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/Restriction
REQUIREMENT FOR UNITY OF INVENTION
1. As provided in 37 CFR 1.475(a), a national stage application shall relate to one invention only or to a group of inventions so linked as to form a single general inventive concept (“requirement of unity of invention”). Where a group of inventions is claimed in a national stage application, the requirement of unity of invention shall be fulfilled only when there is a technical relationship among those inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features. The expression “special technical features” shall mean those technical features that define a contribution which each of the claimed inventions, considered as a whole, makes over the prior art.
The determination whether a group of inventions is so linked as to form a single general inventive concept shall be made without regard to whether the inventions are claimed in separate claims or as alternatives within a single claim. See 37 CFR 1.475(e).
When Claims Are Directed to Multiple Categories of Inventions:
As provided in 37 CFR 1.475 (b), a national stage application containing claims to different categories of invention will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combinations of categories:
(1) A product and a process specially adapted for the manufacture of said product; or
(2) A product and a process of use of said product; or
(3) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and a use of the said product; or
(4) A process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process; or
(5) A product, a process specially adapted for the manufacture of the said product, and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process.
Otherwise, unity of invention might not be present. See 37 CFR 1.475 (c).
This application contains claims directed to more than one species of the generic invention. These species are deemed to lack unity of invention because they are not so linked as to form a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1.
The species are as follows:
Species A, Figs. 4 and 7-11, Claims 1-3
Species B, Figs, 5-6 and 12-14, Claims 4-15 and 19
Applicant is required, in reply to this action, to elect a single species to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. The reply must also identify the claims readable on the elected species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered non-responsive unless accompanied by an election.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which are written in dependent form or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowed generic claim. Currently, the following claim(s) are generic: 16-18.
The groups of inventions listed above do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features for the following reasons:
Species A and B lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a secondary battery comprising: an electrode assembly comprising two or more positive electrode plates with each positive electrode plate having a positive electrode tab extending therefrom, two or more negative electrode plates with each negative electrode plate having a negative electrode tab extending therefrom, two or more separators with each separator interposed between a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate; a case accommodating the electrode assembly; and a tab welding portion comprising welded overlapping positive electrode tabs and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Choi et al. (Pub. No. US 20100055558 A1).
Choi teaches a secondary battery (100, Fig. 4, see [0040]) comprising: an electrode assembly (300, Fig. 3, see [0040]) comprising two or more positive electrode plates (301, Fig. 7, see [0051]) with each positive electrode plate (301, Fig. 7, see [0051]) having a positive electrode tab (310, Fig. 4, see [0050]) extending therefrom (see [0050] and Fig. 7 where each cathode tap 310 extends from a cathode 301), two or more negative electrode plates (302, Fig. 7, see [0051]) with each negative electrode plate (302, Fig. 7, see [0051]) having a negative electrode tab (320, Fig. 4, see [0043]) extending therefrom (Fig. 7, see [0043] where anode taps 320 extend from 300, therefore as seen in [0050] the 310 extend from 301, therefore it is the Examiner’s opinion in order for them to be the anode taps they must extend from the anodes 302), two or more separators (separators, see [0051]) with each separator (separators, see [0051]) interposed between a positive electrode plate (301, Fig. 7, see [0051]) and a negative electrode plate (302, Fig. 7, see [0051], see [0051] where separators disposed between 301 and 302); a case (200, Fig. 4, see [0040]) accommodating the electrode assembly (300, Fig. 3, see [0040]); and a tab welding portion (areas where 320 and 310 overlap and are welded, see [0043] where they are coupled by welding) comprising welded overlapping positive electrode tabs (310, Fig. 4, see [0050], see [0043] where the 310 are coupled by welding) and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs (320, Fig. 4, see [0043] where 320 are coupled by welding).
During a telephone conversation with Wilfred Patrick on 02/19/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Species B, claims 4-19. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 1-3 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species or invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention or species may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected invention or species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions have unity of invention (37 CFR 1.475(a)), applicant must provide reasons in support thereof. Applicant may submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. Where such evidence or admission is provided by applicant, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/12/2023, 11/30/2023, 09/20/2024, 12/16/2024, and 03/17/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
4. Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because the reference character “C” in Fig. 6 is used to designate two different tab welding portions, one of which is also designated by reference character “D”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 5-15, 17, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 5, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 5, lines 5 and 7 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 6, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 6, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 7, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 7, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 8, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 8, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 9, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 9, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 10, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 10, lines 8, 10, 11, and 12-13 should read “the extension direction”, and the recitation “a first tab welding portion” in claim 10, line 12 should read “the first tab welding portion”.
Regarding claim 11, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 11, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 12, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 12, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 13, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 13, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 14, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 14, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 15, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 15, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 17, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 17, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 19, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 19, line 2 should read “the extension direction”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
6. Claims 4-19 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.
Regarding claim 4, the recitation “two or more separators with each separator interposed between a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate” in claim 4, lines 5-6 is indefinite because two or more positive electrode plates and two or more negative electrode plates have been previously recited in claim 4, therefore it is unclear if the positive electrode plate and negative electrode plate of the aforementioned recitation are the same or different from the positive and negative electrode plates previously recited. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “two or more separators with each separator interposed between one of the positive electrode plates and one of the negative electrode plates”.
Further regarding claim 4, the recitation “a tab welding portion comprising welded overlapping positive electrode tabs and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs to form an electrode lead” in claim 4, lines 7-8 is indefinite because it is unclear how overlapping positive electrode tabs and overlapping negative electrode tabs can form a single lead. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a tab welding portion comprising welded overlapping positive electrode tabs to form a positive electrode lead, and overlapping negative electrode tabs to form a negative electrode lead”.
Regarding claim 5, the recitation “a second tab welding portion not in contact with the surface of the tab welding portion” in claim 5, lines 3-4 is indefinite in view of the specification as seen in Fig. 5 and 6 of the instant application all the components are in contact with one another either directly or indirectly, therefore it is unclear how the second tab welding portion is not in contact with the surface of the tab welding portion as it is in contact with the first tab welding portion and therefore indirectly contacts the surface of the tab welding portion. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a second tab welding portion not in direct contact with the surface of the tab welding portion”.
Regarding claim 6, the recitation “the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab” in claim 6, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab”.
Regarding claim 7, the recitation “the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab” in claim 7, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab”.
Regarding claim 8, the recitation “the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab” in claim 8, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab”.
Regarding claim 10, the recitation “a second tab welding portion not in contact with the surface of the tab welding portion” in claim 10, lines 4-5 is indefinite in view in view of the specification as seen in Fig. 5 and 6 of the instant application all the components are in contact with one another either directly or indirectly, therefore it is unclear how the second tab welding portion is not in contact with the surface of the tab welding portion as it is in contact with the first tab welding portion and therefore indirectly contacts the surface of the tab welding portion. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a second tab welding portion not in direct contact with the surface of the tab welding portion”.
Further regarding claim 10, the recitation “third tab welding portion not in contact with the surface of the tab welding portion” in claim 10, lines 6-7 is indefinite in view of the specification as seen in Fig. 6 of the instant application all the components are in contact with one another either directly or indirectly, therefore it is unclear how the second tab welding portion is not in contact with the surface of the tab welding portion as it is in contact with the second tab welding portion which is in contact with the first tab welding portion and therefore indirectly contacts the surface of the tab welding portion. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a third tab welding portion not in direct contact with the surface of the tab welding portion”.
Further regarding claim 10, the recitation “the opposite side of the second tab welding portion” in claim 10, line 7 is lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “an opposite side of the second tab welding portion”.
Further regarding claim 10, the recitation “the length of a first tab welding portion” in claim 10, line 12 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of a first tab welding portion”.
Regarding claim 11, the recitation “the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab” in claim 11, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab”.
Regarding claim 12, the recitation “the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab” in claim 12, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab”.
Regarding claim 13, the recitation “the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab” in claim 13, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab”.
Regarding claim 14, the recitation “the surface of the tab welding portion” in claim 14, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a surface of the tab welding portion”.
Regarding claim 15, the recitation “the thickness of the tab welding portion” in claim 15, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a thickness of the tab welding portion”.
Regarding claim 16, the recitation “a plurality of separators with each separator interposed between a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate” in claim 16, lines 5-6 is indefinite because a plurality of positive electrode plates and a plurality of negative electrode plates have been previously recited in claim 16, therefore it is unclear if the positive electrode plate and negative electrode plate of the aforementioned recitation are the same or different from the positive and negative electrode plates previously recited. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a plurality of separators with each separator interposed between one of the positive electrode plates and one of the negative electrode plates”.
Further regarding claim 16, the recitation “a tab welding portion comprising welded overlapping positive electrode tabs along a partial length thereof and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs along a partial length thereof to serve as an electrode lead, the electrode lead” in claim 16, lines 8-10 is indefinite because it is unclear how welded overlapping positive electrode tabs and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs are able to form a single electrode lead as suggested by the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a tab welding portion comprising welded overlapping positive electrode tabs along a partial length thereof to serve as a positive electrode lead and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs along a partial length thereof to serve as a negative electrode lead, the positive electrode lead and the negative electrode lead.
Regarding claim 19, the recitation “the surface of the tab welding portion” in claim 19, line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a surface of the tab welding portion”.
Further regarding claim 19, the recitation “the thickness of the tab welding portion” in claim 19, line 4 lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “a thickness of the tab welding portion”.
Regarding claim(s) 17-18 the claim(s) is/are rejected as they depend from, and therefore incorporate the claimed subject matter from claims rejected under this statute.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 nonobviousness.
8. Claim(s) 4-5, 10, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (Pub. No. KR 20180072065 A).
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches a secondary battery (secondary battery, Fig. 1, see [0007], the examiner would like to note this is a non-preferred embodiment however, this is still prior art as seen in MPEP 2123) comprising: an electrode assembly (10, Fig. 1, see [0007]) comprising two or more electrode plates (11, Fig. 1, see [0007]) with each electrode plate (11, Fig. 1, see [0007]) having an electrode tab (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) extending therefrom (see each 11 has a 13 extending from it in Fig. 1), and two or more separators (12, Fig. 1, see [0007]) with each separator (12, Fig. 1, see [0007]) interposed between electrode plates (11, Fig. 1 see where 12 separates each electrode plate 11, see [0007]); and a tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together) comprising welded overlapping electrode tabs (13, Fig. 1 below see where the tabs 13 are overlapped and welded to make up the TWP and is present on both sides, see [0007]) to form an electrode lead (it is the examiners position that the TWP is an electrode lead), wherein a length (length is from edge of 15 closest to electrode assembly 10 to front end of overlapping tabs 13, Fig. 1 below) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below, as the TWP is present on the right and left side, the extension direction will be the x direction going from the 10 outward to the left or right respectively for each side) of the electrode tabs (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) varies across a thickness direction (y-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the electrode tabs (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]). In this embodiment Park fails to teach wherein the electrode plates are two or more positive electrode plates with each positive electrode plate having a positive electrode tab extending therefrom, and two or more negative electrode plates with each negative electrode plate having a negative electrode tab extending therefrom, wherein each separator is interposed between a positive electrode plate and a negative electrode plate, a case accommodating the electrode assembly, wherein the tab welding portion comprises welded overlapping positive electrode tabs and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs to form an electrode lead, wherein a length of the tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or negative electrode tab varies across a thickness direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
PNG
media_image1.png
752
998
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, in a different embodiment Park teaches wherein the electrode plates (110, Fig. 2, see [0073]) are two or more positive electrode plates (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) with each positive electrode plate (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) having a positive electrode tab (130, Fig. 2, see [0073] where the 130 extend from 110 therefore the positive electrode tab are the 130 extending from cathodes 112 as seen in Fig. 2) extending therefrom, and two or more negative electrode plates (111, Fig. 2, see [0073]) with each negative electrode plate (111, Fig. 2, see [0073]) having a negative electrode tab (130, Fig. 2, see [0073] where the 130 extend from 110 therefore the negative electrode tabs are the 130 extending from the anodes 111 as seen in Fig. 2) extending therefrom, wherein each separator (120, Fig. 2, see [0073]) is interposed between a positive electrode plate (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) and a negative electrode plate (111, Fig. 2, see [0073]), a case (220, Fig. 3, see [0082] where the 100 from Fig. 2 is in a case 220) accommodating the electrode assembly (100, Fig. 2, see [0082]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the embodiment of Fig. 1 to have the electrode plates 11 be alternating cathodes and anodes with the separator 12 in between each anode and cathode, and wherein the tabs extending from the cathodes are positive electrode tabs, and the tabs extending from the anodes are negative electrode tabs, and accommodating the electrode assembly in a case as taught by the embodiment of Fig. 2 and 3 of Park. Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Therefore, Park teaches wherein the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) comprises welded overlapping positive electrode tabs (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modification above from hereinafter the tabs 13 extending from 11 on the right side will be positive tabs and tabs 13 extending on the left side will be the negative electrode tabs) and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) to form an electrode lead (the TWP on the right side acts as the positive electrode lead and the TWP on the left side acts as the negative electrode lead), wherein a length (length is from edge of 15 to front end of overlapping tabs 13, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in an extension direction (x-direction for each side, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) varies across a thickness direction (y-direction, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above).
Regarding claim 5, Park teaches wherein the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) comprises a first tab welding portion (1st portion, Fig. 1 below, the illustration below is specifically showing the left or negative side but the TWP is mirrored on both sides, so the illustration would apply mirrored to the other side, the first portion is the part of the upper most tab that sits within the TWP) in contact with a surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, the surface is the outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above), and a second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) not in contact with the surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, the surface is the outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15, see 2nd portion is not in direct contact) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) and located on the opposite side (side of 1st portion not directly in contact with surface, Fig. 1 below) of the first tab welding portion (1st portion, Fig. 1 below), wherein a length (distance from edge of 15 to end of 2nd portion) of the second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) is longer than a length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly to end of 1st portion) of a first tab welding portion (1st portion, Fig. 1 below) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above, see in Fig. 1 below the 2nd portion is longer than the 1st portion). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
PNG
media_image2.png
292
370
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Park teaches wherein the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) comprises: a first tab welding portion (1st portion, Fig. 1 below, the illustration below is specifically showing the left or negative side but the TWP is mirrored on both sides, so the illustration would apply mirrored to the other side, the first portion is the part of the upper most tab that sits within the TWP) in contact with a surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, the surface is the outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above); a second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) not in contact with the surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, the surface is the outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15, see the 2nd portion is not in direct contact) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) and located on the opposite side (side of 1st portion opposite the surface, Fig. 1 below) of the first tab welding portion (1st portion, Fig. 1 below see the 2nd portion on the side of 1st portion which is not the surface side); and a third tab welding portion (3rd portion, Fig. 1 below) not in contact with the surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, the surface is the outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15, see the 3nd portion is not in direct contact) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) and located on the opposite side (side of 2nd portion facing 3rd portion, Fig. 1 below) of the second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below), wherein a length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly to end of 3rd portion) of the third tab welding portion (3rd portion, Fig. 1 below) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) is longer than a length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly to end of 2nd portion) of the second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above), and the length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly to end of 2nd portion) of the second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) is longer than the length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly to end of 1st portion) of a first tab welding portion (1st portion, Fig. 1 below) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
PNG
media_image3.png
301
376
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Park teaches wherein the length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly 10 to end of TWP in the x-direction, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) increases from the surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, this is the side of TWP closest to 15) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below) toward a thickness direction (y-direction, away from 15) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
PNG
media_image4.png
752
998
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Park teaches the length (distance between edge of 15 near electrode assembly 10 to end of TWP in the x-direction, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in an extension direction (x-direction, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 below, see modification above) is the longest at a central portion (center, Fig. 1 below) of the thickness (distance between top and bottom of TWP) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see where the center is longest). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
PNG
media_image5.png
752
998
media_image5.png
Greyscale
9. Claim(s) 6-9 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (Pub. No. KR 20180072065 A) as applied to claim 5 and 10 above, and further in view of Son et al. (Pub. No. US 20230140192 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the second tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 40% or more of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (d, Fig. 4) of the second tab welding portion (portion of 120 in d which is in the direct center of the electrode tabs, Fig. 4, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount, therefore the second portion will be the center tab in the welding portion) in an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 40% or more (24% or more, see math below) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the second welding portion is 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the second tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 7, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the second tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 40% to 90% of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (d, Fig. 4) of the second tab welding portion (portion of 120 in d which is in the direct center of the electrode tabs, Fig. 4, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount, therefore the second portion will be the center tab in the welding portion) in an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 40% to 90% (24% or more, see math below) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the second welding portion is 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the second tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 8, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the first tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 60% or less of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (part of length of d, Fig. 4) of the first tab welding portion (portion of tab 110 in area d which is near the top or bottom of 100, Fig. 4, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded, in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount, therefore the first portion is the portion on the outermost edge of area d and therefore the shortest because it has the most length to be bent) an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 60% or less (less than 24% or greater, see math calculations below for details) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: (these calculations are based on the percentage of d of the total length, but as described above the length of the first portion would be smaller than this percentage depending on total length of tabs to begin with) d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the first welding portion is less than 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 9, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the first tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 30% to 60% of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (part of length of d, Fig. 4) of the first tab welding portion (portion of tab 110 in area d which is near the top or bottom of 100, Fig. 4, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded, in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount, therefore the first portion is the portion on the outermost edge of area d and therefore the shortest because it has the most length to be bent) an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 30% to 60% (less than 24% or greater, see math calculations below for details) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: (these calculations are based on the percentage of d of the total length, but as described above the length of the first portion would be smaller than this percentage or greater depending on total length of tabs to begin with) d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the first welding portion is less than 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 11, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the third tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 60% or more of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (d, Fig. 4) of the third tab welding portion (portion of 120 in d which is in the direct center of the electrode tabs, Fig. 4, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount, therefore the second portion will be the center tab in the welding portion) in an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 40% or more (24% or more, see math below) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the third welding portion is 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the second tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 12, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the second tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 40% to 70% of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (part of length of d, Fig. 4) of the second tab welding portion (2nd portion, described in Fig. 3 below, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded, in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount) an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 40% to 70% (less than 24% or greater, see math calculations below for details) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: (these calculations are based on the percentage of d of the total length, but as described above the length of the 2nd portion would be smaller than this percentage depending on total length of tabs to begin with) d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the second welding portion is less than 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 13, Park fails to teach wherein the length of the first tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 50% or less of the length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Son teaches wherein the length (part of length of d, Fig. 4) of the first tab welding portion (portion of tab 110 in area d which is near the top or bottom of 100, Fig. 4, the examiner would like to note although Fig. 4 does not give a visual representation of each tab being different lengths as they are overlapped and welded, in Fig. 3 it is seen that all the tabs are of the same length before bending, therefore the length of each tab present in area d would be varied in the same way as shown in Park by virtue of each one being bent a different amount, therefore the first portion is the portion on the outermost edge of area d and therefore the shortest because it has the most length to be bent) an extension direction (direction from a moving towards end of d, Fig. 4) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) is 50% or less (less than 24% or greater, see math calculations below for details) of the length (a through d, Fig. 1, the addition of all these lengths gives the total length of 110) of the positive electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap) or the negative electrode tab (110, Fig. 4, see [0052] the electrode tabs are generic electrode tabs, therefore can represent either positive or negative electrode tabs, further see [0055] same polarities overlap).
Math Calculations: (these calculations are based on the percentage of d of the total length, but as described above the length of the first portion would be smaller than this percentage depending on total length of tabs to begin with) d = 2mm or more, see [0063], therefore when a, b, c, and 210/220 are longest, and d is 2mm the percentage will be smallest. Other variables: a = 2mm, see [0078], b = 2mm, see [0078], 210/220 = 2mm, and c = 1/5 of c+d, see [0064] the point where d begins is 1/5 the total length of the tab bundle 120 which is c+d, therefore c = 0.25*d, as d = 4/5 of c+d, further the width of 400 is not given, however it is very small compared to the rest of the lengths so the examiner is excluding it from the calculation as negligible. Percent = d/(a+b+c+210/220) = 2/(2+2+2+0.5)*100 = 24%.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the length of the first welding portion is less than 24% or more of the total length of the positive or negative electrode tab by using the welding apparatus and method as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly (see [0040] of Son). Further it would have been obvious to modify the length to be within the claimed range as Son teaches the length of the tab welding portion is a result effective variable of thickness of the electrode assembly and length of the tab bundle (see [0064] of Son) and limitations of distance from electrode assembly to welding portion (see [0080] of Son). Further it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device see MPEP 2144.04. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
10. Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (Pub. No. KR 20180072065 A) in view of Son et al. (Pub. No. US 20230140192 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Park teaches a secondary battery comprising (secondary battery, Fig. 1, see [0007], the examiner would like to note this is a non-preferred embodiment however, this is still prior art as seen in MPEP 2123): an electrode assembly (10, Fig. 1, see [0007]) comprising a plurality of electrode plates (11, Fig. 1, see [0007]) with each electrode plate (11, Fig. 1, see [0007]) having an electrode tab (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) extending therefrom (see each 11 has a 13 extending from it in Fig. 1), and a plurality of separators (12, Fig. 1, see [0007]) with each separator (12, Fig. 1, see [0007]) interposed between an electrode plates (11, Fig. 1 see where 12 separates each electrode plate 11, see [0007]) and a tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together) comprising welded overlapping electrode tabs 13, Fig. 1 below see where the tabs 13 are overlapped and welded to make up the TWP and is present on both sides, see [0007]) along a partial length thereof (see the TWP is only a portion of the total length of the tabs 13) to serve as an electrode lead (it is the examiners position that the TWP is an electrode lead). See 112 rejection above for interpretation. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, Park fails to teach in this embodiment wherein the electrode plates comprise a plurality of positive electrode plates with each positive electrode plate having a positive electrode tab extending therefrom, and a plurality of negative electrode plates with each negative electrode plate having a negative electrode tab extending therefrom, with each separator interposed between a positive and negative electrode plate, a case accommodating the electrode assembly, and wherein the tab welding portion comprises welded overlapping positive electrode tabs and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs to form an electrode lead, the electrode lead exposed to the outside of the case, wherein a length of the tab welding portion in an extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab in relation to a length of an unwelded portion of the positive electrode tabs and the negative electrode tab is adjusted such that deformation of the unwelded portion above a threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion.
PNG
media_image6.png
481
639
media_image6.png
Greyscale
However, in a different embodiment Park teaches wherein the electrode plates (110, Fig. 2, see [0073]) comprise a plurality of positive electrode plates (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) with each positive electrode plate (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) having a positive electrode tab (130, Fig. 2, see [0073] where the 130 extend from 110 therefore the positive electrode tabs are the 130 extending from the cathodes 112 as seen in Fig. 2) extending therefrom, and a plurality of negative electrode plates (111, Fig. 2, see [0073]) with each negative electrode plate (111, Fig. 2, see [0073]) having a negative electrode tab (130, Fig. 2, see [0073] where the 130 extend from 110 therefore the negative electrode tabs are the 130 extending from the anodes 111 as seen in Fig. 2) extending therefrom, with each separator (120, Fig. 2, see [0073]) interposed between a positive electrode plate (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) and negative electrode plate (111, Fig. 2, see [0073]), a case (220, Fig. 3, see [0082] where the 100 from Fig. 2 is in a case 220) accommodating the electrode assembly (100, Fig. 2, see [0082]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the embodiment of Fig. 1 to have the electrode plates 11 be alternating cathodes and anodes with the separator 12 in between each anode and cathode, and wherein the tabs extending from the cathodes are positive electrode tabs, and the tabs extending from the anodes are negative electrode tabs, and accommodating the electrode assembly in a case as taught by the embodiment of Fig. 2 and 3 of Park. Further, it has been held that combining two embodiments disclosed adjacent to each other in a prior art patent does not require a leap of inventiveness and involves only routine skill in the art. Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Therefore, Park teaches wherein the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) comprises welded overlapping positive electrode tabs (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modification above from hereinafter the tabs 13 extending from 11 on the right side will be positive tabs and tabs 13 extending on the left side will be the negative electrode tabs) and welded overlapping negative electrode tabs (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) to form an electrode lead (the TWP on the right side acts as the positive electrode lead and the TWP on the left side acts as the negative electrode lead), wherein a length (length is from edge of 15 to front end of overlapping tabs 13, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in an extension direction (x-direction for each side, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) in relation to a length (length of each tab 13 from edge of electrode assembly to closest edge of 15, Fig. 1 above) of an unwelded portion (portion of 13 in section a, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tabs (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) and the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) is adjusted such that deformation of the unwelded portion (portion of 13 in section a, Fig. 1 above) above a threshold temperature (any temperature where a break may occur, as there is no indication of scale of the threshold temperature, any temperature where deformation causes a break is the threshold temperature) forms a disconnection portion (any place a break occurs in 13 present in section a is the disconnection portion, see [0010] breakage can occur).
Park fails to teach wherein the electrode lead exposed to the outside of the case. However, Son teaches wherein the electrode lead (tab bundle 120, Fig. 4, see [0059] where the tab bundle is directly connected to an external device) exposed to the outside of the case (see [0004] the secondary battery comprises and electrode assembly inside a case, therefore as seen in [0059] when the tab bundle 120 connects to an external device, it would therefore have to extend outside a battery case to be external).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Park such that the TWP extends outside the case to connect to an external device as taught by Son to prevent damage to the electrode tabs and electrode assembly when the electrode tabs are pressed (see [0040] of Son). Further, Park teaches that modifications can be made (see [0087] of Park).
Regarding claim 17, Park in view of Son teaches wherein the length (length is from edge of 15 to front end of overlapping tabs 13, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in an extension direction (x-direction for each side, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) is constant or varies (see length of tabs in TWP in Fig. 1 above vary in length) across a thickness direction (y-direction, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above).
Regarding claim 18, Park in view of Son teaches wherein the disconnection portion (any place a break occurs in 13 present in section a is the disconnection portion, see [0010] breakage can occur) is formed on a side surface (any surface portion of 13 present in section a, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) adjacent to the electrode assembly (10, Fig. 1, see [0007], the portion of 13 present in section a is adjacent to the electrode assembly 10, see Fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 19, Park in view of Son teaches wherein the length (length is from edge of 15 to front end of overlapping tabs 13, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in an extension direction (x-direction for each side, Fig. 1 above) of the positive electrode tab (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) or the negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) increases from the surface (surface, Fig. 1 below, this is the side of TWP closest to 15) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below) toward a thickness direction (y-direction, away from 15) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below) and is the longest at a central portion (center, Fig. 1 below) of the thickness (distance between top and bottom of TWP) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see where the center is longest). See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
PNG
media_image7.png
752
998
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS CALEB MARROQUIN whose telephone number is (571)272-0166. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5:00 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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at 571-270-7078. 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.
/DOUGLAS C MARROQUIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723