DETAILED ACTION
Introductory Notes
Any paragraph citation of the instant is in reference to the U.S. published patent application.
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 .
Joint Inventors
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 Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a tab” is used twice in line 3 and in each instance should read “the tab of the first electrode plate” or similar. Appropriate correction is required.
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 3-6, 8, 12, and 19 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the bending portion” four times. In each case it is unclear which bending portion of claim 2 is referenced.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the tab" once per plate. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Notably the tabs are introduced in claim 2 and this claim is dependent on claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the bending portion". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Notably the term is introduced in claim 2 and this claim is dependent on claim 1.
Claim 19 similarly recites the limitation "the bending portion". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Notably the term is introduced in claim 2 and this claim is dependent on claim 18 which is dependent on claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 12 recites the broad recitation “the fold guiding portion is in the form of a solid line or an interrupted line”, and the claim also recites “the fold guiding portion is in the form of a broken line” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation where broken line is a subset of interrupted line as noted in the instant in paragraph [0022]. Figs. 25-27 demonstrate a solid line while Figs. 28-31 demonstrate a broken line which is an example of interrupted per [0171] which states “Compared with other types of interrupted lines, the broken lines, especially the dotted line and the dashed line, are easier to manufacture”. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
The remaining claims are rejected due to dependency.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 11-12, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KANEDA (JP 2011138675 A, supplied with an IDS, English translation used for citations).
Regarding claim 1, KANEDA discloses an electrode assembly, comprising: a first electrode plate (negative electrode plate 24), being folded back and forth in a first direction (as shown in Fig. 4), so that the first electrode plate comprises a plurality of first laminates connected and stacked in sequence (as shown in Fig. 4); and
a second electrode plate (positive electrode plate 14), being opposite the first electrode plate in polarity and being folded once in a second direction (as shown in Fig. 4; notably the claim requires folding once and does limit the number of folds), so that the second electrode plate comprises two second laminates connected to each other (Fig. 4; notably the claim requires two laminates and does not limit the number of laminates), wherein
the second direction is perpendicular or parallel to the first direction (Fig. 4 shows perpendicular arrangement), and the second laminates and the first laminates are alternately stacked in sequence (as shown in Fig. 4), wherein the second electrode plate is provided with a fold guiding portion to guide folding of the second electrode plate (non-coated portions 13a and 13b as shown in Fig. 4 and detailed for the negative plate as 23a and 23b in Figs. 2a and 2b; notably the detail shown in Figs. 2a and 2b applies to both the negative and positive plates as discussed in at least [0034] and [0044]), and
the fold guiding portion is tilted with respect to a width direction of the second electrode plate (as shown in Figs. 2a and 2b and discussed in at least [0030] and [0040].
Regarding claim 2, KANEDA discloses a tab of the first electrode plate is located on an edge, other than a bending portion, of the first electrode plate (“a negative electrode lead 33 extending from the top of the electrode group 4 is connected to a terminal 40” [0041] wherein this lead is not on a bending portion of the negative electrode plate 24 as shown in Figs. 2 and 5-8 in combination with Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, KANEDA discloses the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction (Fig. 4 shows perpendicular arrangement), the tab of the first electrode plate is located on an edge of the first electrode plate adjacent to the bending portion (as shown in Figs. 2 and 5-8 in combination with Fig. 9 the negative lead is on an edge adjacent to the bending portion of the negative plate), and the tab of the second electrode plate is located at an end of the second electrode plate farther away from the bending portion (as shown in Fig. 9, the two leads are necessarily offset therefore they do not share the same distance to any one bending portion; it is therefore merely a design choice as to which is nearer or farther away to the claimed bending portion).
Regarding claim 4, KANEDA discloses the second direction is perpendicular to the first direction (Fig. 4 shows perpendicular arrangement), only one of any two adjacent first laminates is provided with a tab (there is one lead and therefore one laminate, or layer, provided with a tab), and the first laminate not provided with a tab is wrapped in the bending portion of the second electrode plate (as shown in Fig. 4 each layer that does not include the lead/tab is wrapped by the positive electrode plate).
Regarding claim 5, KANEDA discloses the tab of the first electrode plate and the tab of the second electrode plate are located on the same side (as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 6, KANEDA discloses the tab of the first electrode plate and the tab of the second electrode plate are located on the same side, and the tab of the first electrode plate and the tab of the second electrode plate are arranged in a staggered manner in the first direction (as shown in Fig. 9 when taking into consideration Fig. 4 the leads/tabs are along the first direction of folding).
Regarding claim 7, KANEDA discloses at least one of the two second laminates of the second electrode plate is provided with a tab (there is one lead and therefore one laminate, or layer, provided with a tab).
Regarding claim 8, KANEDA discloses the second electrode plate has an inert region, wherein the inert region comprises the bending portion of the second electrode plate, and the inert region is not coated with an active substance (as detailed in Figs. 2a and 2b which applies to both the negative and positive plates as shown in Fig. 4); and
a surface, facing the first electrode plate, of the inert region on the second electrode plate is provided with an insulating substance (separator 31).
Regarding claim 11, KANEDA discloses the fold guiding portion comprises an indentation or a crease (as shown in Figs. 2a and 2b there is an indentation relative to the top surface of the plate).
Regarding claim 12, KANEDA discloses the fold guiding portion is in the form of a solid line (as shown in Figs. 2a and 2b as well as Fig. 4 the exposed portion is a solid line in the transverse direction; notably the limitation toward broken line is being interpreted as pertaining to the optional interrupted line).
Regarding claim 16, KANEDA discloses the electrode assembly comprises a separator (separator 31), wherein the first electrode plate is a negative electrode plate (negative electrode plate 24) and the second electrode plate is a positive electrode plate (positive electrode plate 14).
Regarding claim 18, KANEDA discloses a battery cell (30), comprising a housing (36) and characterized by further comprising the electrode assembly according to claim 1, wherein the electrode assembly is provided inside the housing (as shown in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 19, KANEDA discloses the tab of the second electrode plate is located at an end of the second electrode plate farther away from the bending portion (as shown in Fig. 9 the positive lead is away from the bottom bend), and the bending portion of the second electrode plate is in contact with an inner wall of the housing (as shown in Fig. 4 combined with Fig. 9 the positive plate bends are not covered by the separator and are therefore in contact with the battery case; furthermore the positive lead is connected to the sealing plate 38 which is welded to the battery case 36 per paragraph [0042] and the positive plate is therefore in contact with the base by design); and a surface, farther away from the first electrode plate, of the bending portion of the second electrode plate faces the direction of gravity (as shown in Fig. 4 combined with Fig. 9 the positive plate bends each include an outer surface which is down relative to the orientation of Fig. 9 where down as it relates to Fig. 9 is a possible direction of gravity depending on how the battery is orientated).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Ahn (US 20120058387 A1) discloses bending portions are provided to bend positive and negative electrode non-coating portions respectively not coated with the positive and negative electrode active material layers as well as holes 72 which enable the electrode assembly to be more easily folded or unfolded.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS L MARTIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm ET.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at (303)297-4684. 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.
/T.L.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721