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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/30/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 06/04/2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 8 are amended, Claims 3-4 are canceled and Claims 1-2 and 5-13 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of Claim 8 is withdrawn in view of the amendment filed 06/04/2026
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 5-6, and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 20150147615 A1), hereinafter "Ahn" in view of Yoo et al. (WO 2020004759 A1- US 20210184243 A1 cited for reference), hereinafter "Yoo" and Jung et al. (WO 2020149638 A1 - US 20220069332 A1 cited for reference), hereinafter "Jung". Ahn, Yoo and Jung et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely manufacturing electrode assemblies.
In regard to Claim 1, Ahn et al. discloses an electrode assembly manufacturing process comprising the steps of: (1) wrapping a second separator around a laminate structure stacked along a stacking dimension with excess portions (overlapping portions) of the second separator which would reasonably extend outwardly from the laminate structure in a lateral dimension transverse to the stacking dimension (Ahn, [0059], Figure 2), wherein the laminate structure having alternating layers of positive electrodes and negative electrodes stacked along the stacking dimension with a respective first separator portion being interposed between each successive layer of the positive and negative electrodes (Ahn, [0005]).
Ahn et al. also discloses bonding each of the excess portions (“the separator sheet is included in an overlapping portion” Ahn [0059]) of the second separator to itself (“outermost ends of the separator sheet may be fixed by heat fusion or taping”, Ahn [0059])) in the stacking dimension so as to define a respective bonded portion of the second separator and bonding each of the bonded portions of the second separator to a respective adjacent portion of the second separator in the lateral dimension (i.e. fixed by contacting the finished separator sheet with a thermal welder or a heat plate) (Ahn, [0059]). Further, the skilled artisan would find it obvious to bond the separator to itself when overlapping portions of the separator are provided.
Additionally, the skilled artisans of Ahn must provide the second separator in some length to allow for the overlapping portion of the separator to be present and Ahn et al. discloses wherein the laminated structure is disposed on a long separator sheet which is then wound around the laminated body (second separator 1x longer the circumferential length of the laminated structure) and that the separator may have a length extending to wrap around the electrode assembly once after the winding (i.e. second separator is 2x longer the circumferential length of the laminated structure) which anticipates the claimed range (Ahn, [0059]).
While Ahn discloses that a pressure may be continuously maintained to enable the electrodes to stably surface-contact the separator sheet, it fails to explicitly disclose pressing an upper end and a lower end of the laminate structure to strengthen an adhesive strength between the first separator portions and each of the layers of the positive and negative electrodes.
Yoo et al. discloses providing a second separator which is wrapped around a laminated electrode body and that pressing an upper end and a lower end of the laminate structure occurs to achieve the benefit of strengthening an adhesive strength between the first separator portions and each of the layers of the positive and negative electrodes (Yoo, [0056-0057, 0063]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a pressing step of the electrode assembly after the second separator is wrapped as taught in Yoo et al. to the electrode assembly and second separator of Ahn et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of achieving the benefits taught in Yoo et al. and as doing so would amount to nothing more than applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Lastly, while Ahn et al. discloses wrapping the laminate structure with the second separator under constant pressure, which would reasonably secure a space for one of the excess portions of the second separator on a side of the laminate structure (Ahn, [0059]), it is silent as to how the pressure is applied.
Jung et al. discloses wrapping a separator around an electrode assembly and uses vacuum suction (adsorption member) to adsorb the material in order to accurately wrap the separator (Jung, [0063, 0065]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide an adsorption member to aid in wrapping the separator around the electrode body as taught in Jung et al. to apply the pressure and secure a space for one of the excess portions of the second separator on a side of the laminate structure already disclosed in Ahn as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would amount to nothing more than the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
In regard to Claims 5-6, and 10 Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. While Ahn et al. discloses wrapping the electrode structure with the second separator, free ends of the second separator are bonded to each other and to the second separator itself (Ahn, [0059]), it does not limit the free ends to be bonded in a certain position of the electrode assembly and may reasonable by bonded on the top or bottom or the left or right based on design incentives known to the skilled artisan.
Further, Yoo et al. discloses when wrapping the electrode structure with the second separator, free ends of the second separator are positioned so as to be in contact with the upper end or lower end of the laminate structure (Yoo, Figure 2) and the assembly may be pressed using a pressing roller (Yoo, [104]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide free ends of the second separator to be bonded on the upper or lower end of the electrode assembly with pressing rollers as taught in Yoo et al. or on the left or right side if so required as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would amount to nothing more than a routine variation of it in the same field based on design incentives or other market forces, as the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
In regard to Claims 8-9, Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. While Ahn et al. discloses wrapping a second separator around the electrode assembly using pressure it is silent as to the pressure members or the first separator ends being folded.
Yoo et al. discloses using pressure members to bond the second separator ends and depicts the first separator ends before and after wrapping the second separator as being undisturbed and unfolded (Ahn, [0008], Figures 1-2). Yoo et al. also discloses wherein sides of the primary pressurizing members are oriented obliquely (curved) to increase contact between the pressurizing members and the second separator when bonding the second separator (Yoo, [0004-0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a second separator that has ends that are bonded under pressure without folding the first separator membrane as taught in Yoo et al. as that would be a reasonable outcome the skilled artisan would be capable of achieving and as doing so would amount to nothing more than combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
In regard to Claim 11, Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. While Ahn et al. discloses wrapping the electrode structure with the second separator and that free ends of the second separator are bonded to each other and then to the second separator itself (Ahn, [0059]), it does not limit the free ends to be bonded in a certain position of the electrode assembly and may reasonable by bonded on the top or bottom or the left or right based on design incentives known to the skilled artisan.
Further, Yoo et al. discloses when wrapping the electrode structure with the second separator, free ends of the second separator are positioned so as to be in contact with the upper end or lower end of the laminate structure (Yoo, Figure 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to bond the free ends of the wrapped second separator on the top/bottom of the electrode assembly as taught in Yoo et al. and then back to the second separator on the lateral sides as doing so would amount to choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would reasonably accomplish the same functionality and structure of an electrode assembly wrapped with a second separator that is disclosed in Ahn, and Yoo.
In regard to Claim 12, Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. Ahn et al. discloses wrapping the electrode structure with the second separator and that free ends of the second separator are bonded to each other and then to the second separator itself which is not limited to the top/bottom or left/right and Ahn also discloses using pressure and heat so that the entire surface of the second separator is in stable contact with the electrode assembly (Ahn, [0059]), which would reasonably include pressure members contacting the lateral surface to achieve stable contact including when the free ends are on the sides.
In regard to Claim 13, Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. Ahn et al. also discloses an electrode assembly manufactured according to the electrode assembly manufacturing process of claim 1 (Ahn, Claim 17).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 20150147615 A1), hereinafter "Ahn" in view of Yoo et al. (WO 2020004759 A1- US 20210184243 A1 cited for reference), hereinafter "Yoo" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Kwon et al. (US 20150236321 A1), "hereinafter "Kwon". Ahn, Yoo and Kwon et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely manufacturing electrode assemblies.
In regard to Claim 2, Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. While Ahn et al. discloses a first separator that may have extended portions and Yoo depicts first separators with extended portions (Yoo, Figure 1 (130) they are silent as to a process of folding portions of the respective separator portions.
However, this is a known technique in the art as evidenced by Kwon et al. and providing the separator with extending portions and folding them over the edges of the electrode assembly by joining them together would reasonably provide more protection (separation) at the edges of the electrode assembly. Kwon et al. discloses an electrode assembly with a first separator interposed between the electrodes and a second separator wrapped around the electrode assembly (Kwon, [0017]), wherein generation of the first separator assembly may be performed by fusing the remaining portions of the separation film extending outwardly in the lateral dimension from the laminate structure (Kwon [0013]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide first separators with extending portions folded and in contact with each other as taught in Kwon et al. as doing so would be obvious to try for the skilled artisan and as doing so would amount to nothing more than the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al. (US 20150147615 A1), hereinafter "Ahn" in view of Yoo et al. (WO 2020004759 A1- US 20210184243 A1 cited for reference), hereinafter "Yoo" as applied to claim 1 above in view of Kim et al. (KR 101287414 B1 - Machine Translation), hereinafter “Kim”. Ahn, Yoo and Kim et al. are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely manufacturing electrode assemblies.
In regard to Claim 7, Ahn in view of Yoo et al. discloses the electrode assembly manufacturing process according to claim 1. While Ahn et al. discloses wrapping the electrode structure with the second separator wherein free ends of the second separator are bonded to each other and to the second separator itself (Ahn, [0059]), it does not limit the free ends to be bonded in a certain position of the electrode assembly and may reasonable by bonded on the top or bottom or the left or right based on design incentives known to the skilled artisan,
Further, Yoo et al. discloses when wrapping the structure with the second separator, free ends of the second separator are positioned so as to be in contact with the upper end or lower end of the laminate structure (Yoo, Figure 2) and the assembly may be pressed using a pressing roller (Yoo, [104]). However, both fail to explicitly disclose both an adsorption member and rollers provided to secure the second separator.
Kim et al. discloses wrapping an electrode assembly with a separator wherein the separator is adsorbed against an adsorption member in the lateral dimension to flatten the second separator where the rollers will pass (Kim, [14]) and wherein the rollers are fixed to the upper end or lower end of the laminate structure while contacting the free ends of the second separator so that the second separator is not folded (Kim, [63]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide a combination of vacuum adsorption and fixed rollers to secure the wrapped separator as taught in Kim et al. as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would amount to nothing more than applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In regard to applicants arguments that Ahn does not disclose a ratio of the separator length to the laminated structure, as pointed out in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection above Ahn et al. discloses wherein the laminated structure is disposed on a long separator sheet which is then wound around the laminated body (second separator 1x longer the circumferential length of the laminated structure) and that the separator may have a length extending to wrap around the electrode assembly once after the winding (i.e. second separator is 2x longer the circumferential length of the laminated structure) which anticipates the claimed range (Ahn, [0059]).
In regard to applicants’ arguments that Jung et al. fails to disclose the when wrapping the laminate structure with the second separator, the second separator is adsorbed against an adsorption member in the lateral dimension in order to secure a space for one of the excess portions of the second separator on a side of the laminate structure, as noted in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection above Ahn et al. discloses wrapping the laminate structure with the second separator under constant pressure, which would reasonably secure a space for one of the excess portions of the second separator on a side of the laminate structure (Ahn, [0059]), it is silent as to how the pressure is applied.
Jung et al. discloses wrapping a separator around an electrode assembly and uses vacuum suction (adsorption member) to adsorb the material in order to accurately wrap the separator (Jung, [0063, 0065]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide an adsorption member to aid in wrapping the separator around the electrode body as taught in Jung et al. to apply the pressure and secure a space for one of the excess portions of the second separator on a side of the laminate structure already disclosed in Ahn as doing so would give the skilled artisan the reasonable expectation of success and as doing so would amount to nothing more than the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Thus, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Seoldong et al. (KR 102264685 B1) discloses an apparatus for manufacturing an electrode assembly including at least one type of electrode unit as a basic unit, a laminator for laminating a first anode unit in which one positive electrode plate and one separator are stacked in a two-layer structure, and a first anode unit in which one negative electrode plate and one separator are stacked in a two-layer structure; a lamination transfer unit for alternately laminating the bonded first positive electrode unit and the first negative electrode unit at least once to form a laminated structure (Seoldong, Abstract).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH MAX OTERO whose telephone number is (571)272-2559. The examiner can normally be reached M-F Generally 7:30-430.
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, Nicole Buie-Hatcher can be reached at (571) 270-3879. 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.
/K.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 1725
/NICOLE M. BUIE-HATCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights