DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgement has been made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 USC 119 (a-d). The certified copy has been filed on 06/05/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed 04/28/2023 have been placed in the application file and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings received 04/28/2023 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 9-11 and 13-16 in the reply filed on 01/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims Status.
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 01/15/2026. Claims 1-16 were pending. Claims 1-16 are now pending. Claims 1-8 and 12 are withdrawn from examination as being drawn to non-elected invention. Claims 9-11 and 13-16 are presented for examination. Applicant's arguments have been considered.
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.
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.
Claims 9, 13, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0044203 to Hwang (Hwang) in view of EP 2 787 554 to Park (Park).
Regarding claim 9, Hwang discloses a pouch (Fig. 1) for a secondary battery (para 51), including an accommodating portion accommodating an electrode assembly therein, and a sealing portion (Fig. 1), the pouch comprising: a sealant layer and a gas barrier layer (para 5, claim 12). Hwang does not expressly disclose wherein a minimum insulation resistance value of the sealant layer on a side of the accommodating portion is 100 MΩ or more.
Park teaches secondary battery (Abstract) in pouch form (para 3). In addition, Park teaches that an insulation resistance of the outer surface (reads on sealant layer) is generally about a few or a few hundred MΩ, for example 1.6 GΩ (para 57). Moreover the sealant layer of Park made from then substantially same material as the sealant layer of the instant Application (polypropylene, PP). Therefore, a use of PP with above mentioned insulation resistance of the sealant layer is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust insulation resistance of the sealant layer within the range disclosed by in order to increase lifespan for the secondary battery.
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, modified Hwang discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 9 and incorporated therein. Hwang also discloses a pouch-type secondary battery (para 46) comprising: the pouch for a wherein the pouch for a secondary battery includes an electrode assembly in an accommodating portion, wherein the electrode assembly includes a positive electrode, a negative electrode, and a separator interposed therebetween (para 46, 47).
Regarding claim 14, modified Hwang discloses a laminated-stack structure (Hwang, para 47).
Regarding claim 16, modified Hwang discloses a carbon or carbon-complex (Park, para 38).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0044203 to Hwang in view of EP 2 787 554 to Park and further in view of US 20130122330 to Hoerpel (Hoerpel)
Regarding claim 15, modified Hwang discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 13 and incorporated therein. In addition modified Hwang teaches that positive electrode active materials can contain a lithium metal oxide (park, para 38) but does not expressly disclose wherein the positive electrode includes at least one selected from lithium-nickel-manganese oxide (LNMO), lithium-permanganese oxide (LMR), nickel-chromium-manganese oxide (NCM), and lithium-phosphate-iron oxide (LFP), as an active material.
Hoerpel teaches a pouch type battery (para 17), wherein a positive electrode active material comprises LFP (para 42). Therefore, a use LFP for positive electrode active material in pouch batteries is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pouch battery of modified with the LFP containing positive electrode active material, as taught by Hoerpel, because the use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods or products) in the same way is likely to be obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. __,__, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, C.).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0044203 to Hwang in view of EP 2 787 554 to Park and further in view of KR20200052061 to Jung (Jung, machine translation).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, modified Hwang discloses the invention as discussed above as applied to claim 9 and incorporated therein. Modified Hwang does not expressly disclose wherein an RSS value according to Equation 2-1: RSS = TS_MIN/T1_MAX is 0.5 or more, where RSS is a thickness ratio of the sealant layer located on the side of the accommodating portion and the sealing portion, TS_MIN is a minimum value of a sealant layer thickness (TS) located on the side of the accommodating portion, and T1_MAX is a maximum value of a sealant layer thickness (T1) located on the sealing portion and wherein an RSB value according to Equation 3-1: RSB = TS_MIN/TB_MIN is 0.5 to 1.5, where RSB is a thickness ratio of the sealant layer located on the side and a bottom surface of the accommodating portion, TS_MIN is a minimum value of the thickness of the sealant layer located on the side surface of the accommodating portion, and TB_MIN is a minimum value of the thickness of the sealant layer located on the bottom surface of the accommodating portion.
Jung teaches a pouch (Claim 1) for secondary battery comprising pouch film (314), which in turn comprises a gas barrier layer and a sealant layer (Fig. 2, para 52) which is formed by punch (23). As such the sealant layer disposed on side, bottom and sealing portions of the accommodating portion (Fig. 8, below). Modified Hwang in view of Jung does not expressly disclose Rss values in accordance with Equations 2-1 and 3-1. However, The Courts have held that changes in shape are a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed invention was significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). See MPEP 2144.04. Therefore, It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the sealant layer of modified Hwang by varying pressure of punch 23 in order to improve sealing properties and completely seal the interior and block material transfer between the interior and the exterior.
PNG
media_image2.png
200
400
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER USYATINSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-7703. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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 at (571) 270-1292. 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.
/Alexander Usyatinsky/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1751
Prosecution Insights