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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/10/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 8/19/2026 have been entered. Claims 1, 8, 16, and 17 are amended.
Support for the amendments can be found in Figs. 5-10 of the instant specification.
The amendments overcome the claim objections and 112(b) rejections presented in the office action of 6/16/2026.
Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed 8/19/2026, with respect to the 102 rejections over Lee have been fully considered and are persuasive: The amendments to Claims 1 and 8 distinguish the present invention from the current collecting member of Lee.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 10-12, with respect to the 103 rejections over Sato in view of Chai have been fully considered but they are not persuasive:
On page 11, Applicant argues that, in Chai, the projection of the edges of the tab connecting portion on a plane X, Y normal to the second direction is not “located strictly between a projection of the first edge and a projection of the second edge” of the transitional portion and provides annotated Fig. 9 (see page 12 of Applicant’s Remarks) as evidence. Examiner notes that Chai is only cited for the presence of a notch in the tab connecting portion; however, the structure of Fig. 5 of Sato is similar enough to Chai that the arguments would be applicable to both references.
Thus, based on annotated Fig. 9, the argument appears to be that, since the projection of the second edge of the transitional portion and the projection of the tab connecting portion share the same location on the X, Y plane, the projection of the tab connecting portion would not be “strictly between” the projections of the two edges. However, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitation “strictly between” would be inclusive of the end points/first and second edges and modified Sato would read on the limitations of Claim 1. This interpretation is supported by Fig. 10 of the instant specification, where the projection of the edge of the transitional portion 142 shares the same end point as the projection of the tab connecting portion 143 on the X, Y plane.
Amending Claims 1 and 8 to specify that “strictly between” is exclusive of the end points/edges would overcome the 103 rejections over Sato in view of Chai; however, in that case, it has been held that the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design (See MPEP 2144.04).
Examiner notes a mistake in the final rejection of 6/16/2026: Examiner stated that “Sato does not teach that the transitional portion comprises a first edge and a second edge that are opposite each other along said first direction X, wherein a projection of the tab connecting portion on a plane X, Y normal to the second direction Z is located strictly between a projection of the first edge and a projection of the second edge on said plane X,Y.” However, as shown in Fig. 5C of Sato, the transitional portion and the tab connecting portion may have the same width (Fig. 5C – parts w2 and w3). This would mean that the projection of tab connecting portion of Sato would be strictly between a projection of the first edge and the second edge. However, this ultimately does not affect the results of the rejection as the shape of the tab connecting portion is modified with the notch taught by Chai.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-8, and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 20170294684 A1, equivalent to EP 3200262 A1 cited in the 4/18/2025 IDS) in view of Chai (CN 210136949 U, machine translation provided in previous office action).
Regarding Claims 1 and 8, Sato teaches a current collecting member for a battery cell comprising:
a terminal connection portion for connection to an electrode terminal of the battery cell (part 44a), the terminal connecting portion having a first dimension along a first direction X and a second dimension along a second direction Z normal to the first direction X and a third dimension along a third direction Y normal to the first direction X and the second direction Z, the first dimension being larger than the third dimension, which is larger than the second dimension (Fig. 5);
a tab connecting portion for connection to a tab of the battery cell (part 44c), the tab connecting portion having a greater dimension along the second direction Z and a smaller dimension along the third direction Y (Fig. 5);
and a transitional portion for connecting the terminal connecting portion and the tab connecting portion (part 44b) (0037, Fig. 1).
The width of the tab connecting portion and the transitional portion in the X direction may be the same (0051, Fig. 5C), meaning that the transitional portion comprises a first edge and a second edge that are opposite each other along said first direction X, wherein a projection of the tab connecting portion on a plane X, Y normal to the second direction is located strictly between a projection of the first edge and a projection of the second edge on said plane X, Y (Figs. 5B and 5C).
PNG
media_image1.png
657
837
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sato does not teach that the transitional portion has, along the first direction X, a width greater than that of the tab connecting portion.
Chai teaches a current collecting member that connects a tab and a terminal (0007). The current collecting member has a terminal connecting portion (part 43), a tab connecting portion (part 42), and a transitional portion for connecting the terminal connecting portion and the tab connecting portion (part 41). The transitional portion has, along a first direction X, a width greater than that of the tab connecting portion due to a notch formed in the tab connecting portion (0007, Fig. 9). The notch facilitates welding and can increase energy density (0017).
Sato and Chai are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they relate to the same field of endeavor, namely current collecting members for batteries.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tab connecting portion to have a smaller width than the transitional portion as taught by Chai in order to facilitate welding and to increase energy density.
As the notch reduces the width of the tab connecting portion in the X direction, modified Sato would still comprise a transitional portion comprising a first edge and a second edge that are opposite each other along said first direction X, wherein a projection of the tab connecting portion on a plane X, Y normal to the second direction is located strictly between a projection of the first edge and a projection of the second edge on said plane X, Y (Sato: Fig. 5C; Chai: Fig. 9).
Modified Sato also teaches a battery cell comprising a housing provided with an opening (part 1), an electrode assembly provided inside the housing (part 3), the electrode assembly comprising a tab (parts 32b and 34b), an end cap assembly comprising a cover plate and an electrode terminal (part 6), the cover plate being used for covering the opening, and the electrode terminal being provided on the cover plate (parts 12 and 13), and the current collecting member (parts 24 and 44) (Sato: Fig. 2). The current collecting member comprises a terminal connection portion for connection to an electrode terminal of the battery cell (part 44a), the terminal connecting portion having a first dimension along a first direction X, a second dimension along a second direction Z normal to the first direction X and a third dimension along a third direction Y normal to the first direction X and the second direction Z, the first dimension being larger than the third dimension, which is larger than the second dimension (Fig. 5); a tab connecting portion for connection to a tab of the battery cell (part 44c), the tab connecting portion having a greater dimension along the second direction Z and a smaller dimension along the third direction Y (Fig. 5); and a transitional portion for connecting the terminal connecting portion and the tab connecting portion (part 44b) (0037, Fig. 1); wherein the transitional portion has, along the first direction X, a width greater than that of the tab connecting portion (Chai: Fig. 9); wherein the transitional portion comprises a first edge and a second edge that are opposite each other along said first direction X, wherein a projection of the tab connecting portion on a plane X, Y normal to the second direction Z is located strictly between a projection of the first edge and a projection of the second edge on said plane X, Y (Sato: Fig. 5C; Chai: Fig. 9) (Claim 8).
Regarding Claims 5 and 14, modified Sato teaches the current collecting member of Claim 1 and the battery of Claim 8. Modified Sato teaches that the transitional portion can have a thickness greater than that of the tab connecting portion (Sato: Fig. 5B).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, modified Sato teaches the current collecting member of Claim 1 and the battery of Claim 8. The transitional portion can be viewed as comprising a first segment and a second segment, where one end of the first segment is connected to the terminal connecting portion, the other of the first segment being connected to one end of the second segment, and the other end of the second segment being connected to the tab connecting portion (Sato: Fig. 5B). The first segment is parallel to the tab connecting portion and the second segment is inclined relative to the first segment and the tab connecting portion (Fig. 5B).
PNG
media_image2.png
632
515
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 7 and 16, modified Sato teaches the current collecting member of Claim 6 and the battery of Claim 15. The second segment can be viewed as comprising a first region having a thickness along said third direction Y that varies along the second direction Z, and a second region having a constant thickness along said third direction Y, wherein the first and second regions are connected to each other, the second region being connected to the first segment, the second region having a thickness equal to that of the first segment, the first region being connected to the tab connecting portion, and the first region having a thickness gradually increasing from the end thereof connected to the tab connecting portion to the end thereof connected to the second region (Sato: Fig. 5B).
PNG
media_image3.png
632
515
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17, modified Sato teaches the battery of Claim 8. The tab connecting portion can be viewed as comprising a third edge and a fourth edge that are inclined relative to each other (Sato: Fig. 5A).
PNG
media_image4.png
640
518
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato and Chai as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Kim (US 20140193696 A1).
Regarding Claims 9 and 10, modified Sato teaches the battery of Claim 8. Modified Sato does not teach a battery comprising the battery of Claim 8 (Claim 9) or a power consuming device comprising the battery of Claim 9 (Claim 10).
Kim teaches that batteries can comprise a plurality of battery cells connected to each other in a battery pack and the battery pack can be used in vehicles (power consuming devices) (0005).
Kim is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it relates to the same field of endeavor, namely batteries.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery of modified Sato by using it in a battery pack as Kim teaches it as a suitable use for a battery (Claim 9).
It would also be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the battery pack of modified Sato by using it in a vehicle (power consuming device) as Kim teaches it as a suitable use for a battery pack (Claim 10).
Claim(s) 3-4, 12-13, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato and Chai as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Lee (US 9559339 B2).
Regarding Claims 3-4 and 12-13, modified Sato teaches the current collecting member of Claim 1 and the battery of Claim 8. Modified Sato teaches a third edge and a first step formed between the third edge and the first edge (Sato: Fig. 5; Chai: Fig. 9) but does not teach a fourth edge and a second step formed between the fourth edge and the second edge.
Lee teaches a current collecting member comprising a terminal connecting portion (part 121b), a tab connecting portion (part 121a), and a transitional portion between the terminal and tab connecting portions (part 122) (Fig. 2A). The tab connecting portion has a smaller width than the transitional portion (Fig. 2A) such that the transitional portion has first and second edges in a first direction X, the tab connecting portion has third and fourth edges in the first direction, and a first step is formed between the first and third edges and a second step is formed between the second and fourth edges (Fig. 2A) (Claims 3 and 12). The first edge is parallel to the third edge and the second edge is parallel to the fourth edge (Fig. 2A) (Claims 4 and 13)
Lee is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it relates to the same field of endeavor, namely current collecting members for batteries.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have reduced the width of the tab connecting portion of modified Sato to form a fourth edge on the tab connecting portion and a step between the second and fourth edges as taught by Lee as it is a known shape for a tab connecting portion of a current collecting member and it has been held that the change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design (See MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claims 18, modified Sato teaches the battery of Claim 12. The first step and the second step are a pair of right-angle steps (Chai: Fig. 9; Lee: Fig. 2A).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Sato teaches the battery of Claim 12. The first step and second step would necessarily be arranged either symmetrically or asymmetrically.
Regarding Claim 20, modified Sato teaches the battery of Claim 12. Modified Sato does not teach that the second step has a width greater than the first step.
However, it has been held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is 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 is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (See MPEP 2144.04).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second step to have a width greater than the first step as a change in relative dimensions, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZIHENG LU whose telephone number is (703)756-1077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 - 5 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, Nicholas Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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.
/ZIHENG LU/ Examiner, Art Unit 1752
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
