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
Claims 1 and 2 are currently pending.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Status of Amendment
The amendment filed on 06/18/2026 has been fully considered, but does not place the application in condition for allowance.
This action has been made Final.
Status of the Rejections Pending since the Office Action of 18 March 2026
All the 103 rejections over Morikawa in view of Sugafuji has been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment. However, a new ground(s) of Rejection has been set forth below over Sugafuji in view of Morikawa.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugafuji et al., JPH1131487 (Cited in IDS, English Translation already on the record) in view of CN 105870394 (Cited in IDS, English translation already on the record).
Regarding claim 1, Sugafuji et al. teaches a cylindrical sealed battery (abstract) comprising:
A bottomed cylindrical exterior can (2; Fig.1) having an opening that is provided with a grooved portion (see figure below);
An electrode assembly (3; Fig.1) and an electrolyte that are housed in the exterior can;
A sealing assembly (5; Fig.1, abstract) fixed by crimping between the grooved portion and an open edge at the opening; and
An upper insulating plate (7 and 6) inserted between the electrode assembly (3) and the sealing assembly (5), wherein
the upper insulating plate has a first insulating plate (7) of a disk shape (Fig.2a-c) smaller than an inner diameter of the grooved portion and has a second insulating plate (6) of a ring shape placed under the first insulating plate (7); and wherein the first insulating plate (7) is disposed inside the grooved portion, and an uppermost surface of the first insulating is lower than an uppermost inner curve of the grooved portion in relation to the sealing assembly.
PNG
media_image1.png
458
747
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sugafuji does not teach that the first insulating plate is more heat resistant than the second insulating plate.
However, Morikawa teaches a bottomed cylindrical exterior can (5) having an opening that is provided with a grooved portion, an electrode assembly (4) and a non-aqueous electrolyte (page 5, [002] of English Translation) that are housed in the exterior can; a sealing assembly (9; Fig.5) fixed by crimping between the grooved portion and an open edge at the opening; and an upper insulating plate (1 &2; Fig.5) inserted between the electrode assembly (4). Morikawa teaches that the first insulating plate (1) is more heat resistant than the second insulating plate. Morikawa teaches that the second insulating plate (2) has a melting point lower than the first insulating plate (1) (page 5, [005]). Therefore, the first insulating plate (1) is more heat resistant than the second insulating plate.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the first and second insulating plates of Sugafuji with teachings of Morikawa, so that the fist insulating plate being more heat resistant than the second insulating plate in order to prevent short circuit and ensure the safety of the battery and the operator as taught by Morikawa (page 5, [005]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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.
Modified Sugafuji does not specifically teach that a ring width of the second insulating plate (6) being greater than a protruding length of the grooved portion in an inward direction of the exterior can. The disk shape insulating plate 7 is placed within the grooved portion and the insulating plate 6, corresponding to the claimed “second insulating plate, is placed within the inner diameter of the first insulating plate 7. As indicated in the drawing below, the inner diameter of the first insulating plate 7 is smaller than the protruding length of the groove portion. A person having ordinary skill in the art would not find it obvious to make the ring width of the second insulating plate 6 bigger than the protruding length of the grooved portion, because insulating plate 6 is placed within the inner diameter of the first insulating plate.
PNG
media_image2.png
359
382
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under Morikawa in view of Sugafuji have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Sugafuji in view of Morikawa.
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 NIKI BAKHTIARI whose telephone number is (571)272-3433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM-6 PM.
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.
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.
/NIKI BAKHTIARI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1722
Prosecution Insights