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 .
Claims 1-26 are pending in the application
Claims 1-15 are withdrawn in the application
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of 16-27 in the reply filed on 17 June 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 17 June 2026.
Double Patenting
Claims 16 and 19-22 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 17, 24, 25, and 28 of copending Application No. 18/286,034 (reference application, hereinafter ‘034). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 16, ‘034 claims an electrode assembly comprising: an electrode cell body portion including: a separator stacked between a first electrode sheet and a second electrode sheet in the form of a sheet, the first electrode sheet, the second electrode sheet, and the separator being wound in a jelly-roll type configuration, and an uncoated portion, is formed in an end portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in a width direction, wherein an active material layer is not coated on the uncoated portion; a plurality of cut surface portions formed at a portion of the uncoated portion along a circumferential direction around a core portion of the electrode cell body portion; and a plurality of forming portions disposed between the plurality of cut surface portions being uncut portions of the uncoated portion that are laid down, wherein the plurality of cut surface portions are formed by first cut lines in an uncoated portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in an axial direction of the electrode cell body portion and second cut lines, peripheral ends of which are connected to the first cut lines, in an uncoated portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in a peripheral direction of the electrode cell body portion (claim 17).
Regarding claim 19, ‘034 claims the plurality of cut surface portions are located spaced outward by a predetermined distance in an axial direction from a boundary portion of the uncoated portion and a coated portion (claim 25).
Regarding claim 20, ‘034 claims the plurality of forming portions are radially formed around the core portion of the electrode cell body portion (the forming portions are formed between the pair of cut surface portions, and the cut surface portions are formed by cutting out opposite sides of the uncoated portion in a diameter direction around a core portion, claim 17).
Regarding claim 21, ‘034 claims the plurality of forming portions are formed in a shape in which the uncut portions are laid down toward the core portion of the electrode cell body portion (claim 24).
Regarding claim 22, ‘034 claims wherein the uncoated portion is removed in a predetermined section adjacent to the core portion in a winding direction (the recessed portion, claim 28).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 17-18 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/286,034 (reference application, hereinafter ‘034) in view of Batson (US Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0351966).
‘034 is relied upon as described above.
‘034 does not claim a cut surface portion among the plurality of cut surface portions is formed in a sector shape along the circumferential direction around the core portion of the electrode cell body portion, nor the cut surface portion having a central angle of 30° to 180°.
Batson teaches a cylindrical cell with a first and second electrode sheet stacked with a separator between them, which are in turn wound in a jelly-roll type configuration (abstract). Batson further teaches the edges of the first and second electrode sheets contain uncoated portions at the peripheral edges (abstract). The uncoated portions have a plurality of cut surface portions that have a sector shape ([0044], and fig. 10, lower portion that includes the notch ref. #1030). The cut surface portion has a central angle of less than 180° ([0049]). When the sector shaped cut surface portions has a central angle of less than 180°, the resistance of the electrode sheet can be reduced ([0044]).
The range of 180° or less for the central angle overlaps with the claimed range of 30° to 180°. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a sector shape cut surface portion with a central angle of 180° or less, as taught by Batson, in the claimed invention of ‘034. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this shape and angle for the decreased resistance of the electrode.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claim 23 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 26 of copending Application No. 18/286,034 (reference application, hereinafter ‘034) in view of Otani (WIPO Patent Application Publication No. 2021/020237). For prior art discussion see English translations for WO-2021020237-A1.
‘034 is relied upon as described above.
‘034 further claims the core portion is formed in a hollow shape passing through a central portion of the electrode cell body portion (claim 26).
‘034 does not claim the plurality of forming portions do not cover the core portion in an axial direction.
Otani teaches an electrode assembly comprising an electrode cell body portion, which includes a separator stacked between a first electrode sheet (strip-shaped positive electrode) and a second electrode sheet (strip-shaped negative electrode) ([0007], [0022], and fig. 2 ref. #21-#23). The first electrode sheet, the second electrode sheet, and the separator are wound in a jelly-roll type configuration (spiral shape) ([0022] and fig. 4, the jelly-roll type body). An uncoated portion is formed in an end portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in a width direction, wherein an active material layer is not coated on the uncoated portion ([0023] and fig. 2 ref. #21C and #22C).
A plurality of cut surface portions (grooves) are formed at a portion of the uncoated portion along a circumferential direction around a core portion of the electrode cell body portion ([0028] and fig. 4B, ref. #43, see below, and fig. 7A, ref. #43). A plurality of forming portions are disposed between the plurality of cut surface portions, the forming portions being uncut portions of the uncoated portion that are laid down ([0051], fig. 4C, see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
543
526
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Otani further teaches the core portion is formed in a hollow shape passing through a central portion of the electrode cell body portion (through-hole, [0027] and fig. 4 ref. #26). The plurality of forming portions do not cover the core portion in an axial direction ([0056], fig. 7A and 7B, ref. #26). Since the forming portions do not cover the core portion, this allows for a jig to be inserted into the core portion during the manufacturing of the electrode to form the cut surface portions ([0053]), in turn increasing the simplicity and consistency of manufacturing the electrode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to not cover the core portion with the forming portions, as taught by Otani, in the claimed invention of ‘034. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this configuration to allow for the use of a jig during manufacturing of the grooves, in turn increasing the simplicity and consistency of manufacturing the electrode.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: fig. 9 ref. H. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 16-27 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 16 recites the limitation “a jelly-roll type configuration” in lines 5-6 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “a jelly-roll type configuration” means that the electrode cell body portion must have a jelly-roll configuration (i.e. a wound electrode) or if it may have a configuration similar to a jelly-roll configuration (i.e. a different configuration with similar properties) that is different to a jelly-roll configuration.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the plurality of cut surface portions are formed by first cut lines in an uncoated portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in an axial direction of the electrode cell body portion and second cut lines, peripheral ends of which are connected to the first cut lines, in an uncoated portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in a peripheral direction of the electrode cell body portion” in lines 16-20 which render the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “the plurality of cut surface portions are formed by” means that the plurality of cut surface portions are defined by having a first and second cut lines, or if this limitation is intended to be a product-by-process limitation.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “a cut surface portion among the plurality of cut surface portions is formed in a sector shape” in lines 1-2 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear what “a sector shape” is, as there is no clear definition in the specification. A sector can refer to an area or portion that is distinct from others, and not just a particular shape. It is unclear if the intended limitation is a circular sector.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “the plurality of forming portions are radially formed around the core portion” in lines 1-2 which renders the claim vague and indefinite. It is unclear if “radially formed” is intended to mean that the plurality of forming portions are located radially around the core portion, or if “radially formed” is intended to be a product-by-process limitation in which the forming portions are formed by the process of radial forming.
Claims 17-23 are further rejected as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 –
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 16-17 and 19-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Otani (WIPO Patent Application Publication No. 2021/020237). For prior art discussion see English translations for WO-2021020237-A1.
Regarding claim 16, Otani teaches an electrode assembly comprising an electrode cell body portion, which includes a separator stacked between a first electrode sheet (strip-shaped positive electrode) and a second electrode sheet (strip-shaped negative electrode) ([0007], [0022], and fig. 2 ref. #21-#23) . The first electrode sheet, the second electrode sheet, and the separator are wound in a jelly-roll type configuration (spiral shape) ([0022] and fig. 4, the jelly-roll type body). An uncoated portion is formed in an end portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in a width direction, wherein an active material layer is not coated on the uncoated portion ([0023] and fig. 2 ref. #21C and #22C).
A plurality of cut surface portions (grooves) are formed at a portion of the uncoated portion along a circumferential direction around a core portion of the electrode cell body portion ([0028] and fig. 4B, ref. #43, see below, and fig. 7A, ref. #43). A plurality of forming portions are disposed between the plurality of cut surface portions, the forming portions being uncut portions of the uncoated portion that are laid down ([0051], fig. 4C, see below).
The plurality of cut surface portions are formed by first cut lines in an uncoated portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in an axial direction of the electrode cell body portion and second cut lines, peripheral ends of which are connected to the first cut lines, in an uncoated portion of each of the first electrode sheet and the second electrode sheet in a peripheral direction of the electrode cell body portion ([0028] and fig. 4B, see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
543
526
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 17, Otani further teaches a cut surface portion among the plurality of cut surface portions is formed in a sector shape along the circumferential direction around the core portion of the electrode cell body portion (in which the rectangular shape of the cut surface portion is the sector shape, fig. 4B ref. #43, see above).
Regarding claim 19, Otani further teaches the plurality of cut surface portions are located spaced outward by a predetermined distance in an axial direction from a boundary portion of the uncoated portion and a coated portion ([0028], the grooves are formed in the uncoated portion, therefore the distance between the bottom of the grooves in fig. 4B, seen above, to a boundary portion, or the edge of the active portion, is the predetermined distance).
Regarding claim 20, Otani further teaches the plurality of forming portions are radially formed around the core portion of the electrode cell body portion (forming portions, fig. 4B and 4C, see above, which are formed radially around the core).
Regarding claim 21, Otani further teaches the plurality of forming portions are formed in a shape in which the uncut portions are laid down toward the core portion of the electrode cell body portion (forming portion, fig. 4C, see above, as well as [0055]-[0056] and fig. 7A, 7B).
Regarding claim 22, the limitation “the uncoated portion is removed in a predetermined section adjacent to the core portion in a winding direction” is a method limitation and does not determine the patentability of the product, unless the process produces unexpected results. The method of forming the product is not germane to the issue of patentability of the product itself, unless Applicant presents evidence from which the Examiner could reasonably conclude that the claimed product differs in kind from those of the prior art. MPEP 2113. Furthermore, there does not appear to be a difference between the prior art structure and the structure resulting from the claimed method because Otani teaches the uncoated portion not being present and removed in a predetermined section adjacent to the core portion in a winding direction ([0055]-[0056], fig. 7A, see below).
PNG
media_image2.png
630
756
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Otani further teaches the core portion is formed in a hollow shape passing through a central portion of the electrode cell body portion (through-hole, [0027] and fig. 4 ref. #26). The plurality of forming portions do not cover the core portion in an axial direction ([0056], fig. 7A and 7B, ref. #26).
Regarding claim 24, Otani teaches a battery cell comprising the electrode assembly of claim 16 ([0013] and [0022], and figs. 1 and 4A-F). The battery cell further contains a battery can (outer can, [0015] and figs. 1 and 4, ref. #11) in which the electrode assembly is electrode assembly (110) is accommodated and electrically connected to the second electrode sheet electrode assembly (110) is accommodated and electrically connected to one of the first electrode sheet (11) and the second electrode sheet (12) to have a first polarity (figs. 1 and 4A-F, ref. #11 and #25, the second electrode current collector contacts the battery can, resulting in them being electrically connected).
The battery cell further contains a sealing cap portion configured to seal an open end of the battery can (battery lid, [0018] and fig. 1 ref. #14), and a first current collector plate electrically connected to the first electrode sheet to have a second polarity (positive electrode current collector plate, [0027] and fig. 1 and 4C-D, ref. #24).
Regarding claim 25, Otani further teaches the first current collector plate is welded to the plurality of forming portions ([0028], the portions without the grooves are welded to the current collector).
Regarding claim 26, Otani further teaches a battery pack comprising at least one battery cell of claim 25 ([0062] and [0064]).
Regarding claim 27, Otani further teaches a vehicle comprising at least one battery pack of claim 26 ([0083] and [0085]).
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.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otani (WIPO Patent Application Publication No. 2021/020237) in view of Batson (US Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0351966). For prior art discussion see English translations for WO-2021020237-A1.
Otani is relied upon as described above.
In the alternative, Otani does not teach a cut surface portion among the plurality of cut surface portions is formed in a sector shape along the circumferential direction around the core portion of the electrode cell body portion. Otani also does not teach explicitly teach the cut surface portion has a central angle of 30° to 180°.
Batson teaches a cylindrical cell with a first and second electrode sheet stacked with a separator between them, which are in turn wound in a jelly-roll type configuration (abstract). Batson further teaches the edges of the first and second electrode sheets contain uncoated portions at the peripheral edges (abstract). The uncoated portions have a plurality of cut surface portions that have a sector shape ([0044], and fig. 10, lower portion that includes the notch ref. #1030). The cut surface portion has a central angle of less than 180° ([0049]). When the sector shaped cut surface portions has a central angle of less than 180°, the resistance of the electrode sheet can be reduced ([0044]).
The range of 180° or less for the central angle overlaps with the claimed range of 30° to 180°. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a sector shape cut surface portion with a central angle of 180° or less, as taught by Batson, in the electrode of Otani. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use this shape and angle for the decreased resistance of the electrode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Myles Alan Lovasz whose telephone number is (571)272-0214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at (571) 272-1490. 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.
/MAL/
Myles Alan LovaszExaminer, Art Unit 1788 08/18/2026
/ALEXANDRE F FERRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788
Prosecution Insights