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
Claim 4 has been cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because it depends on cancelled claim 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are objected to because they depend from claims that ultimately depend from claims that ultimately depend from cancelled claim 4. As a result, the claims lack proper antecedent basis of dependency. Appropriate correction of the claim dependency is required.
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 1 and 10 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.
Claims 1 and 10 recites a “high temperature resistant portion.” The term “high temperature resistant” is a term of degree. The specification fails to provide an objective standard, temperature range, test method, or other guidance by which one of ordinary skill in the art could determine the scope of the claimed limitation with reasonable certainty. Accordingly, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, rendering the claim indefinite.
For examination purposes, the claim term “high temperature resistant portion” is read as capable of resisting degradation, deformation, or loss of intended functionality when exposed to elevated temperatures.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1, 2, 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zheng et al. (US 20180294467), hereinafter Zheng.
Regarding claim 1, Zheng teaches a secondary battery (Abstract), comprising:
A top cover plate ([0003], Fig. 4, cap plate 1);
Cell assemblies comprising ([0005], Fig. 5, electrode assembly 2):
A cell body ([0005], main body 21, case 5);
Tabs arranged on the cell body ([0005], first electrode tab 22, second electrode tab 23);
Extension parts are fixedly connected to the tabs ([0050], Fig. 3, first electrode terminal 11/second electrode terminal 12 passing through the cap plate 1 connecting to the insulating frame 6 and side edges 61 extending through)
Insulators ([0050], insulating frame 6);
Insulators arranged between the top cover plate and the cell assemblies and configured to isolate the cell assemblies from the top cover plate ([0050], insulating frame 6);
The insulators comprise high temperature resistant portions ([0050], insulating frame 6);
high temperature resistant portions being arranged above the extension parts and made of a high temperature resistant material ([0050], insulating frame 6);
Electrode terminals ([0005], [0046], first electrode terminal 11, second electrode terminal 12);
Electrode terminals pass through the top cover plate and the insulators and being connected to the tabs (Fig. 3, first electrode terminal 11/second electrode terminal 12 passing through the cap plate 1; insulating frame 6 connected to first electrode tab 22, second electrode tab 23);
The bottom ends of the electrode terminals extend along the bottom surfaces of the insulators to form extension parts ([0050], Fig. 3, first electrode terminal 11/second electrode terminal 12 passing through the cap plate 1 connecting to the insulating frame 6 and side edges 61 extending through).
Regarding claim 2, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Zheng further teaches:
The insulators are configured to isolate the top cover plate from the extension parts ([0050], insulating frame 6);
The extension parts extend along the width direction Y of the top cover plate ([0050], Fig. 3, first electrode terminal 11/second electrode terminal 12 passing through the cap plate 1 connecting to the insulating frame 6 and side edges 61 extending through).
Regarding claim 3, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 2, as stated above. Zheng further teaches the extension parts extend along the length direction X of the top cover plate ([0050], insulating frame 6 extending along the X direction (side edges 61)).
Regarding claim 6, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Zheng further teaches each of the tab comprises:
A first connecting portion and a first bending portion that are connected in sequence ([0005], first connecting piece 3, first bending portion 222);
The first bending portion being configured to the connect the cell body with the first connecting portion ([0005], first connecting piece 3, first bending portion 222);
The first connecting portion being fixedly connected to corresponding extension part of the extension parts ([0005], first connecting piece 3, first bending portion 222).
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.
Claims 5, 7-10 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng in view of Guo et al. (US 20210074963), hereinafter Guo.
Regarding claim 5, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach:
Guo teaches:
Grooves are formed in ends, close to the cell assemblies, of the electrode terminals;
The electrode terminals comprise body portions, the grooves correspond to the positions of the body portions;
The extension parts are arranged around the edges of the body portions.
Guo teaches:
Grooves are formed in ends, close to the cell assemblies, of the electrode terminals ([0013-0015], electrode lead-out hole 11, second groove 12, first groove 13);
The electrode terminals comprise body portions, the grooves correspond to the positions of the body portions ([0013-0015], electrode terminal 21, base portion 211, extension portion 212, electrode column 213);
The extension parts are arranged around the edges of the body portions ([0013-0015], electrode terminal 21, base portion 211, extension portion 212, electrode column 213).
Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the electrode plate cover structure of Zheng to include the grooved electrode terminal taught by Guo as it would facilitate positioning, assembly, and/or connection of the electrode terminal within the battery structure. Incorporating the grooved terminal would have merely involved the predictable use of known terminal configuration to obtain its recognized advantages yielding no more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 6, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach:
Each of the extension parts and each of the tabs are welded to form a first soldering mark region;
The area of the first soldering mark region is less than the area of the bottom surface of corresponding extension part of the extension parts
Guo teaches:
Each of the extension parts and each of the tabs are welded to form a first soldering mark region ([0012], [0051]);
The area of the first soldering mark region is less than the area of the bottom surface of corresponding extension part of the extension parts ([0012], [0051]).
Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the battery of Zheng to include the welded region as taught by Guo in order to provide a reliable electrical and mechanical connection between the extension parts and tabs. Further, selecting a soldering mark region having an area less than the area of the bottom surface of the corresponding extension part would have been an obvious matter of design choice, since the relative sizes constitute a result-effective variable that may be routinely optimized to achieve a desired balance of weld strength, manufacturing efficiency, and material usage.
Regarding claim 8, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 7, as stated above. Zheng further teaches the secondary battery comprises:
Protecting pieces ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4), comprising:
A second connecting portion and a second bending portion that are connected in sequence ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4, first curve portion 43/second curve portion 44, second folding portion 45);
The second bending portion being bent along an inner surface of the first bending portion ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4, first curve portion 43/second curve portion 44, second folding portion 45);
Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. Zheng and Guo collectively teach fixing corresponding connecting portions by welding and forming soldering mark regions at welded interfaces. Guo teaches welded connections and soldering mark regions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the protecting piece structure of Zheng to include the welded connection and corresponding soldering mark region as taught by Guo because welding is a well-known and commonly used technique in the battery art for mechanically and electrically securing adjacent components. Further selecting the particular location and extent of the welded region constitutes an obvious matter of design choice, since such parameters may be routinely varied according to manufacturing requirements while achieving the predictable result of securely joining the protecting piece portions.
Regarding claim 9, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 8, as stated above. Zheng further teaches each of the protecting pieces further comprises:
A turning portion ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4, first curve portion 43/second curve portion 44, second folding portion 45);
The turning portion being connected to the second bending portion and the second connecting portion ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4, first curve portion 43/second curve portion 44, second folding portion 45);
The second bending portion and the turning portion forming a U-shaped structure ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4, first curve portion 43/second curve portion 44, second folding portion 45).
Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide the protecting piece structure previously stated with the U-shaped turning portion taught by Zheng, resulting in no more than the predictable use of a known structure for its intended purpose.
Regarding claim 10, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 8, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach the bottom surfaces of the high temperature resistant portions at least cover the first soldering mark region. Guo teaches high temperature resistant material and soldering regions ([0002], [0048], [0051]). Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the temperature resistant portions taught by Zheng to cover the soldering regions with the high temperature resistant material as taught by Guo to further protect the soldering region to allow for better functionality.
Furthermore, the claim does not specify any particular composition, structure, or temperature threshold for the recited “high temperature resistant portions.” Therefore, the term reasonable encompasses any portion formed of a material capable of withstanding elevated temperature during battery operation.
Regarding claim 16, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 7, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach a ratio of the area of the first soldering mark region to the area of the bottom surface of corresponding extension part of the extension parts is less than 0.95. Guo teaches extension parts welded to corresponding tabs to form soldering regions ([0012], [0051]). Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to select a ratio less than 0.95 as a matter of design choice. The particular relative size of the soldering mark region with respect to the bottom surface of the extension part constitutes a result-effective variable that would have been routinely optimized by one of ordinary skill in the art based on desired welding strength, manufacturing tolerance, heat distribution, and material usage. Selecting a ratio less than 0.95 would have amounted to no more than the predictable optimization of a known battery welding configuration.
Regarding claim 17, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 7, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach the horizontal distance between an edge of the first soldering mark region and an edge of the corresponding extension part is 0.25 mm-20 mm. . Guo teaches extension parts welded to corresponding tabs to form soldering regions ([0012], [0051]). Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. The location and dimensions of a soldering mark region relative to the extension part constitute result-effective variables that would have been routinely selected and optimized by one of ordinary skill in the art based on manufacturing tolerances, weld strength requirement, heat distribution consideration, and available surface area. Accordingly, selecting the claimed horizontal distance between the edge of the first soldering mark region and the corresponding extension part would have been an obvious optimization of a known welding configuration and would have yielded no more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 18, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 7, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach the bottom surface of the extension part is treated by an embossing process. Guo teaches an extension portion ([0051], extension portion 212). Zheng and Guo are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of battery cover plates. . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to treat the bottom surface of the extension part by an embossing process because embossing is a well-known and commonly used metal forming process in the battery and electrode arts for modifying surface characteristics, increasing surface roughness, improving mechanical engagement, facilitating welding, and/or enhancing structural rigidity. Applying a known embossing process to the known extension parts of Guo would have been nothing more than the predictable use of a known manufacturing technique to improve the properties of a known component.
Claims 12-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng in view of Bai (WO 2021143481 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 10, as stated above. Zheng teaches a secondary battery including cell assemblies and tabs, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach:
At least two of the cell assemblies are arranged side by side along the width direction Y of the top cover plate
In the width direction Y of the top cover plate , the first connecting portions of the tabs with the same polarity are welded to the bottom surface of the extension part,
The first bending portions of the tabs with the same polarity are bent toward centers of the cell assemblies arranged side by side.
Bai teaches:
At least two of the cell assemblies are arranged side by side along the width direction Y of the top cover plate (Fig. 4).
In the width direction Y of the top cover plate, the first connecting portions of the tabs with the same polarity are welded to the bottom surface of the extension part ([0143-0146], Fig. 4).
The first bending portions of the tabs with the same polarity are bent toward centers of the cell assemblies arranged side by side (Fig. 4).
Zheng and Bai are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the secondary battery of Zheng by arranging the cell assemblies in the side-by-side configuration taught by Bai. Such modification merely involves substituting the arrangement of cell assemblies taught by Bai in order to accommodate multiple cell assemblies within.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to arrange at least two cell assemblies’ side by side as taught by Bai and to weld the connecting portions of the tabs having the same polarity to the bottom surface of the extension part as such configurations are well known in the art for electrically connecting multiple cell assemblies. Further, bending the bending tabs having the same polarity toward the centers of the cell assemblies arranged side by side would have been an obvious design choice based on packaging constraints, electrical connection requirement, and space utilization within the battery housing. The particular orientation of the bent tab portions merely represents a predictable arrangement of known battery components to achieve their intended purpose.
Regarding claim 13, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach a battery module, comprising the secondary battery. Bai teaches a battery module, comprising the secondary battery (Abstract, Fig. 1-4). Zheng and Bai are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to incorporate the secondary battery of Zheng into the battery module taught by Bai because so merely substitutes one known secondary battery for another known secondary battery in a known battery module arrangement. Such substitution would have yielded the predictable result of a battery module capable of storing and supplying electrical energy while utilizing the known advantages of the secondary battery structure of Zheng.
Regarding claim 14, Zheng teaches the limitations of claim 1, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach an electrical device, comprising the secondary battery. Bai teaches an electrical device, comprising the secondary battery (Abstract, Fig. 1-4). Zheng and Bai are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to incorporate the secondary battery of Zheng into the electrical device taught by Bai because so merely substitutes one known secondary battery for another known secondary battery in a known electrical device. Such substitution would have yielded the predictable result of an electrical device capable of operating using stored electrical energy while utilizing the known advantages of the secondary battery structure of Zheng.
Regarding claim 15, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 8, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach the bending portions of the tabs are fixedly connected to the bending portions of the protecting pieces by welding. Bai teaches the bending portions of the tabs are fixedly connected to the bending portions of the protecting pieces by welding ([0032]). Zheng and Bai are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the secondary battery of Zheng to weld the bending portions of the tabs to the bending portions of the protecting pieces as taught by Bai because welding is a well-known and commonly used technique in the battery art for forming secure mechanical and electrical connections between overlapping conductive structures, including bent or folded portions. Such as modifications would merely involve applying a known fastening technique to a known configuration to obtain the predictable result of improved structural stability and electrical connectivity.
Regarding claim 20, Zheng and Bai teach the limitations of claim 12, as stated above. Zheng teaches each of the first bending portion forms a structure similar to an arc or an L shape (Fig. 2). Zheng and Bai are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to implement the L-shaped bending portion of Zheng since it already discloses that specific bending geometry and its use in battery tab structure for facilitating routing, connection, and spatial arrangement within the battery assembly yielding predictable results.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng in view of Chen et al. (CN 112615091 A), hereinafter Chen, in further view of Guo, and in further view of Bai.
Regarding claim 11, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 8, as stated above. Zheng further teaches:
Electrode terminals that comprise ([0005], [0046], first electrode terminal 11, second electrode terminal 12):
First electrode terminal ([0005], [0046], first electrode terminal 11);
Second electrode terminal ([0005], [0046], second electrode terminal 12);
Protecting pieces ([0005], [0048], protecting piece 4).
Zheng fails to teach:
The top cover plate is further provided with at least one of an explosion-proof valve hole and a liquid injection hole;
Each of the electrode terminals is sequentially sheathed with a plastic member and a seal ring;
The electrode terminals comprise:
First electrode terminal;
Second electrode terminal;
A part tabs of the tabs and a part protecting pieces of the protecting pieces electrically connected to the first electrode terminal are all made of an aluminum material;
The second electrode terminal , the other part tabs of the tabs and the other part protecting pieces of the protecting pieces electrically connected to the second electrode terminal are all made of a copper material;
In the length direction X of the top cover plate , one of the protecting pieces made of the copper material and the protecting pieces made of the aluminum material is provided with a poka-yoke portion.
Chen teaches the top cover plate is further provided with at least one of an explosion-proof valve hole and a liquid injection hole ([0075], [0105]).
Guo teaches each of the electrode terminals is sequentially sheathed with a plastic member and a seal ring ([0064-0066], sealing member 22)
Bai teaches:
The electrode terminals comprise ([0112], electrode terminals 4):
First electrode terminal ([0112], electrode terminals 4);
Second electrode terminal ([0112], electrode terminals 4);
A part tabs of the tabs and a part protecting pieces of the protecting pieces electrically connected to the first electrode terminal are all made of an aluminum material ([0106]);
The second electrode terminal , the other part tabs of the tabs and the other part protecting pieces of the protecting pieces electrically connected to the second electrode terminal are all made of a copper material ([0107]).
In the length direction X of the top cover plate, one of the protecting pieces made of the copper material and the protecting pieces made of the aluminum material ([0106-0107]).
Zheng, Chen, Guo, and Bai are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to include the claimed features because each reference teaches well-known structural elements used in lithium battery assemblies for the predictable purposes of venting pressure (Chen), sealing electrode terminals (Guo), and improving electrical connection, assembly reliability, and error prevention through material selection (Bai), all within conventional design parameters. The combination merely involves the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. Additionally, it would have been obvious to modify the battery structure to include an assembly error-prevention feature (poka-yoke portion) because incorporating polarity-differentiating or miss assembly-preventing structures is a routine and well-understood practice in the art to improve manufacturability and assembly reliability. The use of such features merely reflects predictable design implementation choices within standard battery module engineering practices.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng in view of Qi et al. (CN 112652865 A), hereinafter Qi.
Regarding claim 19, Zheng and Guo teach the limitations of claim 10, as stated above. Zheng fails to teach a plurality of soldering marks are arranged in the first soldering mark region; and each of the soldering marks is square, circular or oval. Qi teaches soldering marks that are circular or oval ([0035-0036]). Zheng and Qi are considered analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of batteries. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify soldering mark regions in view of Qi to form them of different shapes as taught by Qi. Such modification would merely involve selecting an appropriate known soldering geometry based on routine manufacturing considerations, such as weld strength, contact area, and available surface region. The shape of a soldering mark region is a design variation because it is dictated by known fabrications constraints and does not alter the fundamental function of the welded connection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tamara Orduna whose telephone number is (571)431-1457. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/TAMARA ORDUNA/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights