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 .
Response to Amendment
1. Applicant’s amendments with respect to claims filed on 06/17/2026 have been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application and are currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Claims 1-3 have been withdrawn from consideration.
The amendments and remarks filed are sufficient to cure the previous 35 U.S.C 112 rejections set forth in the Non-Final office action mailed on 03/17/2026.
Drawings
2. 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
3. Claims 4-5 and 10 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 4, the recitation “adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs are welded together overlapping negative electrode tabs to form a negative electrode lead” in claim 4, lines 10-12 should read “adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs are welded together to form a negative electrode lead”.
Regarding claim 5, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 5, line 7-8 should read “the extension direction”.
Regarding claim 10, the recitation “an extension direction” in claim 10, lines 9-10 should read “the extension direction”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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 4-20 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 “wherein each positive electrode tab and each negative electrode tab includes a tab welding portion in which adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs are welded together to form a positive electrode lead and adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs are welded together overlapping negative electrode tabs to form a negative electrode lead” in claim 4, lines 8-12 is indefinite because it is not clear if each tab is referring to each tab of the two or more positive electrode plates and each tab of the two or more negative electrode plates, or it if it is referring to the positive electrode tab and the negative electrode tab. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “wherein the positive electrode tab and the negative electrode tab includes a tab welding portion comprising adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs welded together to form a positive electrode lead and adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs welded together overlapping negative electrode tabs to form a negative electrode lead”.
Regarding claim 16, the recitation “wherein each positive electrode tab and each negative electrode tab includes a tab welding portion in which adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs are welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a positive electrode lead and in which adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs are welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a negative electrode lead” in claim 16, lines 9-13 is indefinite because it is not clear if each tab is referring to each tab of the two or more positive electrode plates and each tab of the two or more negative electrode plates, or it if it is referring to the positive electrode tab and the negative electrode tab. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “wherein the positive electrode tab and the negative electrode tab includes a tab welding portion comprising adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a positive electrode lead and adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a negative electrode lead”.
Further regarding claim 16, the recitation “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 tab and the negative electrode tab corresponds to a predetermined threshold temperature such that deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion” in claim 16, lines 15-19 is indefinite because it is unclear how a relation of lengths relates to a specific temperature, it is unclear what the predetermined temperature is and how it is determined based on the relation of lengths, and it is unclear what amount or type of deformation is occurring. Further it is unclear in the claim what relation of lengths creates the structure necessary to achieve this predetermined temperature. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “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 tab and the negative electrode tab is configured such that at a predetermined threshold temperature, deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion”. Further since there is no specific structure defined as providing this configuration, a teaching of the structural limitations of the claim will be considered as providing the necessary structure to be configured such that at a predetermined threshold temperature, deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion.
Regarding claim 18, the recitation “wherein the disconnection portion is formed on a side surface of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab adjacent to the electrode assembly” is indefinite in view of the interpretation of claim 16 above, as the disconnection portion is not a positively recited structure of the electrode assembly of claim 16 and rather a portion which forms after an unspecified deformation force is applied to the unwelded portion above an unspecified predetermined temperature. For examination purposes the aforementioned recitation will be interpreted as “wherein the disconnection portion is configured to be formed on a side surface of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab adjacent to the electrode assembly”. Further, the Examiner is considering the limitations of claim 18 obvious if the structural limitations of the claim is met.
Regarding claim(s) 5-15 and 17-20, 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
5. 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.
6. 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]); wherein the electrode tab (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) includes a tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together) in which adjacent 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]) are welded together 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 each tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together, each tab is each one on the right and left side) defined as extending from an outermost end (end of TWP furthest from 10, Fig. 1 below) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together, each tab is each one on the right and left side) to an end (end of TWP closest to 10, Fig. 1 below) of each tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together, each tab is each one on the right and left side) closest to the electrode assembly (10, Fig. 1, see [0007]) 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 tab (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) varies across a thickness direction (y-direction, Fig. 1 below) of the electrode tab (13, Fig. 1, see [0007], see Fig. 1 below where the length of the TWP varies across the y-direction). 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 of the positive electrode plates and a negative electrode plate of the negative electrode plates, a case accommodating the electrode assembly, wherein each positive electrode tab and each negative electrode tab includes a tab welding portion in which adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs are welded together to form the positive electrode lead and adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs are welded together overlapping negative electrode tabs to form a negative electrode lead, wherein a length of the each 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 (one of 112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) of the positive electrode plates (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) and a negative electrode plate (one single 111, Fig. 2, see [0073]) of the negative electrode plates (111, Fig. 2, see [0073], see one 120 in between each 112 and 111), 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 each positive electrode tab (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 each negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) includes a tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in which adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) are welded together to form a positive electrode lead (the TWP on the right side, it is the Examiner’s position this acts as the positive electrode lead) and adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) are welded together overlapping negative electrode tabs to form a negative electrode lead (the TWP on the left side, it is the Examiner’s position this 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 each tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together, each tab is each one on the right and left side) defined as extending from an outermost end (end of TWP furthest from 10, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together, each tab is each one on the right and left side) to an end (end of TWP closest to 10, Fig. 1 above) of each tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together, each tab is each one on the right and left side) closest to the electrode assembly (10, Fig. 1, see [0007]) 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) disposed along an outermost surface (surface of 1st portion closest to 15, Fig. 1 below) of the tab welding portions (TWP, Fig. 1 above, includes left and right side), and a second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) spaced apart from the outermost surface (surface of 1st portion closest to 15, Fig. 1 below, see 2nd portion is spaced apart from the outer surface of 1st portion) of the tab welding portions (TWP, Fig. 1 above, includes left and right side) and located on a opposite side (side of 1st portion furthest from 15, 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 the 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).
PNG
media_image2.png
656
528
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) disposed along an outermost surface (outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15, Fig. 1 below) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above); a second tab welding portion (2nd portion, Fig. 1 below) spaced apart from the outermost surface (outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15, Fig. 1 below) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) and located on an opposite side (side of 1st portion furthest from 15, 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) spaced apart from the outermost surface (outside surface of the 1st portion closer to 15, Fig. 1 below, see the 3nd portion is spaced apart) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) and located on an 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 the 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 the 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 the 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).
PNG
media_image3.png
656
528
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 the 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 a 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).
PNG
media_image4.png
735
975
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 the 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 a thickness (distance between top and bottom of TWP) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see where the center is longest).
PNG
media_image5.png
752
998
media_image5.png
Greyscale
7. 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 the extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 40% or more of a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab.
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 the extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 40% to 90% of a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab.
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 the extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 60% or less of a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab.
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 the extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 30% to 60% of a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab.
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 the extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 60% or more of a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab.
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 the extension direction of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab is 40% to 70% of a length of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab.
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).
8. Claim(s) 16-20 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]), wherein each electrode tab (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) includes a tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see [0007] where the welding jig 15 welds the tabs together) in which adjacent overlapping electrode tabs (13, Fig. 1, see [0007]) are welded together along a partial length thereof (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 serve as an electrode lead (it is the examiners position that the TWP is an electrode lead). 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 electrode plate of the plurality of positive electrode plates and a negative electrode plate of the plurality of negative electrode plates, a case accommodating the electrode assembly, and wherein each positive electrode tab and each negative electrode tab includes a tab welding portion in which adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs are welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a positive electrode lead, and in which adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs are welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a negative electrode lead, the positive electrode lead and the negative 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 tab and the negative electrode tab corresponds to a predetermined temperature such that deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
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]) 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 (one of 112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) of the positive electrode plates (112, Fig. 2, see [0073]) and a negative electrode plate (one single 111, Fig. 2, see [0073]) of the negative electrode plates (111, Fig. 2, see [0073], see one 120 in between each 112 and 111), 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 each positive electrode tab (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 each negative electrode tab (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) includes a tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in which adjacent overlapping positive electrode tabs (13 right, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) are welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a positive electrode lead (the TWP on the right side, it is the Examiner’s position this acts as the positive electrode lead) and adjacent overlapping negative electrode tabs (13 left, Fig. 1 above, see modifications above) are welded together along a partial length thereof to serve as a negative electrode lead (the TWP on the left side, it is the Examiner’s position this acts as the negative electrode lead).
Park fails to teach wherein the positive electrode lead and the negative electrode lead exposed to the outside of the case, and 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 tab and the negative electrode tab corresponds to a predetermined temperature such that deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion.
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), wherein a length (d, Fig. 4) of the tab welding portion (120, Fig. 4, see [0059]) is 60% or less (24% or more, see math calculations below) of a total 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 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).
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 tab 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 of 24% to 60% 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).
Therefore, as Park in view of Song teach the structural limitations of claim 16, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the secondary battery of Park in view of Song to be configured such that at a predetermined threshold temperature, deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion. Further as seen in the 112 rejection of claim 16 above, it is the Examiner’s position that where the structural limitations of the claim are met, the configuration that at a predetermined threshold temperature, deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion.
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 each tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in the 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 fails to teach wherein the disconnection portion is formed on a side surface of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab adjacent to the electrode assembly. See 112 rejection above for interpretation.
However, as Park in view of Son teaches the same structure of the secondary battery as the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect secondary batteries with the same structure to exhibit the same configuration of wherein the disconnection portion is formed on a side surface of the positive electrode tab or the negative electrode tab adjacent to the electrode assembly. Further see 112 rejection above, where the Examiner is considering the limitations of claim 18 obvious if the structural limitations have been taught by the prior art.
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 each tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 above) in the 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 an outermost 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 a thickness (distance between top and bottom of TWP) of the tab welding portion (TWP, Fig. 1 below, see where the center is longest).
PNG
media_image7.png
752
998
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Park in view of Son teaches wherein the length (distance between end of TWP furthest from 10 to end of TWP closest to 10, Fig. 1 above) of the tab welding portion (TWP, see Fig. 1 above) is 60% or less (24% to 60%, see modifications above) of a total length (length of 13 from 10 to end of TWP, see 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).
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant's arguments filed 06/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that the cited art does not disclose variance in the length of each tab welding portion defined as extending from an outermost end of the tab welding portion to an end of each tab welding portion closest to the electrode assembly. The Examiner respectfully disagrees as seen in Fig. 1 below, each TWP, the TWP on the left and the TWP on the right varies in length in the y-direction, wherein the length of the TWP on the left and the right is defined as extending from the end of each TWP furthest from 10 to the end of each TWP closest to 10.
PNG
media_image1.png
752
998
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding applicant’s argument that the cited art fails teach benefit of being easier to improve the safety of the battery. This argument is moot as first, this limitation was not required to be taught in the claim limitations of claim 4, and further the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985).
Regarding applicant’s argument that the cited art fails to teach the structure of the 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 tab and the negative electrode tab corresponds to a predetermined threshold temperature such that deformation of the unwelded portion above the predetermined threshold temperature forms a disconnection portion and does not recognize a correspondence between a predetermined threshold temperature and disconnection portion. This argument is moot as this limitation does not imply any specific structure, nor does it specify the predetermined threshold temperature or the scale or type of deformation applied to the structure. Further, forming of a deformation portion appears to be an attempt at introducing a method limitation into a structural claim. Therefore, as the prior art of Park in view of Song teaches the structural limitations of claim 16, it meets the configuration of the aforementioned recitation. Further, the claim limitation does not require the prior art to recognize a correspondence between a predetermined threshold temperature and a disconnection portion, it requires that above an unspecified predetermined temperature, an unspecified deformation will form a disconnection portion. Once again this appears to be a recitation of a method of forming a disconnection portion given specific conditions rather than a specific structural limitation. Therefore as the cited art teaches the structural limitations, the Examiner considers the expected configurational limitations to be taught.
Conclusion
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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
Prosecution Insights