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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 01/22/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Claims 15-23 are dependent from independent Claim 1, and therefore, require all of the particulars of independent Claim 1. Accordingly, Applicant argues that there is no undue search burden to examine Claims 1-23, and that the unity of invention requirement be reconsidered and withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments are acknowledged are persuasive. Accordingly, the previous restriction requirement is hereby withdrawn.
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 19-23 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 19 (as well as dependent Claim 23) recites the limitation "the ground." There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukuda (JP 55-39675, provided by Applicant in the 10/15/24 IDS and using the translation provided by Applicant for citation purposes).
Regarding Claim 1, Fukuda teaches an electric float comprising a battery (“battery cell fixing device”) (Page 2). As illustrated in Figures 1-4, Fukuda teaches that the electric float comprises a plurality of “holders” (i.e. tab (11) and claw (12), in combination) which are configured to be coupled to a cylindrical battery cell (4) along an outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell (Pages 2-3). As illustrated in Figures 1-4, each holder includes said tab (11) (“holder body”) configured to cover a part of the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell, and said claw (12) (“beading fixer”) configured to protrude toward the cylindrical battery cell from the tab, wherein the claw is configured to be inserted into an annular groove (41) (“beading portion”) in the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell (Pages 2-3).
It is further noted that the instant Claim does explicitly require the presence of a cylindrical battery cell as claimed, but instead merely requires that the plurality of holders are configured to be coupled to a cylindrical battery cell as claimed.
Regarding Claim 2, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 3-4, the electric float comprises a jig (14) (“connector”) provided on an outer surface of the tab of at least one of the plurality of holders, wherein the jig is configured to be connected to an upper case (1) (“vibration source”) and lower (2) case (alternatively, “vibration source”), wherein vibrations propagating through said upper and lower cases are transferred and/or propagate, to at least some degree, to/through the jig (Pages 2-3).
Regarding Claim 3, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 3-4, a protruding piece (13) (“holder coupler”) is configured to coupled neighboring holders to each other (Page 3).
Regarding Claim 4, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-3, the tab has a height corresponding to “a height” (i.e. the height of the cylindrical battery to which the tab reaches) of the cylindrical battery cell (it is noted that the instant Claim does not require that the holder body has a height corresponding to the total overall height of the cylindrical battery cell).
Regarding Claim 5, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-3, the tab extends, by at least some distance, along the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell.
Regarding Claim 6, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 2, the claw has a protruding length corresponding to a depth of the annular groove.
Regarding Claim 7, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 2, the claw extends, by at least some distance, along the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell.
Regarding Claim 8, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-3, the claw, as it is moved and subsequently inserted into the annular groove, is configured to move along a radial direction (i.e. a pivoting motion) of the cylindrical battery from the tab and be fixed into the annular groove (Pages 2-3).
Regarding Claim 9, Fukuda teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-3, the claw is configured to be fixed in a state of being drawn from the tab by a length corresponding to a depth of the annular groove of the cylindrical battery cell.
Claims 1, 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimura et al. (US 2014/0045038).
Regarding Claim 1, Kimura teaches an assembled battery (“battery cell fixing device”) (Abstract). As illustrated in Figures 1-4, Kimura teaches that the assembled battery comprises a plurality of “holders” (i.e. hook portion (32) and protrusion (32A), in combination) which are configured to be coupled to a cylindrical battery cell (2) along an outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell ([0027], [0032]). As illustrated in Figures 2-3, each holder includes said hook portion (32) (“holder body”) which is configured to cover a part of the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell, and said protrusion (32A) (“beading fixer”) which is configured to protrude toward the cylindrical battery cell from the hook portion, wherein the protrusion is configured to be inserted into a protruding portion (21A) (“beading portion”) in the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell ([0027], [0032], [0035]).
It is further noted that the instant Claim does explicitly require the presence of a cylindrical battery cell as claimed, but instead merely requires that the plurality of holders are configured to be coupled to a cylindrical battery cell as claimed.
Regarding Claim 3, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 1 and 3, neighboring holders are coupled, at least indirectly, to one another via a planar fixing plate (3) (i.e. the planar fixing plate to which numeral (3) is pointing in Figure 3) (“holder coupler”) ([0032]).
Regarding Claim 4, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-4, the hook portion has a height corresponding to “a height” (i.e. the height of the cylindrical battery to which the hook portion reaches) of the cylindrical battery cell (it is noted that the instant Claim does not require that the holder body has a height corresponding to the total overall height of the cylindrical battery cell).
Regarding Claim 5, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-4, the hook portion extends, by at least some distance, along the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell.
Regarding Claim 6, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 2, the protrusion has a protruding length corresponding to a depth of the protruding portion.
Regarding Claim 7, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-4, the protrusion extends, by at least some distance, along the outer circumference of the cylindrical battery cell.
Regarding Claim 8, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 1, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figure 5, the protrusion, as it is moved and subsequently inserted into the protruding portion, is configured to move along a radial direction (i.e. a pivoting motion) of the cylindrical battery from the hook portion and be fixed into the protruding portion ([0035]).
Regarding Claim 9, Kimura teaches the instantly claimed invention of Claim 8, as previously described.
As illustrated in Figures 2-5, the protrusion is configured to be fixed in a state of being drawn from the hook portion by a length corresponding to a depth of the protruding portion of the cylindrical battery cell.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 10 further limits the battery cell fixing device of Claim 3 by requiring that the holder coupler is provided inside the holder body of each of the plurality of holders.
Neither Fukuda nor Kimura teach or suggest the limitations of Claim 10. While Fukuda teaches the protruding piece (i.e. “holder coupler”), said protruding piece is physically distinct from each tab of each holder, and said protruding piece is not provided inside each tab of each holder. While Kimura teaches the planar fixing plate (i.e. “holder couple”), said planar fixing plate is physically distinct from each hook portion of each holder, and said planar fixing plate is not provided inside each hook portion of each holder.
Claims 13-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 13 further limits the battery cell fixing device of Claim 3 by requiring that the holder coupler is provided as a pair of holder couplers at opposite sides of the holder body.
Neither Fukuda nor Kimura teach or suggest the limitations of Claim 13. While Fukuda teaches the protruding piece (i.e. “holder coupler”), a pair of such protruding pieces are not provided at opposite sides of the tab. While Kimura teaches the planar fixing plate (i.e. “holder couple”), a pair of such planar fixing plates are not provided at opposite ends of the hook portion.
Claims 15-23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 15 recites an electrolyte impregnation device comprising a plurality of the battery cell fixing devices of Claim 1 and a rotator configured to rotate the plurality of battery cell fixing devices based on a predetermined rotation axis.
Neither Fukuda nor Kimura teach or suggest the limitations of Claim 15. While Fukuda’s cylindrical battery cell comprises an electrolyte therein, Fukuda does not disclosure a particular device for impregnation of said electrolyte (since Fukuda is not concerted with a mechanism for electrolyte impregnation), let alone a device structured in the instantly claimed manner. While Kimura’s cylindrical battery cell comprises an electrolyte therein, Kimura does not disclosure a particular device for impregnation of said electrolyte (since Kimura is not concerted with a mechanism for electrolyte impregnation), let alone a device structured in the instantly claimed manner. Furthermore, while battery manufacturing devices which employ rotation for impregnation of electrolyte (See, for example, Kim et al. (US 2013/0065111), Sohn et al. (KR 1997-0054733, provided by Applicant in the 11/13/25 IDS), or Won et al. (KR 1020170004738, provided by Applicant in the 02/19/25 IDS) are known, none of said manufacturing devices are explicitly configured to comprise one battery cell fixing device as recited in Claim 1, let alone a plurality of such battery cell fixing devices wherein a rotator is configured to rotate said plurality of battery cells fixing devices on a predetermined rotation axis.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN whose telephone number is (571)270-7595. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-3PM EST M-F.
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, Matthew Martin can be reached at 5712707871. 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.
/MATTHEW W VAN OUDENAREN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1728