig. 2) comprising:
Electrode laminates (annotated Kato Fig. 2 shown below)
Each of the electrode laminates being configured with a positive electrode composite layer (2c, 2d, Kato Fig. 2), a solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d, Kato Fig. 2), and a negative electrode composite layer (4c, 4d, Kato Fig. 2) that are sequentially laminated on a positive electrode current collector (1c, 1d, Kato Fig. 2)
A negative electrode current collector (5c, Kato Fig. 2) sandwiched between the electrode laminates,
Wherein the negative electrode composite layer is provided with a negative electrode insulating frame only on an outer perimetric part of the negative electrode composite layer (resin layer 41, annotated Kato Fig. 2 shown below)
When the solid-state battery is viewed from above:
An outer perimetric edge of the positive electrode current collector (1c, 1d) exists inward of an outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d) (Kato Fig. 2)
An outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode insulating frame (annotated Kato Fig. 2 shown below) exists outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer (3c, 3d) (Kato Fig. 2)
PNG
media_image2.png
621
1253
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Taniuchi (WO 2020022111 A1, US 2021/0273235 A1 used for citations) and Lee (Lee, J. Design optimization of tab attachment positions and cell aspect ratio to minimize temperature difference in 45-Ah LFP large-format lithium-ion pouch cells. Applied Thermal Engineering. 182, 116143. Available online October 3, 2020).
Regarding claim 2, Kato teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Kato further teaches a positive electrode tab extending from the positive electrode current collector (positive electrode current collector protruding parts, Kato [140]; claim 1) and a negative electrode tab extending from the negative electrode current collector (negative electrode current collector protruding parts, Kato [140]; claim 1). Kato does not teach the positive electrode tab and negative electrode tab extending on opposite sides (tabs of Kato are shown on same side in Fig. 1).
Taniuchi teaches a solid state battery comprising electrode laminates (Taniuchi Fig. 6), wherein the positive electrode tab (22, Taniuchi Fig. 6) extends from a side opposite from a side from which the negative electrode tab extends (12, Taniuchi Fig. 6).
Lee teaches that the location of tabs in a solid-state battery affects temperature distribution within the battery (Lee pg. 2 right column second paragraph). Lee further teaches that a configuration wherein the tabs are on opposite sides “provided the most uniform temperature distribution in the LIB cell and potential distribution in the negative and positive current collectors” (pg. 6 right column third paragraph).
Since Taniuchi teaches that having the positive electrode tab and the negative electrode tab on opposite sides is known and suitable and Lee teaches that the tab location impacts the temperature distribution and that having the tabs on opposite sides results in a more uniform temperature distribution, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to fabricate the solid-state battery of Kato to have the positive electrode tab extend on a side opposite to a side from which the negative electrode tab extends in order to obtain a solid-state battery with a more uniform temperature distribution and suitable performance for a desired application.
Since the tabs are located on opposite sides, the ordinary artisan would be motivated to apply the insulating frame (resin layer of Kato) to both sides (the side from which positive electrode tab extends and the side from which the negative electrode tab extends), thus resulting in, when the solid-state battery is viewed from above, the outer perimetric edge of the positive electrode insulating frame on the side on which the positive electrode tab extends existing outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer, in order to obtain a solid-state battery capable of preventing short-circuiting. The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04.
Kato teaches the positive electrode composite layer and solid electrolyte layer being at the same outer perimeter position; therefore, when the positive electrode insulating frame is added, the insulating frame has an outer perimeter position existing outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer.
Regarding claim 3, Kato in view of Taniuchi and Lee teaches all features of claims 1-2, as described above. The modified solid-state battery of Kato in view of Taniuchi and Lee further teaches the solid electrolyte layer comprising an extending portion (resin layer 41) extending on the side on which the negative electrode tab extends (Kato Fig. 2 teaches resin layer 41 on an outer perimetric part of the solid electrolyte layer, therefore forming an extending portion; modified solid-state battery of Kato in view of Taniuchi and Lee has resin layer on the side that the positive electrode tab extends from and on the side that the negative tab extends from).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato, as applied to claims 1 and 4-5 above, and in further view of Tomura (US 2017/0207482 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Kato teaches all features of claims 1 and 4-5, as described above. Kato further teaches that the negative electrode insulating frame (resin layer 41, Kato Fig. 2) includes a curable resin or a thermoplastic resin (Kato [25]). Kato does not teach the insulating frame including rubber.
Tomura teaches solid-state batteries that comprise an insulation material to prevent undesired electrical connections (Tomura [20]). Tomura further teaches that thermoplastic resins, as used in the invention of Kato, and rubber are suitable materials for use as insulation materials in a solid-state battery (Tomura [103]).
Since Kato and Tomura both teach solid-state batteries comprising insulation materials and Tomura teaches that rubber is a suitable insulation material in solid-state batteries, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the insulating frame of Kato using rubber in order to obtain the predictable result of a solid-state battery capable of preventing undesired electrical connections.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kato, as applied to claims 1 and 4-5 above, in view of Lee (Lee, Y.G. et al. High energy long cycling all solid state lithium metal batteries enabled by silver carbon composite anodes. Nature Energy. 5, 299-308 (2020)).
Regarding claim 7, Kato teaches all features of claims 1 and 4-5, as described above. Kato does not teach the electrode laminates comprising an intermediate layer formed between the negative electrode composite layer and the solid electrolyte layer.
Lee teaches the use of an intermediate layer that includes carbon that includes metal that can be alloyed with Li (Ag-C layer) in an all-solid-state battery in order to regulate Li deposition and improve electrochemical cyclability (Lee abstract).
Since Kato and Lee both teach solid-state secondary batteries and Lee teaches that including an intermediate layer comprising carbon that includes a metal that can be alloyed with Li (Ag-C) can regulate Li deposition, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add an intermediate layer, as taught by Lee, to the solid-state battery of Kato between the negative electrode composite layer and the solid electrolyte layer in order to regulate Li deposition and improve electrochemical cyclability.
Kato teaches the negative electrode composite layer and the solid electrolyte layer being the same width (4c and 3c, respectively, Kato Fig. 2), therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the intermediate layer having the same width as these layers, thus resulting in an outer perimetric edge of the intermediate layer existing inward of the outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode insulating frame.
Claims 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita (US 2015/0188195 A1) in view of Kato.
Regarding claim 1, Matsushita teaches a solid-state battery (Matsushita Fig. 15). Matsushita does not explicitly teach an embodiment wherein a positive electrode current collector is interposed between laminates of a solid electrolyte layer and positive electrode composite layer on a negative current collector. However, Matsushita teaches that the order of the layers (first, second electrode active material layers) can be chosen according to desired voltage requirements (Matsushita [106]). Matsushita further teaches that, when the first electrode active material layer is a positive electrode active material layer, the second electrode active material layer is a negative electrode active material layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the first electrode active material of Matsushita Fig. 15 to be a positive electrode active material layer in order to meet a desired voltage requirement, thus resulting in a solid-state battery comprising:
electrode laminates (Matsushita annotated Fig. 15 shown below)
each of the electrode laminates being configured with a solid electrolyte layer (13) and a positive electrode composite layer (11) that are sequentially laminated on a negative electrode current collector (22)
a positive electrode current collector sandwiched between the electrode laminates (12)
and when the solid-state battery is viewed from above, an outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode current collector exists inward of an outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer (annotated Fig. 15 shown below).
PNG
media_image3.png
636
1473
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 15 of Matsushita does not teach the positive electrode composite layer being provided with a positive electrode insulating frame on an outer perimetric part.
Kato teaches a solid-state battery comprising electrode laminates containing a solid electrolyte layer and an electrode composite layer (Kato Fig. 2). Kato further teaches the solid-state battery comprising an insulating frame (41, Kato Fig. 2) on an outer perimetric part of a positive electrode composite layer (2c resin layer, Kato Fig. 2) in order to prevent short-circuiting (Kato [63-67]).
Since Kato teaches that it is known and suitable to add an insulating frame on an outer perimetric part of a positive electrode composite layer, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the resin layer of Kato to the solid-state battery of Matsushita, thus resulting in a positive electrode insulating frame only on an outer perimetric part of the positive electrode composite layer, in order to prevent short-circuiting. This modified solid-state battery of Matsushita results in an outer perimetric edge of the positive electrode insulating frame existing outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer. The positive electrode composite layer (11) and the solid electrolyte layer (13) of Matsushita Fig. 15 are depicted as having an outer perimetric edge at the same position; therefore, when the insulating frame is added to the positive electrode composite layer, the positive electrode insulating frame edge exists outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer.
Regarding claim 4, Matsushita in view of Kato teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Matsushita further teaches each of the electrode laminates being configured with a negative electrode composite layer (21, Matsushita Fig. 15), the solid electrolyte layer (13, Matsushita Fig. 15) and the positive electrode composite layer (11, Matsushita Fig. 15) that are sequentially laminated on the negative electrode current collector (22, Matsushita Fig. 15).
Regarding claim 5, Matsushita in view of Kato teaches all features of claims 1 and 4, as described above. The modified solid-state battery of Matsushita in view of Kato further teaches the negative electrode composite layer being provided with a negative electrode insulating frame on an outer perimetric part thereof (the resin layer of Kato (41, Fig. 2) has a portion on the outer perimeter of the negative electrode composite layer and the positive electrode composite layer), thus resulting in when the solid-state battery is viewed from above, an outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode insulating frame on the side on which the negative electrode tab extends exists outward of the outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode current collector. Before the addition of the insulating frame, the negative current collector and negative electrode composite layer are at the same position; therefore, after the addition of the insulating frame, an outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode insulating frame on the side on which the negative electrode tab extends exists outward of the outer perimetric edge of the negative electrode current collector.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita in view of Kato, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Taniuchi (WO 2020022111 A1, US 2021/0273235 A1 used for citations) and Lee (Lee, J. Design optimization of tab attachment positions and cell aspect ratio to minimize temperature difference in 45-Ah LFP large-format lithium-ion pouch cells. Applied Thermal Engineering. 182, 116143. Available online October 3, 2020).
Regarding claim 2, Matsushita in view of Kato teaches all features of claim 1, as described above. Matsushita further teaches a positive electrode tab extending from the positive electrode current collector (Matsushita annotated Fig. 15 shown below) and a negative electrode tab extending from the negative electrode current collector (Matsushita annotated Fig. 15 shown below). Matsushita does not teach the positive electrode tab and negative electrode tab extending on opposite sides.
Taniuchi teaches a solid state battery comprising electrode laminates (Taniuchi Fig. 6), wherein the positive electrode tab (22, Taniuchi Fig. 6) extends from a side opposite from a side from which the negative electrode tab extends (12, Taniuchi Fig. 6).
Lee teaches the location of tabs in a solid-state battery affects temperature distribution within the battery (Lee pg. 2 right column second paragraph). Lee further teaches that a configuration wherein the tabs are on opposite sides “provided the most uniform temperature distribution in the LIB cell and potential distribution in the negative and positive current collectors” (pg. 6 right column third paragraph).
Since Taniuchi teaches that having the positive electrode tab and the negative electrode tab on opposite sides is known and suitable and Lee teaches that the tab location impacts the temperature distribution and that having the tabs on opposite sides results in a more uniform temperature distibution , it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to fabricate the solid-state battery of Matsushita to have the positive electrode tab extend on a side opposite to a side from which the negative electrode tab extends in order to obtain a solid-state battery with a more uniform temperature distribution and suitable performance for a desired application.
Since the tabs are located on opposite sides, the ordinary artisan would be motivated to apply the insulating frame (resin layer of Kato) to both sides (the side from which positive electrode tab extends and the side from which the negative electrode tab extends), thus resulting in, when the solid-state battery is viewed from above, the outer perimetric edge of the positive electrode insulating frame on the side on which the positive electrode tab extends existing outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer, in order to obtain a solid-state battery capable of preventing short-circuiting. The mere duplication of parts, without any new or unexpected results, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04.
Matsushita teaches the positive electrode composite layer and solid electrolyte layer being at the same outer perimeter position; therefore, when the positive electrode insulating frame is added, the insulating frame has an outer perimeter position existing outward of the outer perimetric edge of the solid electrolyte layer.
Regarding claim 3, Matsushita in view of Kato, Taniuchi, and Lee teaches all features of claims 1-2, as described above. The modified solid state battery of Matsushita in view of Kato, Taniuchi, and Lee further teaches the solid electrolyte layer comprising an extending portion (resin layer 41 taught by Kato) extending on the side on which the negative electrode tab extends (Kato Fig. 2 teaches resin layer 41 on an outer perimetric part of the solid electrolyte layer, therefore forming an extending portion; modified solid-state battery of Matsushita in view of Kato, Taniuchi, and Lee has resin layer on the side that the positive electrode tab extends from and on the side that the negative tab extends from).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita in view of Kato, as applied to claims 1 and 4-5 above, and in further view of Tomura (US 2017/0207482 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Matsushita in view of Kato teaches all features of claims 1 and 4-5, as described above. Kato further teaches that the negative electrode insulating frame (resin layer 41, Kato Fig. 2) includes a curable resin or a thermoplastic resin (Kato [25]). Kato does not teach the insulating frame including rubber.
Tomura teaches solid-state batteries that comprise an insulation material to prevent undesired electrical connections (Tomura [20]). Tomura further teaches that thermoplastic resins, as used in the invention of Kato, and rubber are suitable materials for use as insulation materials in a solid-state battery (Tomura [103]).
Since Kato and Tomura both teach solid-state batteries comprising insulation materials and Tomura teaches that rubber is a suitable insulation material in solid-state batteries, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the insulating frame of modified Matsushita in view of Kato using rubber in order to obtain the predictable result of a solid-state battery capable of preventing undesired electrical connections.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsushita in view of Kato, as applied to claims 1 and 4-5 above, and in further view of Lee.
Regarding claim 7, Matsushita in view of Kato teaches all features of claims 1 and 4-5, as described above. Matsushita does not teach the electrode laminates comprising an intermediate layer formed between the negative electrode composite layer and the solid electrolyte layer.
Lee teaches the use of an intermediate layer that includes carbon that includes metal that can be alloyed with Li (Ag-C layer) in an all-solid-state battery in order to regulate Li deposition and improve electrochemical cyclability (Lee abstract).
Since Matsushita, Kato, and Lee all teach solid-state secondary batteries and Lee teaches that including an intermediate layer comprising carbon that includes a metal that can be alloyed with Li (Ag-C) can regulate Li deposition, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add an intermediate layer, as taught by Lee, to the modified solid-state battery of Matsushita between the negative electrode composite layer and the solid electrolyte layer in order to regulate Li deposition and improve electrochemical cyclability.
There are three options for the relative position of the outer perimetric edge of the intermediate layer relative to the negative electrode insulating frame, including the outer perimetric edge being located at the same position, located inward, or located outward relative to the negative electrode insulation frame. It is noted that two of these three configurations are recited in claim 7. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a configuration from this finite list of configurations in order to obtain a battery suitable for a desired application.
Response to Arguments
Response – Claim Rejections 35 USC § 112
The rejections of claims 5-8 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention are overcome by the amendments to claim 5 and cancelation of claim 8 in the response received December 31, 2025. These rejections of claims 5-8 are withdrawn.
Response – Claim Rejections 35 USC § 102 and 103
Rejections of claims 6 and 7 are updated due to Applicant’s amendments to claims 6 and 7. Applicant’s arguments filed December 31, 2025 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
On page 7 of the response, Applicant appears to allege that Kato does not disclose the insulating frame “provided only” on an outer perimetric part and directs the Examiner to paragraph [0070] of Kato to support this allegation.
This argument is not persuasive. Kato paragraph [0070] and Fig. 2 both disclose the insulating frame provided only on an outer perimetric part, as shown above, of the positive electrode composite layer and only on an outer perimetric part of the negative electrode composite layer. It is noted that the phrases “extends across the entirety of the edges”, “the entire end face”, and “a portion of the electrode current collector protruding part 21 p” used in Kato and cited by Applicant meet the structural requirement of being provided on an outer perimetric part.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tomura (US 20170207482 A1): appears to disclose a solid state battery comprising electrode laminates containing a positive electrode composite layer, solid electrolyte layer, and negative electrode composite layer (Fig. 12).
Waseda (US 11,909,003 B2): appears to disclose a solid state battery comprising electrode laminates containing a positive electrode composite layer, solid electrolyte layer, and negative electrode composite layer (Fig. 1).
Ono (US 20210104775 A1): appears to disclose a solid state battery comprising electrode laminates containing a positive electrode composite layer, solid electrolyte layer, negative electrode composite layer, and insulating frame (Fig. 1).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA S CASERTO whose telephone number is (571)272-5114. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789