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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action regarding Application Ser. No. 18/271,007 to Cha et al., assigned to LG Energy Solutions, Ltd., Seoul, Korean, filed 07/05/2023 and published as U.S. PG Publication 2024/0387877 on 11/21/2024 is in response to applicant’s arguments/remarks and claims amendment filed 05/29/2026. Applicant’s response is fully considered.
This application is a 35 U.S.C. § 371 National Stage entry of International Patent Application PCT/KR2022/021220 filed 12/23/2022. It claims priority from Korean Patent Application KR10-2021-0188409 filed 12/27/2021.
Status of the Claims
In the response filed on 05/29/2026 applicant has amended the claims of the application. Claim 1 has been amended by adding the new limitation of “locally” applying the sound waves to “selective parts of” the battery cell. Claim 3 has been canceled, and new claims 11-13 have been added. The status of the claims stand as follows:
Currently amended 1
Original 2
Canceled 3
Previously presented 4-10
4.5 New 11-13
Claims 1-2, 4-13 are currently pending in this application. All pending claims are under full consideration.
Withdrawal of Claim Rejection – 35 USC § 112
The rejection of claim 3 under 112(b) for reciting the limitation “…locally applying sound waves to a region where air bubbles are expected to form”, which renders the claim indefinite since the “region where air bubbles are expected to be formed” is not explicitly known has been withdrawn because of the cancellation of the claim.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35 U.S. Code not included in this section can be found in the prior Office Action.
Claim 1-2, 4, 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang Fushuai (CN106505251; cited in IDS dated 08/19/2024; English language machine translation is used here; hereafter called CN'251) in view of Murphy et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2020/0106137A1).
Regarding claim 1 CN '251 discloses the disclosed invention belongs to the field of lithium-ion battery manufacturing technology (CN '251 paragraph 0002); thus disclosed a method of manufacturing a lithium ion battery. The method describes the battery cell stand in two stages after it has been injected with electrolyte (CN '251 paragraph 0031). This is equivalent to the method comprising assembling a battery cell by accommodating an electrode assembly inside a battery case and injecting an electrolyte into the battery case. CN '251 discloses an aging process is an important process after electrolyte injection into the battery cell (CN '251 paragraph 0006).
CN '251 discloses a sound wave generator is placed around the battery cell after liquid injection (CN '251 paragraph 0011) and in a first settling stage a sound wave generator is adjusted to emit sound waves to the battery cell (CN '251 paragraph 0012, 0031), the first settling stage is considered equivalent to the claimed pre-aging stage, which is carried by applying sound waves to the battery cell. CN '251 then discloses after the first settling the battery cells are left to cool to room temperature until aging process is complete (CN '251 paragraph 0013, 0031), equivalent to aging the battery cell.
CN '251 discloses the sound wave generator is symmetrically placed around the battery cell, and the symmetrical placement around the perimeter ensures all parts of the battery cell are in full contact with a sound waves (CN '251 paragraph 0038). CN '251, however, is silent about applying the sound wave to the battery cell using a speaker. CN ‘251 is also silent about the sound waves are locally applied to selective parts of the battery cell.
Murphy discloses that acoustic illumination may be utilized as an excitation force on a lithium-ion battery (Murphy paragraph 0072), and the acoustic stimuli may include continuous wave signals, tone bursts, chirps, broadband noise, and/or impulses "broadcasted" by at least one speaker (Murphy paragraph 0072). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have used a speaker to apply the sound waves as taught by Murphy in the battery cell of CN '251 since such a modification is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 IC). Such a speaker may be utilizing direct transmission waves (Murphy paragraph 0065) equivalent to the directional speaker recited in claim 2.
The directional speaker of Murphy is therefore capable of directing the sound wave in a particular direction or to a particular part of the battery, and, therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have directed the sound waves using the speaker of Murphy to selective parts of the battery cell as recited in amended claim 1.
Regarding claim 4 CN '251 discloses the applying the sound wave by sweeping the frequency to arrive at the optimum frequency (CN '251 paragraph 0036).
Regarding claim 6 CN '251 discloses the battery cells after being injected with the electrolyte are placed in a closed environment (CN '251 paragraph 0014, 0017), and sound wave generator is placed around the battery cell (CN '251 paragraph 0038); thus, the sound waves are applied in a state where the battery is sealed.
Regarding claim 7 CN '251 is silent that the sound waves are applied in a state wherein battery cell is not sealed. However, applying the wavs when the battery cell is not sealed would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill since the sound waves will still produce the desired pre-aging as CN '251 teaches that applying the waves when the battery in a sealed state enhances the aging effect better than when the battery in a non-closed environment (CN '251 paragraph 0038), but the pre-aging will still be possible in a non-closed environment.
Regarding claim 8 CN 25 discloses the frequency of the sound waves can be between 20kHz and 500 GHz (CN '251 paragraph 0036). The claimed ranges of 20 Hz to 20000kHz (20kHz) overlaps in its upper end with the lower end of the disclosed range of 20kHz and 500 GHz (CN '251 paragraph 0036).
Regarding claim 9 CN '251 discloses in one embodiment the sound wave generator is activated to emit ultrasonic frequency (CN '251 paragraph 0045).
Regarding claim 10 the frequency of the sound waves can be between 20kHz and 500 GHz (CN '251 paragraph 0036). The claimed range ranges of 20 kHz to 100 kHz is included in the disclosed range 20kHz and 500 GHz (CN '251 paragraph 0036).
Regarding claim 11-13 CN discloses the battery 100 has a prismatic shape (CN ‘251 Fig. 1) and is silent about the battery being cylindrical (as recited in claim 11), or pouch-type (as recited in claim 12) or the electrode assembly is a jelly-roll electrode assembly (as recited in claim 13). However, all these involve change in the shape of the battery cells without changing or affecting the electrochemical nature and behavior of the batteries and changing the shape of the battery cell or the electrode assembly would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art since according to the MPEP a change in shape or size is generally considered as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang Fushuai (CN106505251; called CN '251) in view of Murphy et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2020/0106137A1) as applied above to claim 1, and further in view of Arise et al. (U.S. PG Publication 2018/0254460)
The discussion of CN '251 and Murphy as applied to claim 1 above is fully incorporated here and is relied upon for the limitation of the claim in this section.
Regarding claim 5 CN '251 is silent about activating charging after the pre-aging of the battery cell. Arise discloses a method of producing a secondary battery (Arise paragraph 0136), and disclose a battery having low resistance after an aging charge and discharge (Arise paragraph 0033) wherein the battery is charged after an aging process in which the battery is subjected to a degassing operation (Arise paragraph 0033), considered equivalent to the first settling the battery cells (CN '251 paragraph 0013, 0031), equivalent to pre-aging the battery cell.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to have subjected the battery of CN '251 after the first settling (CN '251 paragraph 0012, 0031), equivalent to the pre- aging, to an activation charging to evaluate the status of the battery cell. This is considered the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way (MPEP 2143 I C).
Response to Argument
In the response filed on 05/29/2026 applicant has amended the claims of the application. Claim 1 has been amended by reciting the limitation that the sound wave is locally applied to selective parts of the battery cell. Claim 3 has been canceled and new claims 11-13 have been added claiming different shapes of the battery cell being cylindrical in claim 11, and pouch-type in claim 12, and the electrode assembly being jelly-roll assembly in claim 13. Applicant traverses the rejection of the claims presented in the previous non-final Office action dated 03/12/2026.
Regarding the rejection of claim 3 under 112(b) applicant notes that claim 3 has been canceled to overcome the rejection. Examiner also notes that as pointed above in this Office action the rejection of claim 3 under 112(b) is now moot due to the cancelation of the claim. Therefore, the rejection is hereby withdrawn.
Regarding the rejection of the claims 1-4, and 6-10 under 103 over Fushuai CN106505251 in view of Murphy et al. U.S. PG Pub. 2020/0106137 applicant notes that while Fushuai is applied for pre-aging being performed by applying sound waves to a battery cells, Murphy is applied for disclosing applying sound waves using a speaker. And that claim 1 has been amended to recite locally applying sound waves to selective parts of the battery cell. Applicant then argues that Fushuai discloses the sound generator is symmetrically placed around the battery cell and that all parts of the battery are in contact with the sound waves and concludes that the combination of Fushuai and Murphy does not result in the subject matter of claim 1 (Remarks pages 6-7).
Examiner notes that the rejection was based on the teaching that Fushuai teaches the application of sound waves for a preaging of a battery and Murphy teaches the use of a microphone for a directional application of the soundwave. And that applying the sound wave in specific direction to a particular locality of the batter cell would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art. Further, such obviousness rationale would result in Fushuai modified by the microphone of Murphy would result in the subject matter of claim 1. Applicant has not presented any argument or evidence that such a modification is not obvious to a person of ordinary skill. The discussion presented here also extended to the dependent claims. Thus, the previously presented rejection is still considered proper and valid.
New claims 11-13 as presented above in this Office action are also rejected under the same references of Fushuai in view of Murphy.
The rejection is made final.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 OMAR M KEKIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5918. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-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, NIKI BAKHTIARI can be reached at 571-272-3433. 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.
/OMAR M KEKIA/Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights