DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the arguments, filed 08 December 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-4 and 6-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of JP 2012-94854, submitted 14 January 2026 as part of an IDS.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 11-15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 210073631 in view of JP 2012-94854. The Office notes that CN ‘631 was submitted as part of an IDS dated 19 July 2023 and JP ‘854 was submitted as part of an IDS dated 14 January 2026.
With respect to claim 1, CN ‘631 teaches an electrochemical energy storage apparatus (see abstract), the electrochemical energy storage apparatus comprising: a battery cell assembly (see FIG. 1, element 3), wherein the battery cell assembly is able to store electric energy (see abstract, noting that the assembly stores energy); a lead terminal (see FIG. 1, element 6), wherein the lead terminal is electrically connected to the battery cell assembly (see FIG. 1); an elastic member (see FIG. 1, element 4 which is a rubber plug), wherein the elastic member is arranged at the top of the battery cell assembly (see FIG. 1) and is able to hold the lead terminal (see FIG. 1, noting that the lead terminal passes through and is held by rubber plug 4); and a potting material (see FIG. 1, element 5), wherein the potting material is applied to the elastic member and is able to block gaps present between the lead terminal and the elastic member after being cured (see FIG. 1).
CN ‘631 teaches that the housing is provided with an inward recess corresponding to the elastic member, so that the elastic member is able to be tightly fitted to the lead terminal when an external force is applied to the elastic member through at least one of the plurality of inward recesses (see FIG. 1), but fails to teach that the housing is provided with a plurality of inward recesses recessing inward at positions corresponding to the elastic member.
JP ‘854, on the other hand, teaches a plurality of inward recesses recessing inward at positions corresponding to the elastic member. See FIG. 1, elements 1d and 1c. Such an arrangement results in a compression of the rubber body to press-fit the lead terminals and further, engage the lower surface of the sealing body. See paragraphs [0039] and [0036], and further, [[0043].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify CN ‘631, as taught by JP ‘854, in order to press-fit the lead terminals and further, provide an engagement for the lower surface of the sealing body.
With respect to claim 2, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the electrochemical energy storage apparatus further comprises a housing (see CN ‘631, FIG. 1, element 2), wherein the housing has a side wall (see CN ‘631, FIG. 1) forming an inner cavity, and one side of the housing is open to an outside (see CN ‘631, FIG. 1); and the inner cavity is used for accommodating the battery cell assembly, the elastic member and the potting material (see CN ‘631, FIG. 1).
With respect to claim 3, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the potting material is formed as a potting layer poured on the elastic member. See FIG. 1, noting that the potting layer is on the elastic member. While CN ‘631 does not explicitly state that the potting layer is poured on the elastic member, the Office notes that this limitation is a product-by-process limitation, which is not granted patentable weight. See MPEP 2113.
With respect to claim 4, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the elastic member is an elastic rubber member and is provided with through holes matched with the lead terminal. See CN ‘631 FIGS. 1 and 3.
With respect to claim 6, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 fail to teach that at least one of the plurality of inward recesses is able to abut against an upper end surface of the elastic member.
However, modifying the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 to have an inward recess abut against an upper und surface of the elastic member is considered to be a mere rearrangement of parts, which has been found to be obvious as being well within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C), citing In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
With respect to claim 7, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that at least one of the plurality of inward recesses (55, 56) is annular inward recesses. See CN ‘631, FIG. 1 and JP ‘854, FIG. 1.
With respect to claim 11, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 fail to teach that the inner cavity of the housing is provided with a plurality of the battery cell assemblies, and the potting layer is arranged in the inner cavity and simultaneously covers the plurality of the battery cell assemblies. However, modifying the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 to have a plurality of battery cell assemblies is considered to be a mere duplication of parts, which has been found to be obvious as being well within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), citing In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
With respect to claim 12, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the elastic member is made of butyl rubber and/or ethylene propylene diene monomer. See CN ‘631, paragraph [0022], noting an elastic member made of rubber.
With respect to claim 13, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 is considered to implicitly teach that a Shore hardness of the elastic member (30) is 70 degree-90 degree. See CN ‘631, paragraph [0022], noting that the elastic member is made of rubber, and further noting that the Shore hardness is a physical property of the rubber. See MPEP 2112.01(I).
With respect to claim 14, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the potting material is made of one or more of organosilicone potting glue, polyurethane potting glue, and epoxy potting glue. See CN ‘631, paragraph [0024].
With respect to claim 15, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 is considered to implicitly teach that wherein a curing temperature of the potting material is 20°C-150°C, and a Shore hardness of the potting material after being cured is 80 degree-100 degree. CN ‘631 discloses the use of epoxy glue, which is the same as the glue used in the instant application, and as such, implicitly discloses any physical properties associated with the same, including Shore hardness and curing temperature. See MPEP 2112.01(I).
With respect to claim 19, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that an energy storage system, characterized in that the energy storage system comprises: at least two electrochemical energy storage apparatuses (100) according to Claim 1; and a connecting part, wherein the connecting part is used for electrically connecting the electrochemical energy storage apparatuses. See CN ‘631 abstract, noting a plurality of capacitors connected in series between the PCB.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 210073631 in view of JP 2012-94854, and further, in view of JP 2011009279.
With respect to claim 8, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the housing further comprises a bottom wall connected to the side wall, but fail to teach that the electrochemical energy storage apparatus further comprises an explosion-proof valve arranged on the bottom wall.
On the other hand, JP ‘279 teaches an explosion-proof valve arranged on the bottom wall. See FIG. 1, element 4. Such an arrangement greatly reduces the leakage of an electrolyte. See abstract.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854, as taught by JP ‘279, in order to prevent the leakage of electrolyte from the capacitor.
With respect to claim 9, the combined teachings of CN ‘631, JP ‘854, and JP ‘279 teach that the explosion-proof valve is a thin-walled part located at the bottom wall. See JP ‘279, abstract.
With respect to claim 10, the combined teachings of CN ‘631, JP ‘854, and JP ‘279 teach that the thin-walled part is formed by recessing inward from a lower surface of the bottom wall. See JP ‘279, FIG. 1.
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 210073631 in view of JP 2012-94854, and further, in view of JP 2020522836.
With respect to claim 16, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 teach that the battery core assembly comprises a winding core formed by winding to butt a head end and a tail end of an electrode (see CN ‘631, FIG. 1), but fails to teach a fixing member that is arranged on an outer surface of the winding core and is able to glue the head end and the tail end.
JP ‘836, on the other hand, teaches a fixing member that is arranged on an outer surface of the winding core and is able to glue the head end and the tail end. See element 37. Such an arrangement results in a protective tape that holds the wound shape.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854, as taught by JP ‘836, to protect and hold the wound shape of the winding core.
With respect to claim 17, the combined teachings of CN ‘631, JP ‘854, and JP ‘836 teach that the fixing member (14) is an annular member. See JP ‘836, element 37, which surrounds the winding core.
With respect to claim 18, the combined teachings of CN ‘631, JP ‘854, and JP ‘836 teach that the housing is a metal part. See JP ‘836, element 11, which is made of iron, aluminum, etc.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 210073631 in view of JP 2012-94854, and further, in view of Altemose (US Pat. App. Pub. No. 2018/0375345).
With respect to claim 20, the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854 fail to explicitly teach that the connecting part is a bus component, and the bus component is configured to be able to controllably switch on or off the electrochemical energy storage apparatuses.
On the other hand, Altemose teaches that the connecting part is a bus component, and the bus component is configured to be able to controllably switch on or off the electrochemical energy storage apparatuses. See paragraph [0011]. Such an arrangement balances the charge between the supercapacitors. See paragraph [0011].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the combined teachings of CN ‘631 and JP ‘854, as taught by Altemose, in order to balance the charges between the supercapacitors.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 14 January 2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DION R FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 5:30 a.m. - 4:00 p.m..
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, Timothy Dole can be reached at 571-272-2229. 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.
/DION R. FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2848