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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: END CAP COMPRISING A PRESSURE RELIEF STRUCTURE, BATTERY CELL, BATTERY, AND POWER CONSUMING DEVICE.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “close to” in Claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close to” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For example, it is unclear what distance from the inner surface constitutes being “close to” the inner surface.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “the cap body is provided with a recess which is recessed from the outer surface in a direction toward the inner surface” in light of Fig. 7, [00107] of the instant specification.
Claims 8-9 are dependent on Claim 7 and therefore are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the reasons set forth above.
The term “close to” in Claim 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close to” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For example, it is unclear what distance from the inner surface constitutes being “close to” the bottom wall of the case.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the claim to recite “the end cap is arranged on a side of the battery cell facing a bottom wall of the case” in light of [00139]-[00141] of the instant specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-8, 10-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimoji et al. (JP 2007-141518 A, cited on the IDS dated February 28, 2025, see also the EPO machine generated English translation provided with this Office Action).
Regarding Claim 1, Shimoji discloses in Figs. 1-2 an end cap (1a, 5), characterized by comprising:
a cap body (1a) provided with a pressure relief portion (5d) ([0015]-[0018]); and
a pressure relief groove (5c) provided in the cap body (1a), the pressure relief groove (5c) delimiting the pressure relief portion (5d) ([0015]-[0018]);
wherein the pressure relief portion (5d) is bent in a thickness direction of the cap body (1a) ([0015]-[0018]).
Regarding Claim 2, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses in the thickness direction, the cap body (1a) has an inner surface and an outer surface opposite each other, and the pressure relief portion (5d) is bent in a direction from the inner surface to the outer surface (Fig. 2, [0017]).
Regarding Claim 3, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses in the thickness direction, the pressure relief portion (5d) has a first surface, the first surface and the pressure relief groove (5c) are located on the same side of the pressure relief portion (5d), and the first surface is an arc surface (Fig. 2, [0017]).
Regarding Claim 4, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses in the thickness direction, the pressure relief portion (5d) has a second surface opposite the first surface, the second surface being an arc surface, and the first surface and the second surface are bent in the same direction (Fig. 2, [0017]).
Regarding Claim 5, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses in the thickness direction, the cap body (1a) has an inner surface and an outer surface opposite each other; a distance between the pressure relief portion (5d) and the inner surface in the thickness direction gradually increases from two ends to the middle of the pressure relief portion in a first direction, and the first direction is perpendicular to the thickness direction (Fig. 2, [0017]).
Regarding Claim 6, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the end cap (1a, 5) comprises a first protrusion (5b), and the first protrusion (5b) is arranged on the outer surface in a protruding manner and surrounds the pressure relief groove (5c) (Fig. 2, [0015]-[0018]).
Regarding Claim 7, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the cap body (1a) is provided with a recess (5a) which is recessed from the outer surface in a direction toward the inner surface, and the pressure relief groove (5c) is provided in a bottom wall of the recess (5a) (Fig. 2, [0015]-[0018]).
Regarding Claim 8, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the end cap (1a, 5) comprises a first protrusion (5b), and the first protrusion (5b) is arranged on the bottom wall in a protruding manner and surrounds the pressure relief groove (5c) (Fig. 2, [0015]-[0018]).
Regarding Claim 10, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the length of the pressure relief portion (5d) in a second direction is greater than that of the pressure relief portion (5d) in the first direction, and the first direction, the second direction and the thickness direction are perpendicular to each other (Figs. 1-2, [0017]-[0018], wherein the pressure relief portion 5d has an oval shape).
Regarding Claim 11, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the pressure relief groove (5c) is a closed groove extending along a closed trajectory that is connected end to end (Figs. 1-2, [0016], wherein the pressure relief groove 5c has an oval shape).
Regarding Claim 12, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the pressure relief groove (5c) comprises a first groove section, a second groove section, a third groove section and a fourth groove section that are connected in sequence;
in the first direction, the first groove section and the third groove section are arranged opposite each other, and a maximum distance between the first groove section and the third groove section is a first distance;
in the second direction, the second groove section and the fourth groove section are arranged opposite each other, and a minimum distance between the second groove section and the fourth groove section is a second distance; and
the second distance is greater than the first distance, and the first direction, the second direction and the thickness direction are perpendicular to each other (Figs. 1-2, [0016], wherein the pressure relief groove 5c has an oval shape, e.g. see annotated portion of Fig. 1 provided below).
PNG
media_image1.png
338
689
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the first groove section and the third groove section are linear grooves; and
the second groove section and the fourth groove section are arc grooves (Figs. 1-2, [0016], wherein the pressure relief groove 5c has an oval shape, e.g. see annotated portion of Fig. 1 provided above).
Regarding Claim 15, Shimoji discloses in Fig 1. a battery cell (A1) ([0014]) characterized by comprising:
an electrode assembly (2) ([0014]);
a housing (1) having an accommodation space with one end open, the accommodation space being used for accommodating the electrode assembly (2) ([0014]); and
an end cap (1a, 5) as set forth above, wherein the end cap (1a, 5) is connected to the housing (1) and closes the opening ([0014]).
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.
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.
This application 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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimoji et al. (JP 2007-141518 A, cited on the IDS dated February 28, 2025, see also the EPO machine generated English translation provided with this Office Action), as applied to Claim 7 above, and further in view of Matsudo et al. (JP 2014-102935 A, see also the EPO machine generated English translation provided with this Office Action).
Regarding Claim 9, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. However, Shimoji does not disclose wherein the end cap comprises a second protrusion, wherein the second protrusion is arranged on the inner surface in a protruding manner, and the second protrusion corresponds to the recess in position and is arranged around the pressure relief groove.
Matsudo teaches in Figs. 1-2 and 8 an end cap (14) comprising a cap body (14) provided with a pressure relief portion (19) and a pressure relief groove (23) provided in the cap body (14), the pressure relief groove (23) delimiting the pressure relief portion (19) ([0023]).
Specifically, Matsudo teaches in Figs. 1-2 and 8 wherein in a thickness direction, the cap body (14) has an inner surface and an outer surface opposite each other; wherein the cap body (14) is provided with a recess (27) which is recessed from the outer surface toward the inner surface, and a second protrusion (25), wherein the second protrusion (25) is arranged on the inner surface in a protruding manner, and the second protrusion (25) corresponds to the recess (27) in position and is arranged around the pressure relief groove (23) ([0023]).
Matsudo further teaches wherein the second protrusion prevents deformation of the pressure relief portion (19) due to deformation of the cap body (14) ([0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the end cap of Shimoji to comprise a second protrusion, wherein the second protrusion is arranged on the inner surface of Shimoji in a protruding manner, and the second protrusion corresponds to the recess of Shimoji in position and is arranged around the pressure relief groove of Shimoji, as taught by Matsudo, in order to prevent deformation of the pressure relief portion due to deformation of the cap body of Shimoji.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimoji et al. (JP 2007-141518 A, cited on the IDS dated February 28, 2025, see also the EPO machine generated English translation provided with this Office Action), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Byun (US PGPub 2011/0206957 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. However, Shimoji does not disclose wherein the cap body partially protrudes in the thickness direction to form a bump, and the pressure relief groove is provided in the bump.
Byun teaches in Figs. 1-4 an end cap comprising a cap body (30) provided with a pressure relief portion (34) and a pressure relief groove (341) provided in the cap body (30), the pressure relief groove (341) delimiting the pressure relief portion ([0044], [0055]).
Specifically, Byun teaches wherein the cap body (30) partially protrudes in the thickness direction to form a bump (60), and the pressure relief groove (341) is provided in the bump (60) in order to increase the resistivity to thermal deformation and deformation of the pressure relief portion (34) and the cap body (30) ([0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the cap body of Shimoji to partially protrude in the thickness direction to form a bump, wherein the pressure relief groove of Shimoji is provided in the bump, as taught by Byun, in order to increase the resistivity to thermal deformation and deformation of the pressure relief portion of Shimoji and the cap body.
Claim 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimoji et al. (JP 2007-141518 A, cited on the IDS dated February 28, 2025, see also the EPO machine generated English translation provided with this Office Action), as applied to Claim 15 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (CN 112713345 A, see also the EPO machine generated English translation provided with this Office Action).
Regarding Claims 16-18, Shimoji discloses all of the limitations as set forth above. However, Shimoji remains silent regarding the intended use of the battery cell and consequently does not disclose:
a battery, characterized by comprising: a case; and the battery cell, wherein the battery cell is accommodated inside the case,
wherein the end cap is arranged on a side of the battery cell facing a bottom wall of the case; and
a power consuming device, characterized by comprising a battery, wherein the battery is configured to provide electric energy.
Yang teaches in Figs. 1-3 a battery (10) comprising a case (11, 12) and a battery cell (30) accommodated inside the case (11, 12) ([0059]-[0061]) and a power consuming device (1) comprising the battery (10), wherein the battery (10) is configured to provide electric energy ([0056], [0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the battery cell of Shimoji in a battery comprising a case, wherein the battery cell is accommodated inside the case, and to further utilize the battery in a power consuming device, as taught by Yang, as the intended use of the battery cell is not particularly limited, wherein the skilled artisan would have reasonable expectation that such could successfully be configured to provide electric energy to the power consuming device.
Yang further teaches in Figs. 4-5 wherein the battery cell (30) comprises an end cap (42b) comprising a pressure relief mechanism (80a), wherein the end cap (42b) is arranged on a side of the battery cell (30) facing a bottom wall (11) of the case (11, 12) so that the high-temperature and high-pressure emissions emitted by the battery cell (30) are less likely to directly threaten personnel safety when the pressure relief mechanism (80a) explodes and releases pressure, thus improving safety of the battery cell (30) ([0067], [0079]-[0080], [0029], [0132]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the end cap of modified Shimoji to be arranged on a side of the battery cell of modified Shimoji facing a bottom wall of the case of modified Shimoji, as further taught by Yang, so that the high-temperature and high-pressure emissions emitted by the battery cell are less likely to directly threaten personnel safety when the pressure relief portion of Shimoji explodes and releases pressure, thus improving safety of the battery cell.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY WYLUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 AM - 3 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, 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.
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Examiner, Art Unit 1725