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 . If status of the application as subject to 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 a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4 are pending in the application and are presently examined.
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
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.
The claims are in bold font, the prior art is in parentheses.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2016126989A machine translation (Inoue).
Inoue teaches the following claim 1 limitations:
A sealed battery (paragraphs 18-19; figure 2: electric component 200 can be a lithium ion secondary battery) comprising:
a battery case (paragraph 16; figure 2: lid body 100 & case main body 70) including a metal wall portion (paragraph 16; Figure A below: lid body 100 includes a metallic lid body 10) formed with a gas vent hole (paragraph 16; figure 7: hole 12), the metal wall portion (10) having an outer surface (Figure A below) including a hole-surrounding surface (Figure A below)… surrounding an opening edge (Figure A below) of the gas vent hole (12); and
a safety valve member (paragraph 16; figure 7: pressure relief vent 20) closing the gas vent hole (12) by covering the hole-surrounding surface (Figure A below), wherein
the safety valve member (20) is a resin safety valve member made of resin (paragraph 16: resin-made pressure relief vent 20),
the hole-surrounding surface (Figure A below) includes an annular seal surface (Figure A below) that surrounds the opening edge (Figure A below) of the gas vent hole (12),
the resin safety valve member (20) includes an annular joined portion (Figure A below) hermetically joined to the annular seal surface (Figure A below), and
the annular joined portion is configured to break to open the resin safety valve member when an internal pressure of the battery case reaches a valve opening pressure (paragraph 31)
Figure A: Annotated Inoue Figure 7
PNG
media_image1.png
463
996
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Inoue, however, fails to teach that the hole-surrounding surface has an annular shape. An annular shape, however, is the most common shape for connections and vents on metal components because it is the easiest shape to make, and the easiest shape to connect to with a pipe or tubing. It is easier to drill a hole (annular shape) than to cut a rectangle in metal. It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, for Inoue’s hole 12 to have an annular shape, for ease of manufacture.
With regard to claim 2, modified Inoue teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Claim 2 states:
the annular seal surface is an annular roughened surface having an uneven shape with pits and protrusions, and the resin safety valve member is hermetically joined to the annular roughened surface by the annular joined portion made of part of the resin forming the safety valve member, the part of the resin forming the annular joined portion entering into the pits of the annular roughened surface (paragraphs 15-16, 46, & 58; figures 3-4 & 7: joint surface 10c of 10 & 20 is roughened)
With regard to claims 3-4, modified Inoue teaches the limitations of claims 1-2 as described above. Inoue also teaches the following limitations of claims 3-4:
the battery case (100 & 70) comprises:
a case body (paragraph 16; figure 2: case main body 70) having an opening (paragraph 16; figure 2: opening 70a); and
a metal lid (paragraph 16; figure 2: lid body 100) closing the opening (70a) of the case body (70), and
the metal lid (100) includes the metal wall portion (paragraph 16: lid body 100 includes a metallic lid body 10)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WEST whose telephone number is 703-756-1363 and email address is Robert.West@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10 am - 7 pm ET.
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, Allison Bourke can be reached at 303-297-4684.
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.
/R.G.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1721
/ALLISON BOURKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1721