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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/03/2026 has been received and the information that was not lined through is being considered by the examiner. The NPL document labeled as the “Office Action”, does not include an English translation and so cannot be considered.
Claim Status
Claims 6 & 7 are new and claims 1-7 are pending in the application and are examined below.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0153147 (Muroi).
Regarding claim 1, Muroi teaches a wound secondary battery that includes positive and negative current collectors having respective active material on each and separators between (Abstract). Each of the positive and negative electrodes has a band of current collector that doesn’t have active material on it (Fig. 2; [0063-0065]). The positive and negative electrodes have their uncovered parts bent toward the central axis, thereby creating flat surfaces and a respective current collector is attached to each end part (Fig. 1; [0066-0070]). Grooves are formed on the one or more flat surfaces (Figs 4; [0066-0070]). The beginning part of the negative electrode has an uncovered part ([0069]). The positive electrode has an insulating resin provided between the covered and uncovered part of the foil ([0067]).
Muroi is silent to the negative electrode having the insulating resin. However, it is known to include the same insulating resin as taught for the positive electrode, for the negative electrode and therefore would be obvious to include it on the negative electrode as well.
Regarding claim 2, Muroi is silent to a third negative electrode uncovered portion at the end of the winding; however, this is a well-known construction type and would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 3, while Muroi teaches an insulating resin part, the thickness of this part is not discussed. However, varying this thickness is known to one of ordinary skill in the art and it would be obvious to make a thickness that was the same or less than the thickness of the active material in order to not cause interference with the overall thickness of the electrode and interfere with the winding or function of the battery.
Regarding claims 4 & 5, an electric tool is taught using the battery (Fig. 12; [0133]).
Claims 1, 6 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0153147 (Muroi) in view of US 6,335,114 (Ueshima).
It is noted since new claims 6 and 7 depend from claim 1, claim 1 inherently has to be rejected in order to meet the limitations of new claims 6 & 7. The teachings of Muroi as discussed above are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 6, Muroi teaches the length of the positive electrode active material uncovered part in a width direction is greater than a length of the first negative electrode active material uncovered part and the insulating resin part in a width direction (Fig. 2; [0065]).
Muroi is silent to the negative electrode having the insulating resin.
Ueshima teaches that placing an insulating resin on both the positive and negative electrodes is known and equivalent to placing the insulating resin on only one electrode (Figs. 2 & 11; 21:20-40, 21:50-55, 23:5-8, 27:55-63). The resin layer protects from short-circuiting.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to substitute Muroi’s insulating layer on the single electrode with including the insulating on both electrodes since Ueshima teaches the method is both known and is equivalent.
Regarding claim 7, Muroi teaches a portion of the positive electrode active material uncovered part protruding from one end in a width direction of the separator is greater than a length of a portion of the insulating resin part and the first negative electrode active material uncovered part protruding from another end in a width direction of the separator (Fig. 2; [0065]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/27/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Muroi doesn’t teach the negative electrode having an insulating resin and it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill to include the resin on the negative electrode.
These arguments are not found persuasive since, as discussed above, Ueshima illustrates that including resin on both electrodes is well known in the art and is an optional equivalent selection to only including the resin on one electrode. Furthermore, JP2009-043515 also shows that it is known to apply the resin layer to both the positive and negative electrodes (Fig. 1 & 2; [0021]).
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 KEITH WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-3458. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8am - 4pm.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KEITH WALKER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights