CTNF 18/280,009 CTNF 92217 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 statements (IDS) submitted on Sep. 1, 2023, Nov. 5, 2024, and Mar. 3, 2025 have been considered by the examiner. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification 06-11 AIA The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-20 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. Claim 1 recites “aligned with”. However, it is unclear how to understand the related limitation, at least because no direction is claimed for aligning, which renders the claim indefinite. Is a region as claimed determined by whether it is covered by the lead film? For purposes of examination, any direction will read on the said direction. The issue similarly applies to claim 16. Claim 3 recites “… in the first region extend into opposite surfaces of the electrode lead”. However, “opposite surfaces” are not defined. Further, the “extend” does appear to be “extends”. The claim is indefinite. 07-34-03 AIA The term “ adjacent ” in claim s 7-8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ adjacent ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The claims have been rendered indefinite due to the use of the term “adjacent” . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (KR 20170021102 A, whose English machine translation is being employed for citation purposes, herein referred to as Kim ) . Regarding claim 1 , Kim teaches a secondary battery (Title, Abstract, Figs.) comprising: an electrode assembly (30 in Figs.) to which an electrode lead (69) is attached; a case (10) accommodating the electrode assembly therein so that a portion (68 or 64) of the electrode lead is exposed to an outside of the case; a sealing portion (4, 8) of the case that seals the electrode assembly within the case; and a lead film (70) covering a portion of an outer surface of the electrode lead, the lead film being interposed between the electrode lead and the sealing portion (See, in particular, Figs. 1-2), wherein the electrode lead comprises a first region not aligned with the lead film, the first region being exposed to the outside of the case, a second region aligned with the lead film, and a third region not aligned with the lead film, the third region not being exposed to the outside of the case (See the annotated Fig. below), and wherein a separation groove (See 43 in Fig3.) extending into the electrode lead is located in the third region. PNG media_image1.png 720 1280 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 12 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the separation groove defines an empty space therein (See 43 in the Figs.). Regarding claim 15 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 11, wherein the secondary battery is a pouch-type secondary battery (See, at least, Figs. 1-2, and [0009]). Regarding claim 16 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the third region is not aligned with the sealing portion, and a width W1 of the lead film is greater than a width of the sealing portion. See below. PNG media_image2.png 691 1280 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 17 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the separation groove extends from a first end to a second end of the electrode lead along a direction orthogonal to an extension direction of the electrode lead. See below. PNG media_image3.png 720 1280 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claims 18-19 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the separation groove is a region of the electrode lead in which a thickness of the electrode lead is reduced in a width direction of the electrode lead (See groove 43 in Figs. 2, 4 and 7), and the separation groove is a trench recessed from a surface of the electrode lead in a thickness direction of the electrode lead (also see groove 43 in Figs. 2, 4 and 7). Regarding claim 20 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, wherein the separation groove does not extend from a first end to a second end of the electrode lead, the separation groove is divided into several portions, and there is no continuity among the portions of the separation grooves (See Figs. 3, 5 and 9) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-fti The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained through the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-fti The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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. 07-20-02-fti This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a). 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim . Regarding claims 4-5 and 9 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, and providing the separation groove to be a band shape, a shape of a dotted line, a wedge shape, a round shape or a square shape is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular pattern of the claim is significant. Absent persuasive evidence showing that a particular configuration is significant, a mere change in shape is not sufficient to provide a patentable distinction over the prior art since the shape itself may be considered as merely a matter of design choice. See In re Dailey , 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). The change in form or shape, without any new or unexpected results, is an obvious engineering design. See MPEP § 2144.04 IV. Regarding claims 6-8 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, and the claimed ratios can be readily achieved by one of ordinary skill in the art and involves merely ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art. The changes in proportion do not patentably distinguish the instant invention in the absence of evidence that the claimed ratios are significant. MPEP § 2144.04(IV)(A-B). Upon review of the entire initial disclosure, there does not appear to be any criticality to the claimed ratios . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (US 20120276427 A1, hereafter Kim-II ) . Regarding claims 2-3 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, but is silent as to a second separation groove located in the first region. In the same field of endeavor, Kim-II discloses an electrode terminal (41, Fig. 2; corresponding to the claimed electrode lead) has a first region (top portion with threads, Fig. 2), wherein the first region has lots of grooves (See, between 423s, Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to have designed a second groove in the first region of Kim, as taught by Kim-II, since one of ordinary skill in the art would readily appreciate that it would be an obvious matter of design choice. See In re Dailey , 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Furthermore, as taught by Kim-II, the second groove can be in any direction (i.e., 360 [Symbol font/0xB0]), and therefore the second groove of Kim as modified can be located in the first region and extends into opposite surfaces of the electrode lead . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kwon et al. (US 20170069881 A1, hereafter Kwon ) or in view of Ahn et al. (US 20170110712 A1, hereafter Ahn ) . Regarding claim 14 , Kim teaches the secondary battery according to claim 1, but is silent as to a composition of the lead film. In the same field of endeavor, Kwon disclose a similar electrode lead (23, 24) and a lead film (25), wherein the composition of the lead film can be polyethylene (See, at least, [0092], Fig. 2). It would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to have used polyethylene taught by Kwon as the composition of Kim’s lead film, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin , 125 USPQ 416. See MPEP § 2144.07. Ahn discloses a similar structure, wherein an insulating film (12) is attached to a circumference of an electrode lead (100) and the insulating film may be formed of polyethylene ([0060]). It would have been to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the instant invention, to have used polyethylene taught by Ahn as the composition of Kim’s lead film, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See MPEP § 2144.07 . Claim Objections 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 10-11 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHONGQING WEI whose telephone number is (571)272-4809. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 - 6:00. 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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at (571)272-1330. 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. /ZHONGQING WEI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 2 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 4 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 5 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 6 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 7 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 8 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 9 Art Unit: 1727 Application/Control Number: 18/280,009 Page 10 Art Unit: 1727