Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/268,064

ALUMINUM POUCH FILM FOR SECONDARY BATTERY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 16, 2023
Examiner
MCNULTY, SEAMUS PATRICK
Art Unit
1752
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Sbtl Advanced Materials Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
16 granted / 31 resolved
-13.4% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+41.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
91
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
63.5%
+23.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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. Claims 1,3-4, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220173461-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Tatsuzawa’ in view of (US-6416559-B1) hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura’ Regarding Claim 1, Tatsuzawa teaches an aluminum pouch film for a secondary battery, the film comprising: an aluminum film layer (Tastuzawa, “Specific examples of the metal material forming the barrier layer 3 include aluminum alloys, stainless steel, titanium steel and steel sheets.”,see [0077]) ; an outer resin layer laminated on one surface of the aluminum film layer (Tastuzawa, base material layer, 6, Fig. 1) ; and an inner resin layer laminated on the other surface of the aluminum film layer (Tatsuzawa, sealable resin layer, 4, Fig. 1) wherein the inner resin layer includes a polyolefin resin (Tatsuzawa, “The resin forming the heat-sealable resin layer 4 is not particularly limited as long as it can be heat-sealed, a resin containing a polyolefin skeleton such as a polyolefin or an acid-modified polyolefin is preferable.”, see [0094]),) and an ionomer resin. (Tatsuzawa, “The anionic polymer is preferably poly (meth)acrylic acid or a salt thereof, or a copolymer containing (meth)acrylic acid or a salt thereof as a main component.”, see [0086]) Tatsuzawa does not teach an ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH) in the inner resin layer Matsumura teaches ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH) in the resin layer and ionomer resin (Matsumura, “The resin material used in the present invention is preferably provided with chemical stability against the electrolyte of a battery employing the electrode, a positive active material and a negative active material, and adhesion to the substrate frame. When the electrode is used in an alkaline storage battery with an alkaline electrolyte solution, it is preferable to use modified polyethylene, modified polypropylene, polyvinyl alcohol, ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer,”, see Col.6 ln 59). Matsumura teaches that the EVOH copolymer chemical stable against the electrolyte (Mastsumara, “The resin material used in the present invention is preferably provided with chemical stability against the electrolyte of a battery employing the electrode, a positive active material and a negative active material, and adhesion to the substrate frame. When the electrode is used in an alkaline storage battery with an alkaline electrolyte solution, it is preferable to use modified polyethylene, modified polypropylene, polyvinyl alcohol, ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer,”, see Col.6 ln 59). Tatsuzawa and Matsumura are analogous as they are both of the same field of resin coatings for batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resin layer as taught in Matsumura with the addition of EVOH copolymer in order to protect the layer from damage from the electrolyte. Regarding Claim 3, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches the film of claim 1, wherein the polyolefin is polyethylene (PE), polypropylene (PP) or a copolymer thereof (Tatsuzawa, “Specific examples of the polyolefin include polyethylenes such as low-density polyethylene, medium-density polyethylene, high-density polyethylene and linear low-density polyethylene; ethylene-α-olefin copolymers; polypropylene such as homopolypropylene”, see [0095]). Regarding Claim 4, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches the film of claim 1, wherein the ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH) is a copolymer represented by the following Chemical Formula 1: PNG media_image1.png 218 230 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein, x and y are molar ratios of the vinyl alcohol structural unit and the ethylene structural unit, and x may be 0.3 to 0.7, y may be 0.3 to 0.7, and x+y is 1 (Mastsumura, “The resin solution applied on the sheet was a mixture composed of a 10 wt % of ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer,”, s Col 8, ln 6, see Example 3). Regarding Claim 8, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches the film of claim 1, wherein the outer resin layer is formed with a nylon film (Tatsuzawa, “Of these resins, polyester and polyamide are preferable as resins that form the base material layer 1”, see [0054]))(Tatsuzawa, “Specific examples of the polyamide include polyamides such as aliphatic polyamides such as nylon 6, nylon 66, nylon 610”, see [0056]). Regarding Claim 9, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches the film of claim 1, wherein a first adhesive layer is laminated between the aluminum film layer and the outer resin layer (Tatsuzawa, “When the adhesive agent layer 2 is present, the adhesive agent layer 2 is located between the surface coating layer 6 and the adhesive agent layer 2.”, see [0050]); and a second adhesive layer is laminated between the aluminum film layer and the inner resin layer (Tatsuzawa, “an adhesive layer 5 may be present between the barrier layer 3 and the heat-sealable resin layer 4 if necessary for the purpose of, for example, improving bondability between these layers.”, see [0022]). Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220173461-A1) hereinafter referred to as Tatsuzawa in view of (US-6416559-B1) hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura’ in further view of (US-20030031924-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Lee’ Regarding Claim 2, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches 5% by weight to 70% by weight of the ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH) (Mastumura, “The resin solution applied on the sheet was a mixture composed of a 10 wt % of ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer”, see Example 3) Modified Tatsuzawa does not teach, wherein the inner resin layer comprises 29% by weight to 90% by weight of the polyolefin resin, 5% by weight to 70% by weight of the ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH) and 1% by weight to 20% by weight of the ionomer resin. Lee teaches 29% by weight to 90% by weight of the polyolefin resin, and 1% by weight to 20% by weight of the ionomer resin (Lee, “A multi-component microporous membrane having a matrix of polypropylene prepared by stretching without using a solvent, wherein a synthetic resin component of the multi-component microporous membrane comprises a) 70 to 99 weight % of polypropylene; and b) 1 to 30 weight % of one or more polymers selected from the group consisting of poly(ethylene-butylene) copolymer, poly(ethylene-hexene) copolymer, poly(ethylene-octene) copolymer, polyethylene prepared by metallocene catalysts, poly(ethylene-vinylacetate) copolymer, poly(styrene-ethylene) copolymer, poly(styrene-butylene-styrene) copolymer, poly(styrene-ethylenebutylene-styrene) copolymer, silane group grafted polyolefin, maleic anhydride or acrylic acid grafted polyolefin, ionomer, and derivatives thereof.”, see Clm 12) . The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 70 to 99% and 1 to 30% broadly overlaps the claimed range of 29% to 90% and 1 to 20%. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05. Lee teaches that the mixing polymers such as polypropylene with compatible polymers can improve the mechanical properties (Lee, “If these polymers are appropriately selected and melt blended with polypropylene to be well dispersed into the polypropylene, not only are permeabilities improved by facilitating the easy forming of pores in the polypropylene, but mechanical properties are also improved because the polymers function as an impact buffer zone against external impulsion.”, see [0064]) (Lee, “The polymers added are preferably added to a total composition in an amount of 1 to 30 weight % and blended. It is difficult to expect that their permeabilities improve even though their physical properties increase when their contents are 30 weight % or more.”, see [0068]). Tatsuzawa and Lee are analogous as they are both of the same field of resin coatings for batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resin layer as taught in Matsumura with the composition as taught in Lee in order to improve the mechanical properties of the resin. Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US-20220173461-A1) hereinafter referred to as Tatsuzawa in view of (US-6416559-B1) hereinafter referred to as “Matsumura’ in further view of (US-20140312282-A1) hereinafter referred to as ‘Lim’ Regarding Claim 5, Modified Tatsuzawa does not teach wherein the ionomer resin is an ionomer resin of an ethylene acid copolymer. Lim teaches wherein the ionomer resin is an ionomer resin of an ethylene acid copolymer (Lim, “An ethylene copolymer may be disclosed as E/X/Y, or E/X/Y/X′ copolymers”, see [0017]). Lim teaches that ethylene copolymers have robust adhesion and strong binding (Lim, “Functionalized copolymeric ethylene copolymers with similar structures of above examples also have performance qualities that can be utilized as a binder material for lithium ion battery such as robust adhesion to the current collector, stronger binding, suitable swelling in electrolytes,”, see [0006]). Tatsuzawa and Lim are analogous as they are both of the same field of resins and binders for batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the resin layer as taught in Matsumura with the copolymer as taught in Lim in order to increase the binding and adhesion in the resin layer. Regarding Claim 6, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches wherein the ionomer resin of the ethylene acid copolymer is an ionomer resin of an E/X/Y copolymer (Lim, “An ethylene copolymer may be disclosed as E/X/Y, or E/X/Y/X′ copolymers”, see [0017]), and has lithium, sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, barium, zinc, or a combination of two or more of these cations being introduced by a neutralization reaction for the E/X/Y copolymer; PNG media_image2.png 14 27 media_image2.png Greyscale and in the E/X/Y copolymer X represents a C3-C8 a ethylenically unsaturated monocarboxylic acid and is present in an amount of 2% by weight to 30% by weight of the E/X/Y copolymer; and Y represents a copolymerized unit derived from an alkyl acrylate or an alkyl methacrylate and is present in an amount of 0% by weight to 40% by weight of the E/X/Y copolymer. (Lim, “Optionally the carboxylic acid moiety can be partially or fully neutralized with a metal or an amino cation”, see [0007])(Lim, “The derivative can be a salt of the organic acid. The salts may be any of a wide variety, including the barium, lithium, sodium, zinc, bismuth, potassium, strontium, magnesium, or calcium salts of the organic acids”, see [0024]), E represents a copolymerized unit derived from ethylene and is present in an amount of 30% by weight to 98% by weight of the E/X/Y copolymer; X represents a C3-C8 a ethylenically unsaturated monocarboxylic acid and is present in an amount of 2% by weight to 30% by weight of the E/X/Y copolymer; and Y represents a copolymerized unit derived from an alkyl acrylate or an alkyl methacrylate and is present in an amount of 0% by weight to 40% by weight of the E/X/Y copolymer (Lim, “An ethylene copolymer may be disclosed as E/X/Y, or E/X/Y/X′ copolymers where E represents copolymerized units of ethylene. X and X′ can be the same or different and can represent copolymerized units of an α,β ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid, dicarboxylic acid, or both. Y represents copolymerized units of another comonomer. X and X′ can be present from 0 or 5 to about 50, alternatively about 12 to about 30, or about 15 to about 25, weight % of the total weight of the copolymer. Y can be from 0 or about 0.1 to about 50, alternatively about 1 to about 40 weight % of the total weight of the copolymer. However, X, X′, and Y cannot be 0 in the same polymer molecule.”, see [0017]).(The examiner notes that E is the remaining difference between X and Y e.g. 30% X and 30% Y is 40% E) The examiner takes note of the fact that the prior art range of 0 to 50% and 0 to 50% and 50 to 100% broadly overlaps the claimed range of 2% to 30% and 0 to 40% and 30 to 98%. Absent any additional and more specific information in the prior art, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Peterson, 315F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2003). MPEP 2144.05. Regarding Claim 7, Modified Tatsuzawa teaches The film of claim 6, wherein the E/X/Y copolymer is one or more types selected from the group consisting of an ethylene/acrylic acid binary copolymer; an ethylene/methacrylic acid binary copolymer; an ethylene/acrylic acid/n-butyl acrylate, ethylene/acrylic acid/iso-butyl acrylate, ethylene/acrylic acid/methyl acrylate, or ethylene/acrylic acid/ethyl acrylate ternary copolymer; an ethylene/acrylic acid/n-butyl methacrylate, ethylene/acrylic acid/iso-butylmethacrylate,ethylene/acrylic acid/methyl methacrylate, or ethylene/acrylic acid/ethyl methacrylate ternary copolymer; an ethylene/methacrylic acid/n-butyl acrylate, ethylene/methacrylic acid/iso-butyl acrylate, ethylene/methacrylic acid/methyl acrylate, or ethylene/ methacrylic acid/ethyl acrylate ternary copolymer; and an ethylene/methacrylic acid/n-butyl methacrylate, ethylene/methacrylic acid/iso-butyl methacrylate, ethylene/methacrylic acid/methyl methacrylate, or ethylene/methacrylic acid/ethyl methacrylate ternary copolymer (Lim, “Examples of ionomers include ethylene acrylic acid dipolymer, ethylene methacrylic acid dipolymer, ethylene methyl acrylic acid dipolymer, ethylene ethyl acrylic acid dipolymer, ethylene butyl acrylic acid dipolymer, ethylene methyl acrylic acid glycidyl methacrylate terpolymer, ethylene butyl acrylic acid glycidyl methacrylate terpolymer, or combinations of two or more thereof where the acid moieties are partially or fully neutralized with a metal or amino cation as disclosed above”, see [0022]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAMUS PATRICK MCNULTY whose telephone number is (703)756-1909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am to 5pm. 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, Nicholas A. Smith can be reached at (571) 272-8760. 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. /S.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1752 /NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586824
IMIDAZOLIDINYLIDE COMPOUND FOR USE AS A SHUT-DOWN ADDITIVE FOR LITHIUM ION BATTERIES AND ELECTROLYTE AND BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12560517
DEVICE FOR AND METHOD OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT ELECTRODE TAB IS BENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12531239
POSITIVE ELECTRODE ACTIVE MATERIAL FOR NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY, AND NON-AQUEOUS ELECTROLYTE SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12512560
Inorganic Coating Layer Crosslinked Separator
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12494504
ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY AND MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR ALL-SOLID-STATE BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+41.9%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 31 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month