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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/01/26 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment and arguments, filed 04/01/2026, have been fully considered. Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 11, and 15 is/are amended; and claim(s) 2, 3, 6–10, and 12–14 stand(s) as originally or previously presented; no new matter has been added. Examiner affirms that the original disclosure provides adequate support for the amendment.
Upon considering said amendment and arguments, the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection has been maintained and altered as necessitated by Applicant’s amendment, as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text forming the basis for the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) may be found in a prior Office Action.
Claims 11–15 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 11 recites “an electrode assembly comprising electrode tabs having different polarities located at respective ends of the electrode assembly … at least one of the electrode tabs being entirely on one side of the respective end of the electrode assembly” in lines 2–5. Upon further consideration, given the recitation of “respective ends of the electrode assembly”, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the subsequent “the respective end” because it is unclear which end is referenced.
Fig. 3 depicts tabs at each longitudinal end of the electrode assembly, though such is exemplary (¶ 0024–0026) and, thus, non-limiting. Thus, in accordance with claim 11’s recitation of “at least one of the electrode tabs” and the broader specification, for this Office Action claim 11 will be interpreted to require “at least one of the electrode tabs being entirely on one side of at least one of the respective ends of the electrode assembly”.
Dependent claims 12–15 fail to correct this deficiency and are rejected likewise. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text forming the basis for the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 may be found in a prior Office Action.
Claim(s) 1–4, 11, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitao et al. (JP 2001015167 A) (Kitao) in view of DeWulf et al. (US 20170117575 A1) (DeWulf).
Regarding claim 1, Kitao discloses a secondary battery (e.g., ¶ 0018) comprising (per annot. FIG. 2 below) an electrode assembly (2) comprising a negative electrode tab at one end (3) and a positive electrode tab at another end (opposite end, e.g., FIG. 1); a case accommodating the electrode assembly and having open ends opposite each other (cylinder 11); a negative electrode-side cap assembly (cap plate plus terminal) comprising a first cap plate coupled to one end of the case (cap plate) and a negative electrode terminal on the first cap plate (TPin/TPlate) and electrically connected to the negative electrode tab (necessarily via fixing to tab 3, ¶ 0024); and a positive electrode-side cap assembly comprising a second cap plate coupled to another end of the case and a positive electrode terminal on the second cap plate and electrically connected to the positive electrode tab (by including identical structure on opposite side), wherein a liquid injection port is at at least the first cap plate and near one end of at least the first cap plate (port 17 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
330
498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Per the figure, Kitao further discloses a centralized tab-terminal connection adjacent the injection port (17) at an end of the first cap plate, yet, while not appearing limited to a centralized tab and terminal to achieve the desired electrical connection, fails to explicitly disclose that the liquid injection port is near one end of the at least one of the first and second cap plates opposite to an end under which the corresponding negative electrode tab is entirely arranged.
DeWulf, in teaching a cylindrical battery (FIG. 8A–C), teaches arranging the terminals—each of which is respectively welded to the electrode assembly (FIGS. 5, 6) and, thus, would correspond to Kitao’s tab-terminal connection—at the center of each cap plate (FIG. 8B) or offset from center (FIG. 8C). More specifically, DeWulf demonstrates that when arranging a terminal entirely on one lateral half of a cap plate, the tab/connection to the electrode assembly should be correspondingly arranged entirely on this half under the terminal (e.g., annot. fig. 5 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
279
355
media_image2.png
Greyscale
DeWulf and Kitao are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely batteries terminal structures.
As DeWulf recognizes the equivalence of centered and offset terminals/tab structures—specifically arranging the tab entirely under the terminal on one lateral half/end of the cap plate—it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely offset Kitao’s terminal-tab structure—so that the liquid port would be near one end of at least the first cap plate opposite to an end under which the corresponding negative electrode tab is entirely arranged—with the reasonable expectation of achieving successful electrical connection and suitable terminal output, as suggested by DeWulf. Moreover, such would amount to a simple repositioning as a matter of design choice, which, per MPEP 2144.04 (IV.)(C.), is generally prima facie obvious absent unexpected results or modification to the device’s operation, which, here, would not appear to occur because the terminal and tab are merely shifted laterally while maintaining connection to the electrode assembly.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 1, wherein the negative electrode tab and the positive electrode tab are located at respective ends of the electrode assembly in a longitudinal direction of a winding shaft (Kitao’s FIG. 1), wherein the case has both ends open in the longitudinal direction (Id.).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 3, wherein the negative electrode terminal comprises a first terminal plate configured to be electrically connected to a first external terminal (Kitao’s TPlate (washer 81) necessarily configured to be electrically connected to an external terminal for external output), a first current collector electrically connected to the negative electrode tab (Ni screw 55 of Kitao’s ¶ 0028 and FIG. 2), and a first terminal pin coupled to the first current collector and the first terminal plate (Kitao’s TPin (terminal pin 5), FIG. 2) and electrically connecting the first current collector and the first terminal plate (necessarily as all parts are metallic; see Kitao’s ¶ 0019 and 0028),
and wherein the positive electrode terminal comprises a second terminal plate configured to be electrically connected to a second external terminal, a second current collector electrically connected to the positive electrode tab, and a second terminal pin coupled to the second current collector and the second terminal plate and electrically connecting the second current collector and the second terminal plate (by including same structure but on opposite end, as in Kitao’s FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Kitao discloses a secondary battery (e.g., ¶ 0018) comprising (per annot. FIG. 2 above) an electrode assembly (2) comprising electrode tabs having different polarities located at respective ends of the electrode assembly in a longitudinal direction (tabs 3 on opposite ends); a case accommodating the electrode assembly and having openings at both ends in a longitudinal direction of the case (cylinder 11; see also FIG. 2);
and a pair of cap assemblies coupled to open ends of the case, respectively (cap plates plus terminals on each end, FIGS. 1 and 2), wherein at least one of the cap assemblies comprises: a cap plate coupled to a corresponding one of the open ends of the case (FIG. 2), a terminal on the cap plate (FIG. 2) and electrically connected to a corresponding one of the electrode tabs (necessarily via tabs’ fixing to screw 55/terminal 5), and a plurality of insulating members comprising an insulating material (insulating packing members 71 and 7; see also ¶ 0005/0027).
Per annot. FIG. 2, Kitao further exemplifies a centralized tab-terminal connection, as well as a liquid injection port (17) at an end of the cap plate, yet, while not appearing limited to a centralized tab and terminal to achieve the desired electrical connection, fails to explicitly disclose at least one of the electrode tabs being entirely on one side of at least one of the respective ends of the electrode assembly with respect to a longitudinal axis of the electrode assembly, as well as that the liquid injection port is located at an end farther from the terminal.
DeWulf, in teaching a cylindrical battery (FIG. 8A–C), teaches arranging the terminals—each of which is respectively welded to the electrode assembly (FIGS. 5, 6) and, thus, would correspond to Kitao’s tab-terminal connection—at the center of each cap plate (FIG. 8B) or offset from center based on the case’s longitudinal direction (FIG. 8C). More specifically, DeWulf demonstrates that when arranging a terminal entirely on one lateral half of a cap plate, the tab/connection to the electrode assembly should be correspondingly arranged entirely on this half under the terminal (e.g., annot. fig. 5 above).
DeWulf and Kitao are analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely terminal structures in batteries.
As DeWulf recognizes the equivalence of centered and offset terminals/tab structures—specifically arranging the tab entirely under the terminal on one lateral half/end of the cap plate—it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to routinely offset Kitao’s terminal-tab structure—so that at least one tab would be entirely on one side of the respective end of the electrode assembly with respect to a longitudinal axis of the electrode assembly, and the liquid port would be near an end farther from the terminal—as taught by DeWulf, with the reasonable expectation of achieving successful electrical connection and suitable terminal output, as suggested by DeWulf. Moreover, such would amount to a simple repositioning as a matter of design choice, which, per MPEP 2144.04 (VI.)(C.), is generally prima facie obvious absent unexpected results or modification to the device’s operation, which, here, would not appear to occur because the terminal and tab are merely shifted laterally while maintaining connection to the electrode assembly.
Regarding claim 12, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 11, wherein the terminal comprises a terminal plate configured to be electrically connected to an external terminal (TPlate in annot. FIG. 2 of Kitao, necessarily configured to be electrically connected to an external terminal for external output), a current collector electrically connected to the corresponding one of the electrode tabs (Ni screw 55 fixed to tabs 3 and, thus, electrically connected in Kitao’s FIG. 2), and a terminal pin coupled to the current collector and the terminal plate (Kitao’s TPin (terminal pin 5), FIG. 2) and electrically connecting the current collector and the terminal plate (necessarily, as all parts are metallic; see also Kitao’s ¶ 0019 and 0028).
Claim(s) 5–10 and 13–15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitao et al. (JP 2001015167 A) (Kitao) in view of DeWulf et al. (US 20170117575 A1) (DeWulf), as applied to claims 4 and 12, further in view of Urano et al. (US 20060073382 A1) (Urano).
Regarding claims 5 and 8, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 4, wherein each of the positive electrode-side cap assembly and the negative electrode-side cap assemblies comprises (per Kitao’s annot. FIG. 2 (and note identical structure for each cap assembly in Kitao’s FIG. 1)) a first insulating member comprising an insulating material and located between a corresponding one of the first and second terminal plates and a corresponding one of the first and second cap plates (insulating packing member 71; see also Kitao’s ¶ 0005/0027), a second insulating member comprising an insulating material and located between a corresponding one of the first and second terminal pins and the corresponding one of the first and second cap plates (packing member 7), a third insulating member comprising an insulating material and located between the corresponding one of the first and second cap plates and the electrode assembly (Kitao’s insulator 62; see also Kitao’s ¶ 0012).
However, despite Kitao’s further desiring adequate insulation between the electrode assembly and cap to mitigate active-material peeling from external vibration (¶ 0010), modified Kitao fails to further disclose that each cap assembly further includes a fourth insulator between the third insulator and electrode assembly.
Urano, in teaching a battery (Title), teaches insulating plate 5 directly above electrode assembly 2 and beneath insulator 22/23/25 (e.g., FIG. 1), where the insulating plate includes a slot 20 through which the electrode assembly’s lead 7 extends (FIG. 1). Urano teaches that if the battery suffers longitudinal impact from dropping, this insulating plate prevents the electrode assembly’s upper surface from deforming, which prevents short-circuiting (¶ 0016).
Urano is analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely battery insulation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Urano’s slotted insulating plate above each end of Kitao’s electrode assembly and extend Kitao’s tabs through each plate’s slot with the reasonable expectation of protecting the electrode assembly from deformation and short-circuiting due to dropping the battery, as taught by Urano.
Thus, modified Kitao would disclose a fourth insulating member made of an insulating material disposed between the third insulating member and the electrode assembly (Urano’s plate, which would be between Kitao’s insulator 62 and electrode assembly).
Regarding claims 6, 7, 9, and 10, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 5, wherein each of the the fourth insulating members has a slit into which the negative electrode tab or the positive electrode tab is inserted (Urano’s slots 20, meeting claims 6 and 9), wherein the negative electrode tab or the positive electrode tab is electrically connected to a corresponding one of the first and second current collectors between the third insulating member and the fourth insulating member (claim 7), or the negative electrode tab is electrically connected to the first current collector between the third insulating member and the fourth insulating member, and the positive electrode tab is electrically connected to the second current collector between the another third insulating member and the another fourth insulating member (claim 10) (per Kitao’s annot. FIG. 2, when incorporating Urano’s insulating plate, the tabs would connect to screw 55 between Urano’s plate and Kitao’s insulator 62; compare to substantially similar instant FIG. 4A).
Regarding claim 13, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 12, wherein the plurality of insulating members comprises a first insulating member between the terminal plate and the cap plate (Kitao’s insulating packing member 71 in FIG. 2 and ¶ 0005/0027), a second insulating member between the terminal pin and the cap plate (Kitao’s insulating packing member 7, Id.), and a third insulating member a third insulating member between the cap plate and the electrode assembly (Kitao’s insulator 62 in FIG. 2 and ¶ 0012).
However, despite Kitao’s further desiring adequate insulation between the electrode assembly and cap to mitigate active-material peeling from external vibration (¶ 0010), modified Kitao fails to explicitly disclose a fourth insulator between the third insulator and electrode assembly.
Urano, in teaching a battery (Title), teaches insulating plate 5 directly above electrode assembly 2 and beneath insulator 22/23/25 (e.g., FIG. 1), where the insulating plate includes a slot 20 through which the electrode assembly’s lead 7 extends (FIG. 1). Urano teaches that if the battery suffers longitudinal impact from dropping, this insulating plate prevents the electrode assembly’s upper surface from deforming, which prevents short-circuiting (¶ 0016).
Urano is analogous prior art to the claimed invention because they pertain to the same field of endeavor, namely battery insulation.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Urano’s slotted insulating plate above each end of Kitao’s electrode assembly and extend Kitao’s tabs through each plate’s slot with the reasonable expectation of protecting the electrode assembly from deformation and short-circuiting due to dropping the battery, as taught by Urano.
Thus, modified Kitao would disclose a fourth insulating member made of an insulating material disposed between the third insulating member and the electrode assembly (Urano’s plate, which would be between Kitao’s insulator 62 and electrode assembly).
Regarding claims 14 and 15, modified Kitao discloses the secondary battery of claim 13, wherein the fourth insulating member has a slit into which the corresponding one of the electrode tabs is inserted (Urano’s slot 20), wherein the corresponding one of the electrode tabs is electrically connected to the current collector between the third insulating member and the fourth insulating member (per Kitao’s annot. FIG. 2, when incorporating Urano’s insulating plate, the tabs would connect to screw 55 between Urano’s plate and Kitao’s insulator 62).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 have been fully considered but are unpersuasive.
Applicant argues that Kitao’s tabs 3 extend from the entire end of electrode assembly 2, so moving the terminal to an edge of the cap plate would not modify the tabs protruding from around the entire end of the electrode assembly. Examiner respectfully reiterates, however, that claims 1 and 11 use open, “comprising” language and only require one tab to be entirely arranged under the end opposite the port (claim 1)/entirely on one side of the end of the electrode assembly such that the port is at an end farther from the terminal (claim 11). As discussed above, Kitao already contemplates a tab opposite to port 17 and mostly arranged under an end opposite to the port/on one side of the electrode assembly (see left-most and labeled “tab” in annot. fig. 2). DeWulf then recognizes that centralized and offset tab-terminal connections are functionally equivalent and demonstrates that when offsetting the terminal, the corresponding tab/connection to electrode assembly should also be arranged entirely under one half of the cap plate/entirely on one side of the electrode assembly. Thus, modified Kitao would disclose or render obvious at least one tab arranged as recited.
Examiner further respectfully echoes, per MPEP 2144.04 (VI.)(C.), that rearranging parts is generally prima facie obvious without unexpected results or modification of the device’s operation. Here, the instant disclosure appears devoid of any unexpected result or other technical effect from arranging the tab/terminal as recited, and such modification would not appear to fundamentally alter Kitao’s mechanism because, as DeWulf demonstrates, such would merely shift the terminal and tab laterally while maintaining electrical connection to the electrode assembly. Thus, the case of obviousness appears to remain proper, and the argument is unpersuasive.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN S MEDLEY whose telephone number is (703)756-4600. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00–5:00 EST M–Th and 8:00–12:00 EST F.
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, Jonathan Leong, can be reached on 571-270-192. 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.
/J.S.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1751
/JONATHAN G LEONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1751 5/20/2026
Prosecution Insights