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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/24/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claim 1 has been amended; support for the amendment can be found in Fig. 9B and 12.
Claims 1-6 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo (US 2017/0149043 A1, cited in IDS filed 07/13/2023) in view of Hattori (US 20140242439 A1, previously cited) and Yoshida (US 20160372722 A1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Koo discloses a secondary ([0025]) battery (Fig. 1; 100) comprising:
an electrode body (Fig. 2; element 110) that includes a positive electrode plate (Fig. 2; element 110a) and a negative electrode plate (Fig. 2; element 110b);
an exterior body (Fig. 1; element 120) that has an opening ([0031]) and accommodates the electrode body (110);
a sealing plate (Fig. 1; element 130) that has a terminal mounting hole (Fig. 5; element 132) and seals (Fig. 2) the opening ([0031]);
a current collector (Fig. 2; element 152) that is electrically connected to the negative electrode plate (110b); and
a terminal (Fig. 2; element 151) that is connected to the current collector (152) and inserted in the terminal mounting hole (132),
wherein the current collector (152) has a current-collector through hole (Fig. 3; element 152a),
wherein a spot-faced hole (Fig. 5; element 152c) is formed around the current-collector through hole (152a),
wherein the spot-faced hole (152c) has a bottom surface (annotated Fig. 5; element B) and a side surface (annotated Fig. 5; element S), the side surface (S) connects to an outer periphery (annotated Fig. 5; outermost periphery of B) of the bottom surface (B), and to an outer edge (annotated Fig. 5; OE) of the spot-faced hole (152c) adjacent to (Fig. 5) a major surface (annotated Fig. 5; MS) of the current collector (152)
PNG
media_image1.png
392
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
426
619
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
487
680
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein the terminal (151) is inserted (Fig. 5) in the current-collector through hole (152a) and has a riveted portion (Fig.4 ; element 151R1 and 151R2) which is bent outward (Fig. 4) from the current-collector through hole (152a) in a radial direction (annotated Fig. 4; element R) of the current-collector through hole (152a),
wherein a protrusion (Fig. 5; element 152b) is formed on the bottom surface (B) in such a manner as to extend around the current-collector through hole (152a), the protrusion (152b) being located between the current- collector through hole (152a) and the side surface (S) in the radial direction (R) of the current-collector through hole (152a),
wherein a gap (annotated Fig. 5; G) is formed between the protrusion (152b) and the side surface (S),
PNG
media_image4.png
362
558
media_image4.png
Greyscale
wherein the riveted portion (151R1, 151R2) of the terminal (151) covers (Fig. 4) the protrusion (152b),
wherein a portion (Fig. 4; element 151R2) of the riveted portion (151R1, 151R2) is located nearer (Fig. 6), in the radial direction (R) of the current collector through hole (152a), to the side surface (S) than to a top (annotated Fig. 5; element T) of the
PNG
media_image5.png
455
682
media_image5.png
Greyscale
protrusion (152b),
PNG
media_image6.png
392
662
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein an end (annotated Fig. 4; element E) of the riveted portion (151R1, 151R2) of the terminal (151) is in contact with the side surface (S),
PNG
media_image7.png
408
621
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
518
922
media_image8.png
Greyscale
in a thickness direction (annotated Fig. 5; T) of the sealing plate (130), a dimension (annotated Fig. 5; D1) of the side surface (S) and a dimension (annotated Fig. 5; D2) between the bottom surface (B) and a distal end (annotated Fig. 5; DE) of the protrusion (152b),
wherein the riveted portion (151R1, 151R2) includes a first surface (annotated Fig. 6; element 1S) thereof that faces away from the protrusion (152b) and that extends between the protrusion (152b) and the side surface (S) in the radial direction (R),
Koo fails to disclose “wherein the riveted portion of the terminal is weld-connected to the side surface of the spot-faced hole so as to form a weld portion”, “wherein in the thickness direction of the sealing plate, the dimension of the side surface is larger than the dimension between the bottom surface and the distal end of the protrusion”, “the first surface is nearer the bottom surface with decreasing distance to the side surface in the radial direction” or “wherein the weld portion extends across portions of the first surface of the riveted portion, the side surface of the spot-faced hole, and the outer edge of the spot-faced hole”, “wherein a groove is formed around the spot-faced hole, wherein the outer edge of the spot-faced hole has a first corner and a second corner, wherein the first corner is in contact with the side surface, and wherein the second corner is in contact with the groove”.
Hattori discloses wherein in a thickness direction (annotated Fig. 8A: T) of a sealing plate (Fig. 1; 16), a dimension (annotated Fig. 8A; D1) of a side surface (Fig. 8A; 18j) is larger (Fig. 8A) than a dimension (annotated Fig. 8A: D2) between a bottom surface (Fig. 8A; 18d) and a distal end (annotated Fig. 8A; DE) of a protrusion (Fig. 8A; 18e).
PNG
media_image9.png
224
263
media_image9.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida by making, in a thickness direction of the sealing plate, a dimension of the side surface larger than a dimension between the bottom surface and a distal end of the protrusion because Hattori teaches that these relative dimensions are known in the art and it has been held that a change in relative dimensions is obvious when a device having these dimensions would not perform differently than a prior art device.
Koo in view of Hattori fails to disclose “wherein the riveted portion of the terminal is weld-connected to the side surface of the spot-faced hole so as to form a weld portion”, “the first surface is nearer the bottom surface with decreasing distance to the side surface in the radial direction”, “wherein the weld portion extends across portions of the first surface of the riveted portion, the side surface of the spot-faced hole, and the outer edge of the spot-faced hole”, “wherein a groove is formed around the spot-faced hole, wherein the outer edge of the spot-faced hole has a first corner and a second corner, wherein the first corner is in contact with the side surface, and wherein the second corner is in contact with the groove”.
PNG
media_image10.png
354
390
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Yoshida discloses wherein a riveted portion (Fig. 5; 9c) of a terminal (Fig. 5; 9) is weld-connected (Fig. 5; LB) to a side surface (annotated Fig. 5; S) of a spot-faced hole (Fig. 5; 8e) so as to form a weld portion (Fig. 5; 50),
a first surface (annotated Fig. 5; 1S) is nearer a bottom surface (annotated Fig. 5; B) with decreasing distance to the side surface (S) in a radial direction (annotated Fig.; 5; R),
PNG
media_image11.png
428
386
media_image11.png
Greyscale
wherein the weld portion (50) extends across portions (portions of 1S, S, and OE including 50) of the first surface (1S) of the riveted portion (9e), the side surface (S) of the spot-faced hole (8e), and an outer edge (annotated Fig. 5; OE) of the spot-faced hole (8e),
wherein a groove (Fig. 5; 8f) is formed around the spot-faced hole (8e), wherein the outer edge (OE) of the spot-faced hole (8e) has a first corner (annotated Fig. 4; 1C) and a second corner (annotated Fig. 4; 2C), wherein the first corner (1C) is in contact (Fig. 5) with the side surface (S), and wherein the second corner (2C) is in contact (Fig. 5) with the groove (8f).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Koo in view of Hattori by substituting the first surface and outer edge for those of Koo in view of Hattori, and adding the weld portion and groove of Yoshida to the invention of Koo in view of Hattori, such that the riveted portion of the terminal is weld-connected to the side surface of the spot-faced hole so as to form a weld portion, the first surface is nearer the bottom surface with decreasing distance to the side surface in the radial direction, the weld portion extends across portions of the first surface of the riveted portion, the side surface of the spot-faced hole, and the outer edge of the spot-faced hole, a groove is formed around the spot-faced hole, the outer edge of the spot-faced hole has a first corner and a second corner, wherein the first corner is in contact with the side surface, and wherein the second corner is in contact with the groove as taught by Yoshida. In doing so, one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably expected to have reliably prevented poor welding between the riveted portion and the spot-faced hole ([0047]) and the flowing of metal into the spot-faced hole ([0041]) as taught by Yoshida.
Regarding claim 2, Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida fails to disclose wherein a surface of the protrusion has a curved surface portion.
Hattori discloses a secondary battery (Fig. 1; 10; [0030]) comprising: a current collector (Fig. 8A; 18) that has a current-collector through hole (Fig. 8A; 18c), wherein a spot-faced hole (Fig. 9A; 18d, 18j) is formed around the current-collector through hole (18c), a protrusion (Fig. 8A; 18e) is formed on a bottom surface (Fig. 8A; 18d) in such a manner as to extend around (Fig. 6A) the current-collector through hole (18c), wherein a surface (“a corner”; [0048]) of the protrusion (18e) has a curved (“rounded”; [0048]) surface portion (rounded corner taught in [0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida by rounding a corner of the protrusion as taught by Hattori such that a surface of the protrusion has a curved surface portion, in order to obtain a rotation prevention effect as taught by Hattori ([0047]).
Regarding claim 3, Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida fails to disclose wherein a height of the protrusion is 0.1 times to 0.5 times a depth of the spot-faced hole.
Hattori discloses a secondary battery (Fig. 1; 10; [0030]) comprising: a current collector (Fig. 8A; 18) that has a current-collector through hole (Fig. 8A; 18c), wherein a spot-faced hole (Fig. 9A; 18d, 18j) is formed around the current-collector through hole (18c), a protrusion (Fig. 8A; 18e) is formed on a bottom surface (Fig. 8A; 18d) in such a manner as to extend around (Fig. 6A) the current-collector through hole (18c), wherein a height (annotated Fig. 8A; H1) of the protrusion (18e) is 0.1 times to 0.5 times ([0050]; Fig. 8A teach H2>H1) a depth (annotated Fig. 8A; H2; “height hp of the wall 18j”; [0050]) of the spot-faced hole (18d, 18j).
PNG
media_image12.png
354
405
media_image12.png
Greyscale
The examiner notes that [0050] and Fig. 8A of Hattori teach that the H2>H1, because the height (H1) of the protrusion (18e) is less than (Fig. 8A) the height (annotated Fig. 8A; H3) of the caulked portion 12e, and Hattori teaches that the height (annotated Fig. 8A; H3) of the caulked portion 12e is less than the depth (“height hp of the wall 18j”; [0050]) of the spot-faced hole (18j, 18d).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida by making a height of the protrusion less than a depth of the spot-faced hole as taught by Hattori such that a height of the protrusion is 0.1 times to 0.5 times a depth of the spot-faced hole because such a change in dimensions would not be expected to change the performance of the device and it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was 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 was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Regarding claim 4, Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida fails to disclose wherein a corner at an edge of the current-collector through hole has a radius of curvature of 0.05 mm or smaller.
Yoshida discloses wherein a corner ([0041) at an edge ([0041]) of a current-collector through hole (“countersunk hole”; [0041]) has a radius of curvature ([0041]) that is prevented from being large ([0041]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida by making a corner at an edge of the current-collector through hole have a radius of curvature of 0.05 mm or smaller, to prevent the radius of curvature from being large as taught by Yoshida in order to avoid a large and undesirable gap between the current collector and terminal as taught by Yoshida ([0010]). Further, it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was 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 was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (see MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding claim 5, Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida discloses wherein the riveted portion (151R1, 151R2) overlaps the protrusion (152b) when viewed in a direction (annotated Fig. 4; element D) in which the terminal (151) is inserted in the current-collector through hole (152a).
PNG
media_image13.png
392
643
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Koo in view of Hattori and Yoshida discloses wherein the protrusion (152b) has a ring-like shape (Fig. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRACE A KENLAW whose telephone number is (571)272-1253. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-6:00 PM.
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, Tiffany Legette-Thompson can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/G.A.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723