Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/187,945

ELECTROCHEMICAL APPARATUS AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Mar 22, 2023
Examiner
EFYMOW, JESSE JAMES
Art Unit
1723
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Ningde Amperex Technology Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
100%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 100% — above average
100%
Career Allow Rate
15 granted / 15 resolved
+35.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +0% lift
Without
With
+0.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
75
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.9%
-26.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 15 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Status of Claims This is a final office action for application 18/187,945 in response to the amendment(s) filed on 12/22/2025. Claims 1-14 and 16-21 are under examination. Withdrawn Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112 The amendment(s) to the claim(s) filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged and the previous rejection is withdrawn. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/22/2025 have been fully considered and were found persuasive over the previous 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) rejection of record. The arguments, however, were not persuasive over the prior art for the reasons set forth below. See the newly applied 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections for claims 1-14 and 16-21 below. Applicant argues that Kim does not teach or suggest that “the first electrode plate, the separator, and the second electrode plate are stacked, and are wound around a first direction in multiple layers, wherein the first direction is perpendicular to a winding direction of the electrode assembly” (see e.g. page 11 of Applicant’s arguments). Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kim discloses stacked positive and negative electrode plates with a separator interposed therebetween (see e.g. FIGs. 12, 50, and 51). Kim further discloses that the stacked structure is wound to form a multi-layer electrode assembly (see e.g. FIGs. 8, 11, 50, and 51). A wound electrode assembly inherently defines a winding (circumferential) direction and a radial direction extending outward from the winding axis. These directions are perpendicular as a matter of geometry. The claimed “first direction” corresponds to the radial direction of the wound structure, and the winding direction corresponds to the circumferential direction. Accordingly, Kim teaches the claimed stacked and wound configuration with perpendicular directions. For the above reason, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant argues that Kim does not disclose that “the current collector is divided into a first zone and a second zone arranged adjacent to each other along the first direction,” and that the Office improperly interpreted a zone as extending beyond the physical boundary of the current collector (see e.g. page 13 of Applicant’s arguments). Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kim discloses a current collector having a portion coated with active material and a portion that is not coated (see e.g. FIG. 6 and related description). These portions are distinct regions of the same current collector and are arranged adjacent to each other along a direction corresponding to the claimed first direction. The claim language defines “zones” as portions of the current collector; it does not require separately formed structures. The current rejection relies solely on regions within the physical boundary of the disclosed current collector (see e.g. updated claim 1 rejection below). Accordingly, Kim teaches a current collector divided into adjacent zones as claimed. For the above reason, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant argues that when “the first zone is properly confined to the physical boundary of the current collector, the distance d between the edge of the first zone and the edge of the conductive layer in Kim is necessarily 0, whereas the amended claims require 0 < d” (see e.g. page 14 of Applicant’s arguments). Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in the annotated figures cited in the current rejection (see e.g. updated claim 1 rejection below), Kim discloses a conductive layer disposed on a defined portion of the current collector having a width that is less than the width of the corresponding fourth zone. The illustrated structure shows the first zone and fourth zone both extending to the edge of the current collector in the direction furthermost from the active material layer (see e.g. updated claim 1 rejection below). Thus the distance between the edge of the first zone and edge of the conductive layer is greater than 0. For the above reason, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. Applicant argues that Kim’s “disclosure of metal strips or conductive resin including carbon fiber filler does not teach or suggest a conductive layer comprising carbon nanotubes, conductive carbon black, or graphene as recited in claim 21” (see e.g. page 16 of Applicant’s arguments). Examiner respectfully disagrees. A new search was conducted in light of the new claim and new prior art was identified rendering this argument moot. See claim 21 rejection below. In conclusion, the arguments were persuasive over the previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of record. The arguments, however, were not persuasive over the prior art for the reasons set forth above. See the newly applied 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections for claims 1–14 and 16–21 below. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Claims 1 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US-20100227209-A1). Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses an electrochemical apparatus (see e.g. "electrochemical cell" in Abstract and FIG. 8), comprising an electrode assembly (see e.g. FIG. 1), comprising an electrode assembly (see e.g. FIG. 1), wherein the electrode assembly comprises: a first electrode plate (see e.g. "positive electrode" in paragraph [0004] and part number 11 in FIG. 1); a second electrode plate (see e.g. "negative electrode" in paragraph [0004] and part number 12 in FIG. 1); and a separator disposed between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate (see e.g. "The separator 13 inserted between the positive and negative electrodes 11 and 12" in paragraph [0006] and part number 13 in FIG. 1); wherein the first electrode plate, the separator, and the second electrode plate are stacked (see e.g. FIGs. 12, 50 and 51) , and are wound around a first direction in multiple layers (see e.g. annotated figure below), wherein the first direction is perpendicular to a winding direction of the electrode assembly (see e.g. annotated figure below); wherein the first electrode plate comprises a current collector (see e.g. "current collectors" in paragraph [0019] and part number 65 in FIG. 6) and an active material layer (see e.g. "positive active material layers 64" in paragraph [0019] and part number 64 in FIG. 6), the current collector is divided into a first zone and a second zone arranged adjacent to each other along the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below), the second zone is provided with the active material layer (see e.g. annotated figure below), the first zone is further divided into a third zone and a fourth zone arranged adjacent to each other along the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below), the third zone is arranged in overlap with the separator (see e.g. annotated figure below), and the fourth zone is provided with a conductive layers (see e.g. annotated figure below); wherein the conductive layer and the fourth zone have a first width and a second width, respectively, along the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below), and wherein along the first direction, a distance d between an edge of the first zone facing away from the active material layer and an edge of the conductive layer facing away from the active material layer satisfies 0 < d < a difference between the second width and the first width (see e.g. annotated figure below). It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, that while Kim does not explicitly disclose the exact widths of the conductive layer and the fourth zone nor the distance d between an edge of the first zone facing away from the active material layer and an edge of the conductive layer facing away from the active material layer, Kim does disclose a conductive layer formed on only a portion of the current collector region (see e.g. FIG. 6 and annotated figure below), such that the conductive layer has a finite width that is smaller than the width of the underlying fourth zone along the first direction. As a matter of geometry, the fourth zone extends beyond the conductive layer such that the conductive layer is disposed within the fourth zone rather than spanning the entire width of the fourth zone. In particular, the fourth zone extends from a location left of the conductive layer to the edge of the current collector on the right side (see e.g. annotated figure below). Because the conductive layer terminates before the edge of the current collector, a remaining uncovered portion of the fourth zone necessarily exists between the right edge of the conductive layer and the edge of the current collector. This uncovered portion defines the distance d between the edge of the conductive layer facing away from the active material layer and the edge of the first zone facing away from the active material layer. Further, because the fourth zone extends farther than the conductive layer (i.e. on the remainder of the fourth zone on the left side of the conductive layer in the annotated figure below), the difference between the second width and the first width necessarily exceeds the distance d. Accordingly, the geometric relationship 0 < d < (second width − first width) results from the relative placement of the conductive layer within the fourth zone. Thus, although Kim does not expressly quantify the widths or the exact numerical value of distance d, the relative dimensional relationship recited in the claims (0 < d < [second width − first width]) represents an inherent geometric consequence of forming the conductive layer on only part of the fourth zone. Determining or optimizing the exact widths and resulting spacing would have been a matter of routine design choice and ordinary skill, involving nothing more than selecting suitable dimensions to achieve desired electrical connection and manufacturability. PNG media_image1.png 511 1441 media_image1.png Greyscale (Kim, figures 6 and 31, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 18, Kim discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the electrochemical apparatus further comprises a connecting piece (see e.g. "wire strip" in paragraph [0029] and part number 350-2 in FIG. 30), and the connecting piece is electrically connected to the first zone (see e.g. part number 350-2 in FIG. 30; the wire strips are in direct contact with the conductive layer in the first zone and therefore would be electrically connected to the first zone). Regarding Claim 19, Kim discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above). Kim does not explicitly disclose that the conductive layer comprises a conductive particle, and the conductive particle comprises at least one of a silver particle, a gold particle, a copper particle, or a carbon material. Kim, however, discloses that the conductive layer may be formed of the same kind of metal as that used for forming current collectors (see e.g. "the metal strips may be formed of the same kind of metal as that used for forming current collectors" in paragraph [0233]). Kim further discloses that the current collector is formed of copper (see e.g. "a current collector of a negative electrode is formed of copper" in paragraph [0014]). It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that a conductive layer formed as a metal strip of copper is a functional equivalent to a conductive copper particle. A skilled artisan would understand that using copper in the conductive layer, whether as a continuous strip or as discrete particles, provides the same predictable effect of electrically connecting the layers. Therefore, modifying Kim’s conductive layer to comprise conductive copper particles would have been an obvious and equivalent variation. Regarding Claim 20, Kim discloses an electronic apparatus (see e.g. "vehicle" in paragraph [0009]), comprising an electrochemical apparatus (see e.g. "electrochemical cells should be connected in series for being used in application fields such as industrial and vehicle application" in paragraph [0009]), wherein the electrochemical apparatus is configured to supply power to the electronic apparatus (see e.g. "electrochemical cells should be connected in series for being used in application fields such as industrial and vehicle application" in paragraph [0009]) and comprises an electrode assembly (see e.g. FIG. 1), comprising an electrode assembly (see e.g. FIG. 1), wherein the electrode assembly comprises: a first electrode plate (see e.g. "positive electrode" in paragraph [0004] and part number 11 in FIG. 1); a second electrode plate (see e.g. "negative electrode" in paragraph [0004] and part number 12 in FIG. 1); and a separator disposed between the first electrode plate and the second electrode plate (see e.g. "The separator 13 inserted between the positive and negative electrodes 11 and 12" in paragraph [0006] and part number 13 in FIG. 1); wherein the first electrode plate, the separator, and the second electrode plate are stacked (see e.g. FIGs. 12, 50 and 51) , and are wound around a first direction in multiple layers (see e.g. annotated figure below), wherein the first direction is perpendicular to a winding direction of the electrode assembly (see e.g. annotated figure below); wherein the first electrode plate comprises a current collector (see e.g. "current collectors" in paragraph [0019] and part number 65 in FIG. 6) and an active material layer (see e.g. "positive active material layers 64" in paragraph [0019] and part number 64 in FIG. 6), the current collector is divided into a first zone and a second zone arranged adjacent to each other along the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below), the second zone is provided with the active material layer (see e.g. annotated figure below), the first zone is further divided into a third zone and a fourth zone arranged adjacent to each other along the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below), the third zone is arranged in overlap with the separator (see e.g. annotated figure below), and the fourth zone is provided with a conductive layers (see e.g. annotated figure below); wherein the conductive layer and the fourth zone have a first width and a second width, respectively, along the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below), and wherein along the first direction, a distance d between an edge of the first zone facing away from the active material layer and an edge of the conductive layer facing away from the active material layer satisfies 0 < d < a difference between the second width and the first width (see e.g. annotated figure below). It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the claimed invention, that while Kim does not explicitly disclose the exact widths of the conductive layer and the fourth zone nor the distance d between an edge of the first zone facing away from the active material layer and an edge of the conductive layer facing away from the active material layer, Kim does disclose a conductive layer formed on only a portion of the current collector region (see e.g. FIG. 6 and annotated figure below), such that the conductive layer has a finite width that is smaller than the width of the underlying fourth zone along the first direction. As a matter of geometry, the fourth zone extends beyond the conductive layer such that the conductive layer is disposed within the fourth zone rather than spanning the entire width of the fourth zone. In particular, the fourth zone extends from a location left of the conductive layer to the edge of the current collector on the right side (see e.g. annotated figure below). Because the conductive layer terminates before the edge of the current collector, a remaining uncovered portion of the fourth zone necessarily exists between the right edge of the conductive layer and the edge of the current collector. This uncovered portion defines the distance d between the edge of the conductive layer facing away from the active material layer and the edge of the first zone facing away from the active material layer. Further, because the fourth zone extends farther than the conductive layer (i.e. on the remainder of the fourth zone on the left side of the conductive layer in the annotated figure below), the difference between the second width and the first width necessarily exceeds the distance d. Accordingly, the geometric relationship 0 < d < (second width − first width) results from the relative placement of the conductive layer within the fourth zone. Thus, although Kim does not expressly quantify the widths or the exact numerical value of distance d, the relative dimensional relationship recited in the claims (0 < d < [second width − first width]) represents an inherent geometric consequence of forming the conductive layer on only part of the fourth zone. Determining or optimizing the exact widths and resulting spacing would have been a matter of routine design choice and ordinary skill, involving nothing more than selecting suitable dimensions to achieve desired electrical connection and manufacturability. PNG media_image1.png 511 1441 media_image1.png Greyscale (Kim, figures 6 and 31, annotated for illustration) Claims 2-14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US-20100227209-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Su et al. (US-20200144605-A1). Regarding Claim 2, Kim discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above). Kim does not disclose that the first electrode plate further comprises an insulation layer disposed on the first zone, and the insulation layer is located between the conductive layer and the active material layer. Kim, however, discloses the first electrode plate comprises a bare current collector portion disposed on the first zone and located between the conductive layer and the active material layer (see e.g. the bare current collector in between active material layer (part number 362) and conductive layer (part number 361) in FIG. 31). Su, in the same field of endeavor, electrodes assemblies for use in electrochemical apparatus discloses an electrode plate (see e.g. FIG. 1 of Su) comprising an insulating layer disposed on a bare current collector located between a conductive layer and an active material layer (see e.g. "insulating layer" in paragraph [0056] and part number 14 in FIG. 1 of Su). Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 first electrode plate of Kim such that it further comprises an insulation layer disposed on the first zone, the insulation layer being located between the conductive layer and the active material layer as taught by Su et al. in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. Regarding Claim 3, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the first width is less than or equal to the second width (see e.g. annotated figure below). PNG media_image2.png 507 1031 media_image2.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 6, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 4, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 3 (see e.g. claim 3 rejection above). Kim does not disclose an insulating layer. Kim, however, discloses a bare portion of the current collector located between the conductive layer and the active material layer (see e.g. annotated figure below). This bare portion defines a region along the first direction between the conductive layer and the active material layer and therefore establishes the corresponding dimensional space in which the claimed insulating layer is disposed. Su, however, discloses an electrode plate (see e.g. FIG. 1 of Su) comprising an insulating layer disposed on a bare current collector located between a conductive layer and an active material layer (see e.g. “insulating layer” in paragraph [0056] and part number 14 in FIG. 1 of Su). Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 first electrode plate of Kim such that it further comprises an insulation layer disposed on the first zone, the insulation layer being located between the conductive layer and the active material layer as taught by Su et al. in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. Kim in view of Su further discloses that the insulation layer has a third width, and the third width is less than or equal to a quarter of the first width (see e.g. annotated figure below). With respect to the claimed dimensional limitation, Kim discloses the width of the bare current collector portion located between the conductive layer and the active material layer (see e.g. annotated figure below). Because the insulating layer of Su is disposed on this bare current collector portion, the insulating layer would necessarily have a width corresponding to, and not exceeding, the width of that bare portion. The relative widths of the conductive layer (first width) and the bare current collector portion are shown in Kim (see e.g. annotated figure below), and the bare portion is less than or equal to one quarter of the first width. Accordingly, when the insulating layer of Su is incorporated into the structure of Kim at the disclosed location, the resulting insulating layer would have a third width along the first direction that is less than or equal to a quarter of the first width. PNG media_image3.png 498 810 media_image3.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 6, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 5, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above). Kim does not disclose that a difference between a thickness of the conductive layer and a thickness of the insulation layer is less than or equal to 30 µm. Su, however discloses that the thickness of the conductive layer is 0 µm (see e.g. bare current collector next to part number 14 in FIG. 1) and the thickness of the insulating layer is about 8 μm to about 30 μm (see e.g. "the thickness of the insulating layer 14 is from about 8 μm to about 30 μm." in paragraph [0048] of Su). Therefore, the difference between a thickness of the conductive layer and a thickness of the insulation layer is greater than or equal to 8 μm and less than or equal to 30 µm. Su discloses a range that lies within the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a range within the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I). Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 first electrode plate of Kim such that it further comprises an insulation layer that has a difference of thickness with the conductive layer that is greater than or equal to 8 μm and less than or equal to 30 µma s taught by Su et al. in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. Regarding Claim 6, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above). Kim does not disclose that the insulation layer comprises at least one of an inorganic particle or a binder, and the inorganic particle comprises at least one of aluminum oxide, silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide, barium titanate, titanium dioxide, zirconium dioxide, barium oxide, magnesium hydroxide, or boehmite. Su, however, discloses that the insulating layer comprises of an organic particle and the organic particle comprises at least one of aluminum oxide, silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide, zirconium dioxide, magnesium hydroxide, or boehmite (see e.g. " the insulating layer includes at least one of inorganic particles and a polymer, where the inorganic particles are selected from the group consisting of aluminum oxide, silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide... zirconium dioxide... magnesium hydroxide... boehmite" in paragraph [0015] of Su). Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 electrochemical apparatus of Kim such that it includes an insulation layer that comprises at least one of aluminum oxide, silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide, zirconium dioxide, magnesium hydroxide, or boehmite as taught by Su in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. Regarding Claim 7, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 2 (see e.g. claim 2 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the first zone located at an inner side of a winding structure and the first zone located at an outer side of the winding structure are electrically connected through the conductive layers (see e.g. annotated figure below). PNG media_image4.png 444 678 media_image4.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 31, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 8, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the first zones located at adjacent layers of the winding structure are connected through the conductive layers (see e.g. annotated figure below). PNG media_image5.png 666 989 media_image5.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 31, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 9, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the thickness of the conductive layer is 500 µm to 1000 µm (see e.g. "the thickness of the electrolyte isolation barrier walls ranges from about 0.5 mm to about 1.0 mm." in paragraph [0125]; Kim using electrolyte isolation barrier walls and metal strips interchangeably throughout the disclosure in the case where the electrolyte isolation barrier walls are metal strips and therefore the conductive layer Kim discloses the thickness of 0.5 mm to about 1.0 mm which is equivalent to 500 µm to 1000 µm). Kim discloses a range that overlaps at the end point of the range claimed by the instant application. In the case where the prior art discloses a range that overlaps with the end point of the claimed range, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05 (I). Regarding Claim 10, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the first zone is located at an end part of the current collector in the first direction (see e.g. annotated figure below). PNG media_image6.png 466 1067 media_image6.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 6, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 11, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the conductive layers are arranged spaced apart from each other in the winding direction (see annotated figure below). PNG media_image7.png 638 1143 media_image7.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 51, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 12, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above). Kim does not disclose an insulating layer. Kim, however, discloses the location for the insulating layer (see annotated figure below). Kim further discloses that the insulation layers are arranged spaced apart from each other in the winding direction (see annotated figure below). Su, however, discloses an electrode plate (see e.g. FIG. 1 of Su) comprising an insulating layer disposed on a bare current collector located between a conductive layer and an active material layer (see e.g. "insulating layer" in paragraph [0056] and part number 14 in FIG. 1 of Su). Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 electrochemical apparatus of Kim such that it includes an insulating layer disposed on the bare current collector located between a conductive layer and an active material layer as taught by Su et al. in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. PNG media_image8.png 660 1156 media_image8.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 51, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 13, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 11 (see e.g. claim 11 rejection above). Kim does not disclose an insulating layer. Kim, however, discloses the location for the insulating layer (see annotated figure below). Kim also discloses that the insulation layers are arranged spaced apart from each other in the winding direction (see annotated figure below). Su, discloses an electrode plate (see e.g. FIG. 1 of Su) comprising an insulating layer disposed on a bare current collector located between a conductive layer and an active material layer (see e.g. "insulating layer" in paragraph [0056] and part number 14 in FIG. 1 of Su). Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 electrochemical apparatus of Kim such that it includes an insulating layer disposed on the bare current collector located between a conductive layer and an active material layer as taught by Su et al. in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. PNG media_image8.png 660 1156 media_image8.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 51, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 14, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 11 (see e.g. claim 11 rejection above). Kim does not explicitly disclose that when viewed from the first direction, the conductive layers show a plurality of fan-shaped zones from inner sides to outer sides of the winding structure. Kim, however, discloses an electrochemical apparatus that has no compositional or structural distinction to what is claimed by the instant application. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that if the electrochemical apparatus disclosed by Kim was viewed from the first direction, the conductive layers would show a plurality of fan-shaped zones from inner sides to outer sides of the winding structure. Thus, this is inherent in the electrochemical apparatus disclosed by Kim and a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2112 (III) and MPEP 2112.01 (I). Regarding Claim 16, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 7 (see e.g. claim 7 rejection above). Kim further discloses a current collector plate (see e.g. part number 375 in FIG. 33), the current collector plate is electrically connected to the current collector (see e.g. part numbers 375 and 371 in FIG. 33; the current collector plate (375) is attached to the current collector (371) and is thus electrically connected to the current collector), the current collector plate comprises a top plate (see annotated figure below) and a protrusion disposed on the top plate (see annotated figure below), and the protrusion is located between the first zones of adjacent layers of the winding structure (see e.g. FIG. 37; the current collector plate is wound up and the protrusion would thus be located between the first zones of the adjacent layers of the winding structure). PNG media_image9.png 302 460 media_image9.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 33, annotated for illustration) Regarding Claim 17, Kim in view of Su discloses the electrochemical apparatus of claim 16 (see e.g. claim 16 rejection above). Kim further discloses that the conductive part is located between the top plate and the top of the protrusion (see annotated figure below), and the conductive part is electrically connected to the first zone (see annotated figure below). Kim further discloses that the insulation layers are arranged spaced apart from each other in the winding direction (see annotated figure below). Kim does not disclose that the protrusion comprises an insulating part. Su, however, discloses an insulating layer on a bare current collector (see e.g. part number 14 in FIG. 1). It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the insulating layer of Su could be coated on top of the protrusion disclosed in Kim, thus creating a protrusion that comprises both a conductive part and an insulating part, the conductive part being located between the top plate and the insulating part, and the conductive part being electrically connected to the first zone. Su further teaches that when an insulating layer is included in the electrode assembly a failure caused by an internal short circuit generated when the electrochemical device is pierced by an external force is avoided, thereby effectively improving the safety performance of the electrochemical device in a penetration test (see e.g. paragraph [0005] of Su). 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 protrusion of Kim such that it includes an insulating part as taught by Su et al. in order to avoid a failure caused by internal short circuit of the electrochemical device as suggested by Su. PNG media_image10.png 388 511 media_image10.png Greyscale (Kim, figure 33, annotated for illustration) Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US-20100227209-A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US-20190027788-A1). Regarding Claim 21, Kim discloses the electrochemical apparatus according to claim 1 (see e.g. claim 1 rejection above). Kim does not disclose that the conductive layer comprises a conductive particle, and the conductive particle comprises a carbon material, wherein the carbon material comprises one or more selected from the group consisting of carbon nanotubes, conductive carbon black, or graphene. Liu, however, in the same field of endeavor, wound electrochemical apparatus, discloses a conductive layer that comprises carbon nanotubes and graphene (see e.g. "a CNT/graphene mat as the central conductive layer" in paragraph [0182] of Liu). Liu also teaches that utilizing a conductive later of this type leads to better utilization of the electrode active material particles contributing to the lithium ion storage capacity (see e.g. paragraph [0204] of Liu). 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 conductive layer of Kim such that it comprises a carbon material such as carbon nanotubes or graphene as taught by Liu et al. in order to allow for better utilization of the electrode active material as suggested by Liu. Conclusion 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 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 22, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 28, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603271
APPARATUS FOR PRE-LITHIATION OF NEGATIVE ELECTRODE AND METHOD FOR PRE-LITHIATION OF NEGATIVE ELECTRODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603369
BATTERY MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12586782
ACTIVE MATERIAL, ANODE LAYER, BATTERY, AND METHODS FOR PRODUCING THESE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12562430
BATTERY MODULE, AND BATTERY PACK AND AUTOMOBILE INCLUDING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12548795
ELECTROLYTE ADDITIVES FOR CAPACITOR-ASSISTED BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
100%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+0.0%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 15 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month