DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgement has been made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 USC 119 (a-d). The certified copy has been filed on 08/11/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
To date, no information disclosure statement has been made of record byApplicant. Applicant is invited to submit any and all known pertinent prior art, ifany is known to Applicant, in accordance with 37 CFR §1.56, 1.97, 1.98, etc.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “ face of the cell” should be clearly identified and tabs must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). In addition, it is not clear the difference between structural elements such as “face of the cell” No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 05/29/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the subject matter of Claims 14-20 (Species II) does not include any additional concepts or features, nor does it suggest a different direction for search. This is not found persuasive because a search for a cylindrical battery is drastically different from a search a battery module for, since Species I contents a structurally and patentable different element such as thickness of the first insulating seal and the thickness of the second insulating seal, plurality of a first and second nanopores. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record and requires search within different classes like H01M10/123 for Species I and H01 M50/20 for Species II.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims Status.
This Office Action is responsive to the Remarks/amendment filed on 05/29/2026. Claims 1-20 were pending. Claims 1-20 are now pending. Claims 14-20 have been withdrawn from examination as being drawn to non-elected Species Claims 1-13 are presented for examination. Applicants’ arguments have been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In claim 1 it is unclear what kind of structure claimed by the term on “a same face of the cell” (see instant Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is also unclear what insulative connection means? For examination purposes it is interpreted as claimed elements electrically insulated from each other.
Claims 2-13 depend from claim 1 directly or indirectly and fall therewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2002/0142195 to Ehara.
Regarding claim 1, Ehara discloses a cylindrical battery (the secondary battery may be a cylindrical battery para 60), comprising: a housing (battery case, Abstract), provided with an opening (Fig. 3) a cell (4), arranged in the housing, the cell is provided with a first tab and a second tab with the polarity opposite to that of the first tab, and the first tab and the second tab are both located on a same end face of the cell ( leads 3 and 5 interpreted as a part of tab and located on the same face of the cell, See marked Fig.3 below) and a top cover assembly, sealing the opening and comprising a cover (41, Fig. 3), a first conductive portion and a second conductive portion, wherein the cover, the first conductive portion (45) and the second conductive portion (47, terminals are necessarily conductive) are in insulating connection (electrically insulated from each other but part of cover assembly 41), the first conductive portion is connected with the first tab, and the second conductive portion is connected with the second tab. As such instant claim 1 is anticipated by Ehara.
PNG
media_image2.png
721
1340
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Ehara
Regarding claim 11, Ehara discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. In addition, Ehara teaches that terminals 45 and 47 are made from cold-plated nickel connected with nickel lead (para 37). As such, the first conductive portion comprises the same material as a first tab and the second conductive portion comprises the same material as the second conductive tab (nickel) Therefore claimed limitation considered met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application is currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2, 12 and 13 are under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 2002/0142195 to Ehara.
Regarding claim 2, Ehara discloses wherein a first through hole and a second through hole are formed in the cover in the thickness direction thereof in a penetrating manner, the first conductive portion is arranged in the first through hole and the second conductive portion is arranged in the second through hole (45 and 47, Fig. 3 above). Ehara does not expressly disclose an insulation sealing connection of the first and second conductive portion from a cover. However, it would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to seal the first and second conductive portion from the cover in order to avoid a short circuit if cover made from conductive material.
Regarding claim 12, Ehara discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. Ehara does not expressly disclose wherein one of the first conductive portions and the second conductive portion is made of aluminum while the other one of the first conductive portion and the second conductive portion is made of copper or nickel-plated copper. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to make one of the first conductive portions and the second conductive portion from aluminum while the other one of the first conductive portion and the second conductive portion from of copper or nickel-plated copper, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 13, Ehara discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 1 and incorporated therein. In addition, Ehara discloses that case 7 made from aluminum (para 37). Ehara does not expressly disclose the cover made from the same material. However, It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make combine the cover and the case made from the same material to avoid formation of electrochemical pair at the site of connection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record- US 20120164495, US 2002/0142195, US 6132900 fail to teach or suggest each and every limitation of claim 3. Claims 4-10 depend from claim 3 directly or indirectly and fall therewith.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER USYATINSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7703. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Jonathan Leong can be reached at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/Alexander Usyatinsky/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
