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 .
Status of Claims and Other Notes
Claims 1–4, 7, and 8 are pending.
Claim 5 is canceled.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 14 August 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Applicants' amendments have overcome the objections to the drawings.
Specification
Applicants' amendments have overcome the objections to the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1–4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “where the surface of the substrate layer of the first separator for the first turn and the surface of the layer including the inorganic particles of the first separator for the second turn face each other are bonded to each other.” It is unclear what element the phrase “are bonded to each other” is further limiting. It appears that a conjunction (e.g., and) or punctuation (e.g., a semicolon) has be omitted between the phrases “face each other” and “are bonded to each other.” The Office recommends the limitation “where the surface of the substrate layer of the first separator for the first turn and the surface of the layer including the inorganic particles of the first separator for the second turn face each other, and wherein the surface of the substrate layer of the first separator for the first turn is bonded to the surface of the layer including the inorganic particles of the first separator for the second turn.”
Claims 2–4, 7, and 8 are directly dependent from claim 1 and include all the limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claims 2–4, 7, and 8 are also indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1–4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maeng et al. (KR 2004-0022919 A, hereinafter Maeng) in view of Miyazaki et al. (US 2014/0244072 A1, hereinafter Miyazaki).
Regarding claims 1–4, 7, and 8, Maeng discloses an energy storage device (10, [0027]) comprising:
an electrode assembly (20) obtained by winding a first separator (26a), a first electrode (23), a second separator (26b), and a second electrode (24)layered in this order, without including a winding core (FIG. 3, [0046]),
wherein at least a part of the first separator (26a) and at least a part of the second separator (26b) are bonded to each other at an innermost periphery of the electrode assembly (20, [0050]), and
a surface of the first separator (26a) for a first turn and a surface of the first separator (26a) for a second turn, based on an innermost circumference, are layered to face each other (FIG. 3, [0050]), and
facing parts where the surface of the first separator (26a) for the first turn and the surface of the first separator (26a) for the second turn face each other, and are bonded to each other (FIG. 3, [0050]);
at least a part of the first separator (26a) and at least a part of the second separator (26b) are bonded to each other at the innermost periphery of the electrode assembly (20, [0050]);
wherein the surface of the first separator (26a) for the first turn is bonded to the surface of the first separator (26a) for the second turn (FIG. 3, [0050]).
Maeng does not explicitly disclose:
the first separator includes a substrate layer and a layer including inorganic particles,
the layer including the inorganic particles is disposed at an innermost peripheral surface of the electrode assembly, and
a surface of the substrate layer of the first separator and a surface of the layer including the inorganic particles, of the first separator, are layered to face each other, and facing parts where the surface of the substrate layer of the first separator and the surface of the layer including the inorganic particles of the first separator face each other, and are bonded to each other;
wherein a bonding between the at least part of the first separator and the at least a part of the second separator is welding;
wherein the substrate layer contains a resin as a main component, and
wherein the layer including the inorganic particles contains a resin as a main component;
wherein the surface of the substrate layer of the first separator is directly bonded to the surface of the layer including the inorganic particles of the first separator; and
wherein the surface of the substrate layer of the first separator is directly welded to the surface of the layer including the inorganic particles of the first separator.
Miyazaki discloses a separator (124, 125) includes a substrate layer (124a, 125a) and a layer (124b, 125b) including inorganic particles (FIG. 7, [0055]), the layer (124b, 125b) including the inorganic particles is disposed at an innermost peripheral surface of an electrode assembly (120, [0077]), and a surface of the substrate layer (124a, 125a) of the separator (124, 125) and a surface of the layer (124b, 125b) including the inorganic particles, of the separator (124, 125), are layered to face each other (FIG. 7, [0077]), and facing parts where the surface of the substrate layer (124a, 124b) of the separator (124, 125) and the surface of the layer (124b, 125b) including the inorganic particles of the first separator face each other, and are bonded to each other (FIG. 7, [0077]); wherein a bonding between the at least part of the separator (124, 125) and the at least a part of the separator (124, 125) is welding (FIG. 7, [0063]); wherein the substrate layer (124a, 125a) contains a resin as a main component (see resin, [0057]), and wherein the layer (124b, 125b) including the inorganic particles contains a resin as a main component (see resin, [0059]); wherein the surface of the substrate layer (124a, 125a) of the separator (124, 125) is directly bonded to the surface of the layer (124b, 125b) including the inorganic particles of the separator (124, 125; [0077]); and wherein the surface of the substrate layer (124a, 125a) of the separator (124, 125) is directly welded to the surface of the layer (124b, 125b) including the inorganic particles of the separator (FIG. 7, [0063]) to improve the thermal bonding property of the separator while inhibiting a reduction in performance (see separator, [0005]). Maeng and Miyazaki are analogous because they are directed to separators for energy storage devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to make the separators of Maeng with the substrate layers and the layers including inorganic particles in order to improve the thermal bonding property of the separator while inhibiting a reduction in performance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1–4,7, and 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 Sean P Cullen, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:00 am to 4:00 pm CT, Friday 6:00 am to 12:00 pm CT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Basia A Ridley can be reached at (571)272-1453. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Sean P Cullen, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights