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 § 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 7-9 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 7 recites the limitation "the storage part" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this office action, “the storage part” will be interpreted as “the central part”. Further, claim 9 discloses “the storage part” also at line 3 and will be interpreted same as above. Further still, claims 8-9 are rejected since they depend from claim 7.
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.
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 1-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (US 2015/0) in view of Lee et al. (US 2017/0170437).
Regarding claims 1 and 6-9, Takahashi et al. discloses in Figs 1-25, a battery cell (ref 40) that has a curved shape (Figs 2A-C, [0051]) so that a cross section (Figs 2A-C) of the battery cell (ref 40) has a curve (ref 1802, [0051], Figs 2A-C), wherein both-sided face sealing parts (refs 17, 15, Fig 6D) of a battery case ([0094], ref 10) are sealed by UV glue coating ([0043]) based on a direction (Figs 2A-C, Fig 6D) in which electrode leads (refs 16) are formed.
Takahashi et al. does not explicitly disclose a cutting part is formed at a central part in the longitudinal direction of each of the both-sided face sealing parts, the cutting part is formed within a point of 1/3 to 2/3 of the total length of the both-sided face sealing parts in the direction in which the electrode leads are formed, the cutting part is cut from the outer end of the both-sided face sealing part in an inward direction toward the storage part of the battery case so that a stress due to the curve of the batter cell is not concentrated in the center, the cutting part is formed in a V-shape, the cutting part is formed to a depth of 10 – 70% based on a sealing width from an outer end of the both-sided face sealing parts toward the storage part of the battery case
Lee et al. discloses in Figs 1-7, a battery cell (ref 200) including an electrode assembly (ref 230) in a pouch casing (ref 250). The pouch casing (ref 250) has edge sealing parts (refs 221-224) with included V-shaped cut recesses (refs 210) at a mid-length (Fig 2) of the cell (ref 200). The V-shaped cut recesses (refs 210) are cut to a depth of between 10 – 70% of a width (ref W, Fig 2, [0062]) the edge sealing parts (refs 222, 223). This configuration enhances the structural integrity and performance of the battery ([0082], [0015], [0016]).
Takahashi et al. and Lee et al. are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the V-shaped cut structure disclosed by Lee et al. into the battery of Takahashi et al. to enhance the structural integrity and performance of the battery.
Regarding claim 2, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the cross section of the battery cell (ref 40) in a direction in which the electrode lead (ref 16) is formed has a curve (Figs 2A-C, [0188]) in which both side ends (refs 15, 17) are bent together in the same direction (Figs 2A-C, [0188]) with respect to the central part (Figs 2A-C, [0188]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses a curvature radius R (ref 1802) of the curve (Figs 2A-C) of the battery cell (ref 40) is 90 – 100 mm ([0049]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the battery case is a pouch-type battery case ([0094], Fig 6D) made of a laminate sheet ([0094]) including a resin layer ([0094]) and a metal layer ([0094]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the both-sided face sealing parts (refs 15, 17) are bent in the direction (Figs 2A-C) of the battery cell (ref 40).
Regarding claim 10, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses a UV glue coating ([0043]) is further formed on a cutting surface ([0043] discloses UV adhesive sealing across refs 17, 15) of the cutting part (see Claim 1 above, in view of Lee et al., envisaged combination has UV coating on cut structure).
Regarding claim 11, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above and also discloses the UV glue coating ([0043]) is a coating in which a UV curable material is cured ([0043]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Takahashi et al. discloses in Figs 1-25, a battery module ([0198]) comprising the battery cell (ref 40) as set forth above.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (US 2015/0) in view of Lee et al. (US 2017/0170437) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi (US 2021/0031462).
Regarding claim 12, modified Takahashi et al. discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above but does not disclose the UV curable material comprises at least one of unsaturated polyester-based materials, polyester acrylates, epoxy acrylates, or urethane acrylates.
Choi discloses in Figs 1-9, a battery including a UV cured sealing adhesive comprising urethane acrylates ([0058]). This composition enhances performance of the adhesive sealing material ([0058]).
Takahashi et al. and Choi are analogous since both deal in the same field of endeavor, namely, batteries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the UV cured urethane acrylate disclosed by Choi into the battery of Takahashi et al. to enhance the adhesive sealing of the battery, thereby enhancing overall battery structural integrity and performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH J DOUYETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-1212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8A - 4P EST.
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, Basia Ridley can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/KENNETH J DOUYETTE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725