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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1-3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai (JP 2006/032112, see Machine Translation) in view of Yoo et al. (US 2017/0098813) and further in view of Nakura (US 2012/0088137).
Regarding claims 1-3, Arai discloses in Figs 1-3, a secondary battery ([0014]) comprising an electrode wound body (ref 4) including a positive electrode (ref 1) having a band shape (Figs 1-3) and a negative electrode (ref 2) having a band shape (Figs 1-3), the positive electrode (ref 1) and the negative electrode (ref 2) being stacked with a separator (ref 3) interposed there between (Figs 1-3); a positive electrode current collector plate (ref 10); a negative electrode current collector plate (ref 11); and a battery can (ref 6) containing the electrode wound body (ref 4), the positive electrode current collector plate (ref 10), and the negative electrode current collector plate (ref 11), wherein the positive electrode (ref 1) includes, on a positive electrode foil ([0016], ref 1a) having a band shape (Figs 1-3), a positive electrode active material covered part (ref 1b) covered with a positive electrode active material layer ([0016]), and a positive electrode active material uncovered part (ref 9), the positive electrode active material uncovered part (ref 9) is coupled to (Figs 1, 3) the positive electrode current collector plate (ref 10) at one of end parts (top, Figs 1-3) of the electrode wound body (ref 4), the negative electrode (ref 2) includes, at a first major surface (right side, Fig 1, 3) of a negative electrode foil ([0017]) having a band shape (Figs 1-3), a first negative electrode active material covered part (ref 2b1, Fig 1 below) covered with a negative electrode active material layer ([0017]), a first negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12R, Fig 1 below) extending in a longitudinal direction (Figs 1, 3) of the negative electrode foil ([0017]), and a first insulating layer (ref 14R, Fig 1 below) provided between (Figs 1, 3) the first negative electrode active material covered part (ref 2b1, Fig 1 below) and the first negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12R, Fig 2 below), the negative electrode (ref 2) further includes, at a second major surface (left side, Figs 1, 3) which is another major surface of the negative electrode foil ([0017]), a second negative electrode active material covered part (ref 2b2, Fig 1 below) covered with a negative electrode active material layer ([0017]), a second negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12L, Fig 1 below) extending in the longitudinal direction (Figs 1, 3) of the negative electrode foil ([0017]), and a second insulating layer (ref 14L, Fig 1 below) provided between (Figs 1, 3) the second negative electrode active material covered part (ref 2b2, Fig 1 below) and the second negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12L, Fig 1 below), the electrode wound body (ref 4) has a flat surface (“FLAT” bottom, Fig 1 below), in which a negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12) including the first negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12R, Fig 1 below) and the second negative electrode active material uncovered part (ref 12L, below) is bent toward a central axis (Figs 1, 3) of the electrode wound body (ref 4) to form the flat surface (“FLAT”, at end of ref 12, Fig 1 below), and the negative electrode current collector plate (ref 11) is coupled to the flat surface (depicted in Fig 1, below), and when at least the negative electrode side of the electrode wound body (ref 4) is viewed in a section taken along a plane including the central axis (Figs 1, 3), the first major surface (right side, Fig 1 below) faces toward the central axis (Figs 1, 3) of the electrode wound body (ref 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
522
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Arai does not explicitly disclose a groove provided in an end face on the negative electrode side,
Yoo et al. discloses in Figs 1-9, a secondary battery (ref 100) including a wound electrode assembly (ref 110) disposed within a casing (ref 120). The casing has an outer body (ref 121) disposed with a coupling groove (ref 124) on a bottom end face thereof ([0040-[0042], Figs 4-5). This coupling groove (ref 124) enhances the connection of the casing outer body (ref 121) to the bottom of the battery structure (Figs 4-5, [0040]-[0042]).
Yoo et al. and Arai are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the groove disclosed by Yoo et al. into the structure of Arai to enhance the coupling / connection of the outer structure of the battery, thereby enhancing overall battery structural integrity and performance.
Arai also does not explicitly disclose a length of the first insulating layer is smaller than a length of the second insulating layer, a ratio of the length of the first insulating layer to the length of the second insulating layer is higher than or equal to 52 percent and lower than or equal to 92 percent, and a difference between the length of the first insulating layer and the length of the second insulating layer is greater than or equal to 0.1 millimeters and less than or equal to 1.0 millimeters.
While Arai does not explicitly disclose a length of the first insulating layer is smaller than a length of the second insulating layer, the change in the relative lengths of the first and second insulating layers is not considered to confer patentability to the claims. Nakura (see [0042]) teaches that it was known in the art at the time of the invention that varying size dimensions of an insulating layer will vary the production costs of said battery. Therefore the battery cost of production is a variable that can be modified, among others, by varying the relative lengths of the first and second insulating layers. For that reason, the relative lengths of the first and second insulating layers, would have been considered a result effective variable by one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed. As such, without showing unexpected results, the relative lengths of the first and second insulating layers cannot be considered critical. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have optimized, by routine experimentation, the relative lengths of the first and second insulating layers in the battery of Arai as taught by Nakura to obtain the desired battery production costs (In re Boesch, 617 F.2d. 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 223).
Further, while the reference does not explicitly disclose the specific relative lengths of the first and second insulating layers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to change the lengths of the first and second insulating layers, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size (or dimension) of a component. A change in size (dimension) is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, and the device having the claimed dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device, Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984). It is well known in the art that the insulation performance and structural properties vary depending on their relative dimensions and that many design parameters are taken into consideration when determining the relative dimensions of the first and second insulating layers.
Regarding claim 6, Arai et al. discloses in Figs 1-3, electronic equipment ([0028]) comprising the secondary battery ([0014]) as set forth above.
Regarding claim 7, Arai et al. discloses in Figs 1-3, an electric tool ([0028]) comprising the secondary battery as set forth above.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai (JP 2006/032112, see Machine Translation) in view of Yoo et al. (US 2017/0098813) and Nakura (US 2012/0088137) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Ono et al. (JP 2010/010117, see Machine Translation).
Regarding claim 4, modified Aria discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above but does not explicitly disclose the first insulating layer and the second insulating layer each include polyvinylidene difluoride.
Ono et al. discloses in Figs 1-2, a battery (Abstract) including an electrode insulating layer (ref 18) comprising polyvinylidene difluoride ([0044]). This configuration enhances the insulation of electrodes of the battery and thereby enhances overall battery performance and safety ([0044], [0006]-[0008]).
Arai and Ono et al. are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries and insulation layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the PVDF of Ono et al. into the insulation layer of Arai to enhance the performance of the insulating layer, thereby enhancing overall battery performance and safety.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arai (JP 2006/032112, see Machine Translation) in view of Yoo et al. (US 2017/0098813) and Nakura (US 2012/0088137) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ohata et al. (US 2007/0042270).
Regarding claim 5, modified Aria discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above but does not explicitly disclose the first insulating layer and the second insulating layer each include: a metal having an X-ray shielding effect higher than an X- ray shielding effect of a metal included in the negative electrode foil; or a metal compound including a metal having an X-ray shielding effect higher than the X-ray shielding effect of the metal included in the negative electrode foil.
Ohata et al. discloses in Figs 1-4, a secondary battery (Abstract) including an electrode comprising an insulating layer ([0029]). The insulating layer comprises tungsten oxide ([0038]) which enhances the performance of the insulating layer ([0038]).
Ohata et al. and Arai are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries and insulating layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the tungsten oxide as disclosed by Ohata et al. into the insulation layer of Arai to enhance performance of the insulating layer and thereby enhancing overall battery performance and safety.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH J DOUYETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8A - 4P 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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/KENNETH J DOUYETTE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725