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 .
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, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shim et al. (KR 20150071250 A, see machine translation for citation).
Regarding claim 1, Shim teaches a jelly roll type electrode assembly comprising a stack (10) in which a negative electrode (2), a first separator (3), a positive electrode (1) and a second separator (3’) are sequentially stacked and wounded [0018 and Fig. 1]. The first and second separator (3 and 3’) can be considered a “separation membrane” [0028]. The negative electrode (2) includes a negative electrode current collector (22) and a negative electrode slurry (21) applied to both surfaces of the negative electrode current collector (22) and including a negative electrode active material, a conductive material, and a binder [0021]. The negative electrode (2) further includes an uncoated portion (23) of the negative electrode current collector (22) on which the negative electrode slurry (21) is not applied [0021]. The positive electrode (1) includes a positive electrode current collector (12) and a positive electrode slurry (11) (applied to both surfaces of the positive electrode current collector (12) and including a positive electrode active material, a conductive material, and a binder [0020]. The positive electrode (1) further includes an uncoated portion (13) of the positive electrode current collector (12) to which the positive electrode slurry (11) (active material) is not applied and a positive electrode lead (14) is attached [0020].
From Fig. 6 embodiment can be observed that a taping unit (5) (fixing part) is attached to the first and second separator (3 and 3’) facing the positive electrode (1) slurry (11) and its uncoated area (13) where the positive electrode lead (14) is located and the negative electrode (2) slurry (21) and its uncoated area (23) where the negative electrode lead (24) is located [0033]. Because it is taught that Fig. 6 have the same components and functions as those described with reference to FIG. 1 [0033], the uncoated area (14/24) is located is “an edge portion closest to a winding center of the electrode assembly”. Independently on which electrode is selected as the first and second electrode, all the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 2, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion and Fig. 6 the claimed features “wherein the edge portion of the current collector provided at one end of a winding axis of the electrode assembly includes an uncoated portion in which the electrode active material layer is not provided” is met.
Regarding claim 3, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From claim 1 discussion, Shim teaches that its first separator (3) is placed between the positive and negative electrodes (1 and 2) and a second separator (3’) is placed on an opposite surface of the positive electrode (1) which is a “surface opposite to a surface facing the first separation membrane of the first electrode”. Both the first and second separator (3 and 3’) are fixed to a taping unit (5) (fixing part) respectively [Fig. 1 and 6]. If the positive electrode (1) and the negative electrode (2) are selected as the first and second electrodes respectively, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 4, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From embodiment shown on Fig. 5, the taping unit (5) (fixing part) is located on the second separator (3’) facing the uncoated portion (14) of the positive electrode (1) [0033]. If the positive electrode (1) and the negative electrode (2) are selected as the first and second electrodes respectively, the claimed features are met.
Regarding claim 5, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Shim further teaches that the taping unit (5) (fixing part) may be 3-10 mm (12 mm or less) in the case of a minor axis perpendicular to the winding direction (width) [0037].
Regarding claim 6, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. From Shim’s embodiments shown on Fig. 2-6, with exception of the portion containing the taping units (5) (fixing parts), independently on which electrode is selected as the first and second electrode, “the first electrode, the separation membrane, and the second electrode are not fixed”.
Regarding claim 7, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Because there is no contrary teaching, the first electrode could be selected as the negative electrode and the second electrode could be selected as the positive electrode.
Regarding claim 8, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Shim further teaches that its taping units (5) may be an insulating tape including anyone selected from the group consisting of polyphenylene sulfide, polyimide, and polypropylene [0036]. Since the taping units (5) on Fig. 6 attached to the first separator (3) and faces the positive electrode (1) (first electrode) slurry (11) and its uncoated area (13) where the positive electrode lead (14) is located [0033], it met the limitation to be “a lamination tape”.
Regarding claim 13, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Shim teaches on its embodiment shown on Fig. 6 that the first separator (3) can have two taping units (5) (fixing parts) and the second separator (3’) can have one taping units (5) (fixing parts). All the taping units (5) (fixing parts) located “at edge portions facing each other”. Because the embodiment shown on Fig. 6 is described with reference to Fig. 1, the winding direction is the same. Given that first and second separator (3 and 3’) can be considered a “separation membrane”, the taping units (5) (fixing parts) located on the lower surface of the first separator (3) and on the second separator (3’) can be considered the “first and second point”, while the taping unit (5) (fixing parts) located on the upper surface of the first separator (3) can be considered “one point provided between the two points”.
Regarding claim 14, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Shim further teaches that its taping units (5) (fixing part) have a length of 20 to 100 mm [0037]. From the manufacture of lithium secondary battery, the positive electrode has a length of 450 mm and the negative electrode a length of 510 mm [0045-0048]. From Fig. 6 can be observed that the first separator (3) has two adhered taping units (5) (fixing part) and the second separator (3’) has one adhered taping units (5) (fixing part). Because the first and second separator (3 and 3’) are considered the “separation membrane” and selecting a 100 mm length for the employed taping units (5) (fixing part), the “separation membrane” would be fixed by the taping units (5) (fixing part) approximately by 250 mm. If the negative electrode length is selected as the electrode assembly total length, the “separation membrane” would be fixed by the taping units (5) (fixing part) approximately by 49% “of a length of the electrode assembly in a winding axis direction”.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim et al. (KR 20150071250 A, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Li et al. (High‐resolution thermogravimetry of poly (phenylene sulfide) film under four atmospheres, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claims 9 and 11, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 8. Shim further teaches that the taping part should be a material having strong heat resistance, such that deformation such as shrinkage does not occur even at 100°C or higher, and deformation due to tensile force does not occur [0036].
Shim does not explicitly teaches “wherein a heat decomposition temperature of the lamination tape is 180°C or higher” (claim 9) and “wherein the lamination tape has adhesive force at 40 °C or higher” (claim 11).
Li teaches that polyphenylene sulfide, which is one of the materials taught by Shim as taping unit (50 (laminating tape) candidates, presents an initial thermal degradation at 512 °C under an Air atmosphere with a variable heating rate [Fig. 1 and Table I]. This characteristic makes polyphenylene sulfide to retain properties such as low moisture absorption, low coefficient of friction and low-wear property (adhesion related properties) at elevated temperatures [p. 2053; par. 1-cont. in p. 2054]. From the description above, the limitations of claims 9 and 11 are met.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the taping units (lamination tape) of Shim to include the feature “wherein a heat decomposition temperature of the lamination tape is 180°C or higher “ (claim 9) and “wherein the lamination tape has adhesive force at 40 °C or higher” (claim 11), because Li teaches that polyphenylene sulfide (laminating tape material) meet the heat decomposition temperature feature and it makes polyphenylene sulfide to retain properties such as low moisture absorption, low coefficient of friction and low-wear property (adhesion related properties) at elevated temperatures.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim et al. (KR 20150071250 A, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Nitto Denko Corporation (Tapes for electrical & electronic equipment, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 10, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 8, except “wherein room-temperature adhesive force of the lamination tape is 20 gf/100 mm to 40 gf/100 mm”.
Nitto teaches that typical values for polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) tape, which is one of the taping units (5) (lamination tape) materials taught by Shim, is 3 N/10mm (30.6 gf/mm) [p. 5; PPS adhesive tape section and p. 22; gray box]. Because normally the peeling strength test is done at room temperature, this reported value could be considered to meet the claimed feature. Nitto teaches that a PPS tape having the referred property, offers superior dimension stability [p. 5; PPS adhesive tape section].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the taping unit (lamination tape) of Shim to include the feature “wherein room-temperature adhesive force of the lamination tape is 20 gf/100 mm to 40 gf/100 mm”, because Nitto teaches that a tape having the referred property, offers superior dimension stability.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim et al. (KR 20150071250 A, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 12, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 8, except “wherein a change rate of the adhesive force of the lamination tape satisfies Equation 1 below,0.8 ≤ [X2/X1] x 100(%) ≤1.2 in Equation 1, X1 is the adhesive force of the lamination tape when the lamination tape is left at 23°C for 20 minutes, and X2 is the adhesive force of the lamination tape when the lamination tape is stored at 65°C for 20 minutes after being left at 23°C for 20 minutes”.
The Office realizes that all of the claimed effects or physical properties are not positively stated by Shim. However, Shim teaches all of the claimed ingredients, claimed amounts, and substantially similar process of making. According to the original specification, the claimed change rate of the adhesive force depends on the taught exemplary embodiment [p. 30; line 7-24]. Such exemplary embodiment provides an electrode assembly in which a first electrode (2), separation membranes (4 and 5), and a second electrode (3) are stacked and wound, and at least one of the first electrode (2) and the second electrode (3) includes a current collector (91) and an electrode active material layer (92) provided on the current collector, and the first electrode has a fixing part (7) provided to the electrode active material layer (92), provided to an edge portion (6) closest to a winding center of the electrode assembly, and fixed to at least a part of the separation membranes (4 and 5) [p. 19; line 2-11]. The fixing part (7) may be a lamination tape. The lamination tape may be a tape having an adhesive layer that may be laminated on at least one surface and may be a tape having adhesive layers that may be laminated on both surfaces [p. 27; line 13-17].
Therefore, the claimed effects and physical properties, i.e. the recited change rate of the adhesive force features, would expectedly be achieved by a composition with all the claimed ingredients, claimed amounts, and substantially similar process of making. See MPEP § 2112.01. If it is the applicant' s position that this would not be the case: (1) evidence would need to be provided to support the applicant' s position; and (2) it would be the Office' s position that the application contains inadequate disclosure that there is no teaching as to how to obtain the claimed properties with only the claimed ingredients, claimed amounts, and substantially similar process of making.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shim et al. (KR 20150071250 A, see machine translation for citation) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Mao et al. (US 20100159307 A1) evidenced by Lee et al. (Joining technologies for automotive lithium-ion battery manufacturing: A review, see NPL documents for citation).
Regarding claim 15, Shim teaches all the elements of the current invention in claim 1. Shim further teaches a secondary battery (battery cell) preparation comprising its jelly roll type electrode assembly stack (10) which may be accommodated in a cylindrical can [0039]. A lithium secondary battery was manufactured by inserting an electrolyte solution into a cylindrical battery having a beading part and crimping the cylindrical battery [0052]. From the description above and the general characteristics of a lithium cylindrical secondary battery, the features “a battery can which accommodates the electrode assembly and has an opening at one side” and “a sealing body sealing the opening of the battery can” can be considered met.
Shim does not teach the feature “an electrode terminal riveted through a through-hole formed in a bottom of the battery can and a gasket provided between the electrode terminal and an outer diameter of the through- hole”.
Mao teaches a battery comprising a container (7) (can) for storing a battery unit (8) (electrode assembly analogous) [0051]. The battery can of Mao is on the same field of endeavor of Shim. The container (7) (can) have a lower cover (9) with a central through hole in which a terminal (91) is installed and secured with insulation (92) [0019, 0051 and Fig. 4]. From Fig. 4 can be observed that an electrode (82) is connected to the terminal (91). If the secondary battery (battery cell) of Shim is modified to include the taught features of Mao on its lower cover, the claimed features “an electrode terminal riveted through a through-hole formed in a bottom of the battery can and a gasket provided between the electrode terminal and an outer diameter of the through- hole” would be met.
Lee evidence that the use of rivets related to battery preparation is a mechanical joining approach which have as an advantage the ease of disassembly for maintenance and repair [Abstract and p. 3-4; section 2.4-Mechanical joining].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the secondary battery (battery cell) of Shim to include the feature “an electrode terminal riveted through a through-hole formed in a bottom of the battery can and a gasket provided between the electrode terminal and an outer diameter of the through- hole”, because Mao teaches the referred feature and Lee evidences that the use of rivets related to battery preparation is a mechanical joining approach which have as an advantage the ease of disassembly for maintenance and repair.
Regarding claim 16, Shim, Mao and Lee teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 15. From claim 15 discussion the feature “the sealing body is insulated from the battery can” from Shim teachings about the cylindrical battery having a beading part and crimping the cylindrical battery [0052], because commonly the battery sealing covers are insulated from the battery case. In addition, the feature “the second electrode is electrically connected with the electrode terminal” could be considered met if one of the positive or negative electrodes (1 and 2) taught by Shim is selected as the “second electrode” and is connected to the bottom riveted terminal taught by Mao.
The feature “the first electrode is electrically connected with the battery can” could be considered met based on the general practice of electrically connect one of the positive or negative electrodes to the battery cylindrical body.
Regarding claim 17, Shim, Mao and Lee teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 15. Shim further teaches the employment of a medium-or large-sized battery module or a battery pack in which the plurality of secondary batteries are electrically connected to each other [0040].
Regarding claim 18, Shim, Mao and Lee teach all the elements of the current invention in claim 17. Shim further teaches that its medium-or large-sized battery module or the battery pack may be used as a power source for an electric vehicle including an electric vehicle (EV), a hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), and a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), an electric truck and an electric commercial vehicle [0041].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GILBERTO RAMOS RIVERA whose telephone number is (571)272-2740. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/JAMES M ERWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725 01/30/2026